HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023/10/16 - Briefing Packet MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONER BRIEFING INFORMATION
FOR THE WEEK OF
October 16, 2023
In the spirit of public information and inclusion, the attached is a draft of information for
Commissioner consideration and discussion at the above briefing.
This information is subject to change, additions and/or deletion, and is not all inclusive of
what will be presented to the Commissioners.
Please see draft briefing agenda for schedule.
CoU���� .
1854
Commission meetings are live streamed at http://www.masonwebtv.com/ and public commented is
accepted via email msmith@masoncountywa.gov; mail to Commissioners Office, 411 N 5th Street, Shelton,
WA 98584; or phone at (360) 427-9670 ext. 419. If you need to listen to the Commission meeting via
telephone, please provide your telephone number to the Commissioners’ office no later than 4 p.m. the
Friday before the meeting. If special accommodations are needed, contact the Commissioners' office at
Shelton (360) 427-9670 ext. 419
Briefing Agendas are subject to change, please contact the Commissioners’ office for the most recent
version.
Last printed 10/12/23 at 3:32 PM
BOARD OF MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
DRAFT BRIEFING MEETING AGENDA
411 North Fifth Street, Shelton WA 98584
Week of October 16, 2023
Monday
Noon WA State Association of Counties Zoom Meeting*
Virtual Assembly
*This is being noticed as a Special Commission meeting because a quorum of the Mason County Commission may
attend this event and notification is provided per Mason County Code Chapter 2.88.020 - Special Meetings.
Monday, October 16, 2023
Commission Chambers
Times are subject to change, depending on the amount of business presented
9:00 A.M. Closed Session – RCW 42.30.140(4) Labor Discussion
10:00 A.M. Executive Session – RCW 42.30.110 (1)(i) Potential Litigation
10:30 A.M. Economic Development Council – Jennifer Baria
10:50 A.M. Assessor’s Office – Patti McLean
10:55 A.M. Community Development – Kell Rowen
11:00 A.M. Public Health – Dave Windom
11:05 A.M. Public Works – Loretta Swanson
Utilities & Waste Management
11:15 A.M. Support Services – Mark Neary
Commissioner Discussion – as needed
I
Jropar
- n
n
I�' _ I'I',• � =� W A S H I � G T O N
`mot
Today's Goals
• Support for Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS)
• Support for forming new Economic Development District ( EDD)
• Both expressed through adoption of joint RESOLUTION
Co ntext
• Recognized by US EDA: 380 districts nationwide
• EDD must include multiple counties
• Reframing COLPAC to form Pacific-Salish EDD per EDA
• Requires completion/approval of CEDS
• CEDS Plan identifies priority projects under "focus areas"
• TOP priorities compete for federal funding:
• Retain jobs I Create jobs I Induce private investment
Eligible Projects for Funding
• Construction
• Non-Construction
• Planning
• Technical Assistance
• Revolving Loan Funds ( RLF)
Our Pathway to EDD Formation
1. Secure 4-County approval to proceed with CEDS planning
2. Complete research, outreach and draft plan development
3. Conduct community review process ( *You Are Here)
4. Secure 4-County approval for CEDS and new EDD via resolution
5. Update final plan based on community input
6. Secure final CEDS and EDD approval from EDA and Governor
Proposed Pacific-Salish Economic Development District :
Grays Harbor, Mason, Pacific + Thurston Counties
�f rett
Chelan
attle
✓,t1f..�Il � ,
t
R
V 111'j
is Kent Wen tchee
F--(
97 r
a
Gr+f
v v
P�crce
(hu•stan �,
Cenfe�
12 Yakima
l ewis
12
® Yakima
.'.arh,anum
tor' ,
semi
ongview
Skamania
26
C,�!umDia
maf�l,a
KIK+Wat w,la6 Rol-q.
t:r,:rh
Major Plan Elements
• Regional Character
• Data Profile
• Resiliency
• Infrastructure
• SWOT
• Vision, Goals, Strategies and Action
• Project Priorities
• Partners
• Appendix: Community Plans, Community Engagement, Project Inventories
Vision Statement
The Pacific-Salish region sustains a resilient and inclusive
economy through intentional diversification and investment,
coordinated workforce and enterprise support activities, and
a proactive culture of innovation and adaptation.
Four MajorPlanFocus Areas
INDUSTRY AND ENTREPRENEURIAL NETWORKS
GOAL: Maintain a diverse and thriving economy with resilient core industry sectors and strong entrepreneurial
support systems that drive job, wage and taxable sales growth.
INFRASTRUCTURE CAPACITY AND MODERNIZATION
GOAL: Maintain and expand physical infrastructure systems to accommodate economic growth, ensure
continued operation of core industries and facilitate worker and freight mobility.
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL
GOAL: Create diverse education workforce training and career pathway options to serve a fully inclusive cross
section of our region.
ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP AND RESILIENCY
GOAL: Enhance environmental stewardship to preserve the Pac-Salish region natural competitive advantage
and build emergency response networks and capabilities to expedite recovery from natural disasters.
Objectives : Industryand Entrepreneurial Networks
�
• Expanded support networks to maintain and grow major industry clusters
• Strategies to attract/grow manufacturing, aerospace and R+D
• Investments in the development and expansion of emerging industry sectors
• Diverse economic opportunities and infrastructure through Port and Tribal Enterprise partnerships
• Strategies to support recreation, creative arts industries and attractions
• An opportunity fund to enables leaders to identify and recruit industries that close supply chain gaps
• Full spectrum entrepreneurial assistance that stimulates new enterprise development
• Stable revenue streams and catalytic investments that allow local central commercial areas to thrive
• BIPOC business enterprises and networking systems
Objectives : Infrastructure Capacityand Modernization
• An adequate supply of shovel-ready land to support economic opportunities
• Activate brownfield sites for redevelopment opportunities
• Facilitate development of housing stock at all price levels
• Expand water and wastewater treatment capacity and service areas
• Ensure adequate energy to serve underdeveloped areas and projects
• Extend high-speed communications capacity to more locations
• Maximize rail shipping coverage and rail-adjacent business opportunities
• Ensure Ports, cargo yards and shipping channels operate at maximum potential
• Modernize regional marina and marine service facilities and infrastructure
• Improve road and bridge safety and carrying capacity and add multi-modal capacity where viable.
• Continue evolving public transit to better connect workers to employment centers
• Work to increase roadway maintenance funds for rural communities
Objectives : Economic Opportunityfor All
• Expand early childhood education opportunities to all families
• Ensure all children are made aware of career options and opportunities at an early age
• Identify accessible, affordable childcare solutions for more working households
• Introduce career pathway education and awareness to all ages and underserved populations
• Offer creative workforce training programs that facilitate participation for all people
• Support workforce training and work opportunities for formerly justice involved people
Objectives : Environmental Stewardship and Resiliency
• Protect against anticipated increase in coastal/riverine flooding
• Reduce exposure /mitigate outcomes associated with wildfires
• Balance development and conservation to preserve critical habitat and species health
• Maintain water quality to support habitat, human health and aquaculture
• Hatchery and species restoration efforts that support local economies
• Funding to purchase mitigation lands associated with invasive species impacts
• Identify beneficial uses for highly treated wastewater
• Development and adoption of renewable energy sources
• Enhanced tsunami and earthquake evacuation options/advance warning capabilities
• Emergency mitigation plan/fund to expedite communications, shelter and transportation restoration
PriorityProjects andActions ( now ! )
Grays Harbor
• City of Hoquiam Westfork Dam Removal and Ground Water Supply
• City of Ocean Shores Tsunami Tower
• Port of Grays Harbor Westport Marina Modernization
• Aberdeen-Hoquiam Flood Protection Project — North Shore Levee and Levee West
• Port of Grays Harbor Terminal 4 Expansion and Redevelopment Project
• Highway 12 Rail Separation Project
Pacific County
• Pacific County Housing
• Washington Coast Business Accelerator (WCBA) at Bendiksen Landing, South Bend
• Pacific County Water, Wastewater and Septic System Capacity Planning
• City of Raymond Downtown Revitalization Master Plan
• Planning for Downtown Revitalization — City of Ilwaco
PriorityProjects andActions ( now ! )
Mason County
• Workforce Housing Initiatives
• Core Infrastructure Development and Expansion
• Workforce Training and Upscaling
Thurston County
• Olympia Workforce Housing Initiatives
• Olympia Downtown Parking Structure
• Olympia Low Barrier Workforce Development Programming and Housing
• Olympia Lower Budd inlet Sea Level Rise Improvements
• Olympia US 101 Interchange Project
• Lacey Midtown Project
• Lacey Pacific Avenue Project
• Thurston County Rochester Main Street Improvements (US 12)
• Thurston County 196th Ave SW — Sargent Rd SW to Elderberry St SW
• Thurston County Childcare Building Redevelopment
• Thurston County Fairground Redevelopment
• Tumwater Capitol Boulevard Corridor I Former WSDOT Headquarters Campus
• Tumwater Brewery District I The Knoll, The Warehouse Valley, and the Historic Brewery
EvaluationFramework
Start-Up Tasks:
Economic Development District approved and launched
Operating funds and space secured
Operations space confirmed
Executive director retained
Bylaws developed and approved
of priority actions implemented or underway
Data Indicators:
Population change by county and region
households living below ALICE threshold (produced biannually)
Educational attainment rate by race and ethnicity
Prime-age labor force participation rate by race and ethnicity
Unemployment rate by race and ethnicity
Income by race and ethnicity
# of business establishments
Rate of growth by industry category and employment volume
Gross Regional Product (GRP)
Questions
• • CO ` •CP
111111,'ll
� I
0-3
THURSTON COUNTY
1854 1854
11111SHING
,���\\�������� '
' . Development
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS)
Working Draft: 10-2-2023
October 2023
Table of Contents
ExecutiveSummary..................................................................................................................................................1
ThePacific-Salish Region..........................................................................................................................................2
PhysicalLandscape............................................................................................................................................2
Socioeconomic Landscape.................................................................................................................................3
Population...................................................................................................................................................3
Demographics.............................................................................................................................................6
Housing .......................................................................................................................................................8
Income ......................................................................................................................................................10
LaborForce Participation..........................................................................................................................15
Educational Attainment, Unemployment and Poverty............................................................................16
CommutingProfile....................................................................................................................................19
Business and Industry Landscape....................................................................................................................20
BusinessEstablishments...........................................................................................................................20
Industry Group Cluster Insights ................................................................................................................20
Core and Emerging Industry Insights........................................................................................................25
OccupationInsights...................................................................................................................................31
Resiliency................................................................................................................................................................34
Environmental .................................................................................................................................................34
Socioeconomic.................................................................................................................................................34
LegacyIndustries.............................................................................................................................................34
MarineIndustry Cluster............................................................................................................................34
Wood Products Industry Cluster...............................................................................................................35
Agriculture ................................................................................................................................................35
Emergency Preparedness................................................................................................................................35
EconomicDisaster.....................................................................................................................................35
PhysicalDisaster........................................................................................................................................36
SWOTAnalysis........................................................................................................................................................38
Strengths..........................................................................................................................................................38
Weaknesses.....................................................................................................................................................38
Opportunities ..................................................................................................................................................39
Threats.............................................................................................................................................................41
Infrastructure.........................................................................................................................................................42
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Broadband Infrastructure................................................................................................................................42
GraysHarbor.............................................................................................................................................43
MasonCounty...........................................................................................................................................43
PacificCounty............................................................................................................................................44
ThurstonCounty .......................................................................................................................................44
Vision, Focus Areas, Goals and Objectives.............................................................................................................46
VisionStatement.............................................................................................................................................46
Focus Areas, goals and Objectives ..................................................................................................................46
Focus Area: Industry and Entrepreneurial Networks (IEN) ......................................................................46
Focus Area: Infrastructure Capacity and Modernization (ICM)................................................................47
Focus Area: Economic Opportunity for All (EOA) .....................................................................................47
Focus Area: Environmental Stewardship and Resiliency(ESR).................................................................48
PriorityActions and Projects..................................................................................................................................49
Economic Development Partners..........................................................................................................................55
EvaluationFramework...........................................................................................................................................57
Appendix A—Community Engagement Inventory...............................................................................................A-1
MasonCounty...............................................................................................................................................A-1
GraysHarbor County.....................................................................................................................................A-1
ThurstonCounty............................................................................................................................................A-2
PacificCounty................................................................................................................................................A-3
AppendixB—Regional Plans Summary................................................................................................................ B-1
Appendix C—Pacific-Salish EDD Project Inventory by County.............................................................................C-1
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Table of Figures & Tables
Figure 1: Population Growth 2010-2020 .................................................................................................................3
Table 1: Current Population Estimates, 2022..........................................................................................................3
Figure 2: County Population Densities, 1980-2020 .................................................................................................5
Table 2: Pac-Salish Urban/Rural Breakdown by County, 2021................................................................................6
Figure 3: Pacific-Salish Population by Race/Ethnicity, 2020 Snapshot....................................................................6
Figure 4: Pacific-Salish Race and Ethnicity Shifts, 2010-2020..................................................................................7
Figure 5: Pacific-Salish Average Age, 2010-2020.....................................................................................................7
Figure 6: Pac-Salish Housing by Urban/Rural, 2022.................................................................................................8
Figure 7: Pacific-Salish Median House Value (owner-occupied units), 2010-2020.................................................9
Figure 8: Pacific-Salish Homeowner and Rental Vacancy Rates, 2010-2020...........................................................9
Figure 9: Pacific-Salish Renter-Occupied Housing Units (% of Occupied Units), 2010-2020.................................10
Figure 10: Pacific-Salish Median Household and Per Capita Income, 2010-2020.................................................10
Figure 11: Pacific-Salish Median and Mean Income Trend, 2010-2020................................................................11
Table 3: ALICE Households by Pac-Salish County ..................................................................................................11
Figure 12: ALICE Households by County and ZIP Code Trade Area (Percent) .......................................................12
Figure 13: ALICE Households by County and ZIP Code Trade Area (Percent) .......................................................13
Figure 14: ALICE Households by County and ZIP Code Trade Area (Number).......................................................14
Figure 15: Pacific-Salish Labor Force Participation Rate, 2010-2020....................................................................15
Figure 16: Pacific-Salish Labor Force Participation for People with a Disability, 2012-2020................................15
Figure 17: Pacific-Salish Educational Attainment, Age 25-64: 2020 Snapshot......................................................16
Figure 18: Pacific-Salish Ave Annual Unemployment Rate by Educational Attainment, 2010-2020....................16
Figure 19: Pacific-Salish Unemployment Rate, 2010-2020....................................................................................17
Figure 20: Pacific-Salish Ave Annual Unemployment Rate by Race, 2010-2020...................................................17
Figure 21: Pacific-Salish Ave Annual Unemployment Rate by Gender: 2010-2020 ..............................................18
Figure 22: Pacific-Salish Poverty Levels, 2012-2020..............................................................................................18
Figure 23: Pacific-Salish Uninsured Resident Population by Percentage, 2012-2020...........................................19
Figure 24: Pacific-Salish Mean Commute Time (minutes), 2010-2020..................................................................19
Figure 25: %of Pacific-Salish Workers that Commute via Public Transportation, 2010-2020..............................19
Figure 26: Total Establishments in Pac-Salish EDD by County, 1990-2022 ...........................................................20
Figure 27: Pacific-Salish Industry Groups by Location Quotient, 2023..................................................................21
Figure 28: Pac-Salish Industry Group 10-Yr Historical Employment Performance, 2012-2022 ............................22
Figure 29: Pac-Salish Industry Groups,Av Annual Employment Historical Rate (%) Q3 2012-Q3 2022..............22
Figure 30: Pac-Salish Industry Group 10 Yr. Employment Growth Forecast, 2022-2032......................................23
Figure 31: Pac-Salish Industry Groups,Av Annual Employment Growth Forecast (%) Q3 2022-Q3 2032............24
Figure 32: Pac-Salish Industry Group Employment Change, 10 Yr. Hist. and 10 Yr. Forecast Comparison ..........24
Table 4: Media (Chmura Cluster) in Pacific-Salish EDD, Q3 2022..........................................................................25
Table 5: Health (Chmura Cluster) in Pacific-Salish EDD, Q3 2022 .........................................................................26
Table 6: Professional Services (Chmura Cluster) in Pacific-Salish EDD, Q3 2022 ..................................................27
Table 7: Construction (Chmura Cluster) in Pacific-Salish EDD, Q3 2022 ...............................................................28
Table 8: Agricultural (Chmura Cluster) in Pacific-Salish EDD, Q3 2022 .................................................................29
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District iii
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Table 9: Pac-Salish Agricultural Statistics (2017)...................................................................................................30
Figure 33: Pacific-Salish EDD Employment Volume by 2-Digit Occupation Codes: Q3 2022 ................................31
Table 10:Top 20 6-Digit Pac-Salish Occupations by Volume, Q3 2022.................................................................32
Figure 34: Av Annual Occupation Gaps over 10 Years in Pac-Salish, 2-Yr Degree or Higher(Q3 2023) ...............33
Figure 35: Washington Residents in the Tsunami Inundation Zone (2am summer weekend scenario)...............36
Figure 36: Likely Tsunami Inundation Zones, Pac-Salish Region ...........................................................................37
Figure 37: %of Population with No Internet.........................................................................................................43
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District iv
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Executive Summary
Complete (what matters most) or delete (already too long) post-public review. Or create separate fact sheet.
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 1
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
The Pacific-Salish Region
PHYSICAL LANDSCAPE
The Pacific-Salish Economic Development District encompasses four
counties located in the southwest corner of Washington State. Pacific
and Grays Harbor Counties line the Pacific Ocean, while to the east,
Mason and Thurston Counties border the southernmost point of the
Salish Sea' in South Puget Sound.The greater region spans from the
Columbia River to the south,to the Olympic Mountains in the north. `
From the center of the region, both Portland and Seattle can be _
reached in approximately ninety minutes.
While populated by a number of medium-sized cities and small towns,the region remains heavily forested
with an abundance of lakes, rivers and streams. The region receives more precipitation than most of the US,
but winters are mild and summers are glorious. The northwestern corner of the region is considered remote
and the gateway to the quietest place in the United States, deep in the temperate Olympic Rain Forest
(https://onesquareinch.org/). Conversely, Olympia, in the eastern part of the region, is the seat of Thurston
County, and also the Capitol City for Washington State.
The region is served by multiple transportation options. Interstate 5 runs N-S through Thurston County. State
Highway 12 connects the coast to Interstate 5, and State Highway 101 provides N-S connectivity on both the
Pacific coast and from Olympia north through Shelton adjacent to Puget Sound. Multiple rail lines facilitate the
movement of cargo and passengers. Multiple sea ports provide shipping access for primarily breakbulk cargo
via both the Pacific Ocean and inland Puget Sound. SeaTac international airport is located 45 minutes north in
King County, and Portland International about 90 minutes south.
The region also features 2,339 farms, ranches and aquaculture operations (more on these in Industries
section), as well as beach towns,tribal reservations and the Fort Lewis US Military Base.
df atria
KitSnP Alpine cakes
3- W Ike",as
4
Kuiy
Kent Wen
a
Kithta&
Olympia
1 rnWston P,eme
Mnunr Rnime
1{ National Park
1
+2 Yakima
Lewis
/2
Yakima
%Vahkiakum
A�torl „„s_ro.-rP_e
OngVlewl-' '.''Z GrNmd Pinthof -
Nsfionnl Fnresf
'https:Hen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salish Sea
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 2
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
SOCIOECONOMIC LANDSCAPE
Original Peoples
Population The Pacific-Salish region has been inhabited since
time immemorial by multiple Indigenous tribes.
The Pacific-Salish region is home to approximately The descendants of the original inhabitants
450,000 people. Over the decade between 2010 and include, but are not limited to the Chehalis,
2020, the region grew over 12%and at a clip with the Quinault, Nisqually, Squaxin, Chinook Nation,
overall Washington State average. Like most of the Skokomish and Shoalwater Bay Tribes. Today,
country, the most significant population was in the Age local tribes operate a variety of successful natural
65-74 cohort, which grew from 8%to just over 12%of resource and business enterprises and, in some
the total population, while the median age rose to 41.6 cases, are the primary economic engines in rural
from 40.3. As of 2022,the region is home to areas of the region.
approximately 6%of the Washington State population.
Figure 1: Population Growth 2010-2020
450,000 445,914
440,000 437,982
430,559
430,000
423,848
419,347
420,000 415,578
412,457
409,600
410,000 406,172
401,907
400,000 396,134
390,000
380,000
370,000
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Source:JobsEQ
As of 2022, each county's population/population rank relative to all 39 WA counties are as follows:
Table 1: Current Population Estimates, 2022
2022 POPULATION ESTIMATE 1 COUNTY POPULATION RANK
'M7 ,N1
Grays Harbor 76,400 19
Mason 66,200 20
Pacific 23,600 28
Thurston 300,500 6
Total Pacific-Salish Population 466,700 NA
Source:OFM Forecasting and Research Division
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 3
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
The table above underscores several regional nuances addressed elsewhere in this document. First,Thurston
County is by far the largest population center. In addition to hosting the State Capitol, it is the only Pac-Salish
county transected by Interstate 5. With such a high concentration of the population in one corner of the
region, industry cluster structures and supply chain performance are impacted in multiple ways. For example, a
person commuting to Thurston from another county for employment may also purchase a sizable portion of
goods and services there rather than in their home county.
A prime example of this dynamic occurs in the City of Olympia. As the seat of state government,the City is a
net importer of jobs. Over 48,000 non-residents commute into the City for work each day. Conversely, of the
24,000 Olympian who are employed, 13,000 leave Olympia for work and just 9,000 both live and work in the
City. In short, spending circulates greatly throughout and outside of the region.
Second, as a whole,the region has continued to grow even faster than the 2010 decade the past two years.
While formal analysis has not yet confirmed this, it is clear that this is in large part the result of the pandemic
and resulting increase in the share of workforce now working from home2. While some workers have returned,
many have not and others are working hybrid with minimal trips to the office.
The Pac-Salish region has been a destination for these workers
given the quality of life and relative affordability compared to
large metro areas like Seattle.The impact is manifest in rapidly
escalating home prices driven by wealthier buyers as well as lack
of stock to keep up with in migration.
A final important nuance to the population data is the
proliferation of second homes and vacation rentals, and the
seasonal,transitory nature of seasonal residency.This is
particularly challenging for the small but scenic communities in
our region. APRIL 27,2023
LOCAL HOUSING-WHAT "
Many affordable rentals once available to year-round workers WE HAVE LEARNED SO FAR
Jom us for an update on the work of the P—tw
have been converted to seasonal recreation use. Equally County _ng Work.ng Group on W"housing
needs a oppo,tunlee,.
challenging, many communities on the coast have a small year-
round population,yet must finance infrastructure to ,S
accommodate summer visitors that, in some cases, double the NtJO.T PA 11K Co T,Hws,I AU,
community's population for several months a year. WIIIapa Community Devstop—t A.— N-
With respect to densification, the following maps show shifts for WA Counties between 1980 and 2020. In the
Pac-Salish region, Grays Harbor remained in the 20-50 persons per square mile (PPSM) range, while Pacific
grew from 5-10 to 10-20, Mason from 20-50 to 50-100, and Thurston from 100-200 to 200-400 PPSM. Pacific
and Grays Harbor remain eligible for rural assistance' under Washington State rules, but Mason and Thurston
no longer meet the criteria.
2 E.g.,In 2022,TRPC estimated 71.1%of Capitol Campus workers and 63.3%of ALL Thurston Workers were still tele-commuting.
3 For more about rural assistance opportunities in Grays Harbor and Pacific Counties:https://ofm.wa.govhttps://ofm.wa.gov/washington-data-research/population-data-research/population-
demographics/population-estimates/population-density/select-references-population-density-washington-lawpopulation-estimates/population-density/select-references-population-density-washington-law
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 4
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Figure 2: County Population Densities, 1980-2020
1980 Whatcom
Ok
San J uan i Ile
Stagit Srers
Persons!Sq. Mi.Clellam island 0-5
Snohomish
_ 5-10
Chelan
Jefferson Douglas 10-20
�. Kits a-, Spokane 20-5.0
King
50-100
htas cn
Grays Harbor Kittitas Grant _ 100-200
Thurston
Pierce 200-400
VV h itm
400-700
Pause Lewis Frank lin
Yakirna
Waftiakum Benton
Cowlitz Walla Walla Asotin
Clark IWW
2020 Whatcom
San J uan ills
Sesyit
Persons I Sq. M i.
Clallam Is ksnc _ 0-5
Snohomish
— 5-10
Chelsn
Jefferson Dough 10-20
Kitsac Spokane 20-50
King
50-100
h,tas c n
Grays Harbor k:.ittitss Grant 100-200
7h=be
Pierce Whitman 200-400
_ 400-700
Pacific Lewis Franc lin 700-1100
i's•in-s
Waftiakum Benton
Cowlitz Walla Wane TAsatiro
4 r—ni.
Klick itat
Source:OFM Forecasting and Research Division
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 5
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
As noted earlier, Thurston County is the population center of the Pac-Salish region (64%of total).Yet the
region as a whole is mostly rural, even when including Thurston County. While the US Census does not define
rural, it does consider rural to include all people, housing and territory not within an urban area.The Census
defines urban in two ways: Urbanized Areas of 50,000 or more people; and Urbanized Clusters with 2.500-
49,999 people.4 The table below shows how that breaks out for the Pac-Salish region.
Table 2: Pac-Salish Urban/Rural Breakdown by County, 2021
AREASCOUNTY % RURAL URBAN
Grays Harbor 52% Aberdeen, Hoquiam,Ocean Shores and Montesano
Mason 85% Shelton
Pacific 87% Raymond
Thurston 48% Lacey,Olympia,Tumwater,Yelm, Rochester,Tanglewilde,Grand Mound
Source:US Census Quick Facts;Washington State OFM;J Robertson and Company
Demographics
While the majority of the region's population is still White, Non-Hispanic, it has undergone diversification over
the past decade.That diversification has accelerated recently, driven primarily by Hispanic/Latino and
Multiracial population growth.
Figure 3: Pacific-Salish Population by Race/Ethnicity, 2020 Snapshot
90% 81.3%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10% 2.3/0 o 1.9/0 0 0.7% 2.6/o 4.2% 0 7.0% 9.6%
■ .
0% —
White Black or American Asian Native Some Two or Hispanic or
African Indian and Hawaiian Other Race More Latino(of
American Alaska and Other Races any race)
Native Pacific
Islander
Source:JobsEQ
4 https://www.hrsa.gov/rural-health/about-us/what-is-
ru ra I#:-:text=The%20Ce n s us%20d oes%20n of%20d efi n e,U Cs)%20of%202%2C500%20%2 D%2049%2C 999%20p eo p I e
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 6
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Figure 4: Pacific-Salish Race and Ethnicity Shifts, 2010-2020
100%
90% 15.2% 15.1% 15.3% 15.5% 15.8% 15.9% 16.0% 16.2% 16.6% 16.9% 18.7%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40% 84.8% 84.9% 84.7% 84.5% 84.2% 84.1% 84.0% 83.8% 83.4% 83.1% 81.3%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
■White Other Race,Two or More Races
Source:JobsEQ
Like the rest of the US,the average age in the Pac-Salish region is rising-from a median of 40.3 in 2020, to
44.6 in 2020. As shown below,the largest shift over the last decade is in the age 65-74 "baby boomer" cohort.
Over that same period,the region has also seen a decreasing percentage in the number of children under age
18.
Figure 5: Pacific-Salish Average Age, 2010-2020
2020 fi• 20.6% 12.2%
2019 fi• 20.8% 11.8%
2018 fi• 21.0% 11.4%
2017 fi• 21.2% 11.0%
2016 fi• 21.3% 10.5%
2015 fi• 21.4% 10.0%
2014 fi• 21.6% 9.5
2013 fi• 21.8% 19.0%
2012 fi• 22.0% 8.7%fi•
2011 fi• 22.2% 8.3%fi•
2010 fi• 22.3% 8.0%fi•
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
■ Under 18 Years ■ 18 to 24 Years ■25 to 34 Years 35 to 44 Years
■45 to 54 Years ■55 to 64 Years ■65 to 74 Years ■75 Years and Over
Source:JobsEQ
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 7
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Housing
As of 2022,there were an estimated 211,501 units of housing in the Pac-Salish Region. As the charts below
show,those units were fairly evenly located in incorporated and unincorporated areas. Consistent with
population totals,the greatest volume of housing is in Thurston County. Grays Harbor is the only other county
to have more housing in urban environments than rural.
Washington's Growth Management Act (GMA) encourages development in urban areas, so trends are likely to
show increased density in cities.This could have adverse impacts on rural counties with inadequate
infrastructure or access to related financing to support GMA mandated density. *It should be noted that Grays
Harbor is the only county in the Pac-Salish Region that does not plan under the Growth Management Act.
Figure 6: Pac-Salish Housing by Urban/Rural, 2022
99,040
47% 112,461
53%
Unincorporated Incorporated
Source:OFM Forecasting and Research Division
140,000
120,000
100,000
67,261
80,000
60,000
40,000
3,91
20,000 id 29,838
0
Grays Harbor County Mason County Pacific County Thurston County
Unincorporated . Incorporated
Source:OFM Forecasting and Research Division
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 8
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Following the turbulence of the Great Recession, regional home values remained stagnant, and even declined.
However, by 2017, real estate values began to rise and then spiked during the pandemic. Home prices are
particularly high where people are able to remain working from home. For example, in Thurston County,the
seat of State Government,the median value of single-family home in 2023 has crested $500,000.
Figure 7: Pacific-Salish Median House Value (owner-occupied units), 2010-2020
$300,000
$275,996
$253,151
$250,000 $227 683$230,800$225 469 $226 437$239,050
$219,262$215,969$214,949$217,022 '
$200,000
$150,000
$100,000
$50,000
$0
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Source:JobsEQ
While there are many benefits to being a desirable region to live in,there are also challenges. For more than a
decade, the region has failed to construct enough homes to keep pace with growth.As a result,vacancy rates
have continued to decline and rents have risen.
Figure 8: Pacific-Salish Homeowner and Rental Vacancy Rates, 2010-2020
7%
6%
5% 4.2% 4.2%
4%
3% 2.3%
°
° 1.2%
1%
0%
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Homeowner Vacancy Rental Vacancy
Source:JobsEQ
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 9
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Overall, the region's share of rental properties has remained around 30%of total housing stock. However, in
more urban areas such as the City of Olympia, over 50%of housing units are rentals.
Figure 9: Pacific-Salish Renter-Occupied Housing Units (% of Occupied Units), 2010-2020
40%
35% 321% 32.7% 33.3% 33.2% 33.4% 31.9% o
30.1% 30.1% 30.2% 30.8% 31.0%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Source:JobsEQ
Income
Both median household and per capita income remained stagnant following the Great Recession. Both began
to inch upward in 2016,though at a slower pace for per capita income. While official data is pending, it
appears incomes have continued to grow since, albeit not as fast as inflation.
Figure 10: Pacific-Salish Median Household and Per Capita Income, 2010-2020
$80,000
$68,110
$70,000
$60,000 $54,468
$50,000
$40,000 $33,478
$30,000 $26,826
$20,000
$10,000
$0
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Median Household Income Per Capita Income
Source:JobsEQ
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 10
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
In 2010, mean and median income were separated by about$11,500. By 2020,the gap had grown to over
$14,700, meaning a smaller subset of households have experienced much stronger income gains.
Figure 11: Pacific-Salish Median and Mean Income Trend, 2010-2020
$90,000 $82,854
$80,457
$80,000 $76,897
$70,328 $73,329
$70,000 $65,964 $67,298 $67,538 $67,275 $67,915 $68,005 $68,110
$62,679 $65,155
$59,434
$60,000 $54,468 $56,256 1$56,261 1
$55,595 $55,954 $55,679 $56,865
$50,000
$40,000
$30,000
$20,000
$10,000
$0 ■
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
■ Median Income (dollars) Mean Income (dollars)
Source:JobsEQ
Perhaps a more effective way to evaluate income and financial security is through a review of ALICE° data.
ALICE, a United Way acronym which stands for Asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed —represents the
growing number of individuals and families who are working, but unable to afford basic necessities like
housing,food, childcare, health care, and transportation. These are often people who provide essential
services—teachers, mechanics, police officers.
Statewide, a combined total of 33% households live below the ALICE and/or federal poverty threshold. But in
parts of the Pac-Salish region,that figure is much higher—in particular, Pacific County, where 59%of
households were living below the ALICE threshold as of 2021.
Table 3:ALICE Households by Pac-Salish County
poverty
thresholdi County % below federal
threshold
State Average 9% 24% 33%
Grays Harbor 10% 36% 46%
Mason 12% 28% 40%
Pacific 14% 45% 59%
Thurston 10% 22% 32%
Source:unitedforalice.org
As shown in the zip code charts below, some areas of the Pac-Salish region are considerably more at-risk
(inability to pay for medical incidents, make rent, grow savings, et al)than others.
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 11
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Grays Har•or Thurston
98506- 98512-
Olympia, Olympia,
98535-Copalis Beach 98587-Taholah 98530-Bucoda 98589-Tenino Lacey Tumwater
59 52 46 37 1 36 35
98586-South
8527-Bay Center 98547-Grayland Bend 98501-
82 76 72 98503-Olympia, Olympia,
98579-
98550-Hoquiam 98520-Aberdeen Lacey Tumwater Rochester 98597-Yelm
50 49 39 34
33 33
98513-
98516- Olympia,
98614-Chinook 98631- Long Beach 98502-Olympia 98576-Rainier Olympia, Lacey Lacey
60 60 98595- 38 33 30 25
98566-Neilton Westport 98541-Elma
8644-Seaview 44 43 42
71
98584-Shelton,
Skokomish
98640-Ocean Park 98569-Ocean Nation
Shores 98555-Lilliwaup 42 98588- 98546-
58 98624-Ilwaco 55 Tahuya Grapeview
50 40 98563- 98568
39 38
Monesano Oakville
39 38
98524-
8638-Naselle 98577-Raymond 98590-Tokeland 98557-McCleary 98537-Cosmopolis 98548-Hoodsport 98528-Belfair 98592-Union Allyn
62 53 1 39 34 43 40 29 18
N
N
s '
s
BSSS sA°� Q�
8SI3. �d`A
O/y Ss O�
8516 O/yip ap a dcP f
Figure 13: ALICE Households by County and ZIP Code Trade Area (Percent)
%of Pac-Salish Households Living Below ALICE Threshold, by County and Zip Code Trade Area: 2021
00
(01
985j6, �a�P.,
Rd/�.Pr 33 ,•
9857g-Rochester,33 • .
98597-Yelm,33Chinook,,•
98501-Olympia,...
9ssli ONmpia,• Thurston 98640 Ocean
8506-OIVn'Pia'�a�e..
so
Source:U nited for Alice,J Robertson and Company
Zer�O 3V
�5°3 0 �9 J`°aa Ae y�,a � � 8S3s•ro
A
O
bM ti in
A D
W
EconomicDevelopment District
Comprehensive E • • Development
While Pacific has the highest percentage of households living below the ALICE threshold,Thurston has the highest volume of ALICE households. Those
volumes are clustered around Olympia and Tumwater. Shelton, Skokomish Nation, Aberdeen and Hoquiam have high volumes as well.
Figure 14: ALICE Households by County and ZIP Code Trade Area (Number)
#of Pac-Salish Households Living Below ALICE Threshold by County and Zip Code Trade Area:2021 (67,574 total households)
(see prior chart for county color-coding)
7,000 6,706
6,227
6,000 5,744
5,504
5,000
4,325
4,069
4,000
3,321
3,15 083,082
3,000
2,447
1,942
2,000 1,714,653
' 149�448
1,201 081938
1,000
610 529 526 511 509 504 484 419
391 38 34 2 29 23 2 15 19 17 10 17 4 2 48
0 1111111111
' ' ' ; � ; ' , : . . : : = -
eJ met `oc .a
at �O�eJ eOJh� A et pa �493,c�a�6 cyo` �oo et �agAa a •a�cy� .roa o c a���r,�Q o `�et o
c
mcQo e op oee c ,e c F� 5; oc of
y aF 5 01 oo
oe Ca �e
P
aG � O v I \ G0J
Q \\ \; A ,\o� � bq `� i O � 95 ("(0 4C? � �Oo
\Jao � ph �� CO �0�� c � O � C5
b�
Source:United for Alice,J Robertson and Company
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 14
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Labor Force Participation
Total labor force participation (206,105 people of working age) is down 1-3%across all major cohort areas
from a decade ago. However, it has actually been trending up for people with disabilities,thanks to advocacy
by Morningside, Coastal Community Action Programs, and other regional organizations that offer job
development,training and support services.
Figure 15: Pacific-Salish Labor Force Participation Rate, 2010-2020
100%
79.0%
800 0 177.9%
73.9% -71.3%
0
60.3% 57.3%
40
20%
0%
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Labor Force Participation Rate and Size (civilian population 16 years and over)
Prime-Age Labor Force Participation Rate and Size (civilian population 25-54)
Veterans Labor Force Participation Rate and Size,Age 18-64
Source:JobsEQ
Figure 16: Pacific-Salish Labor Force Participation for People with a Disability, 2012-2020
50%
45% 42.8% 43.5%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Source:JobsEQ
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 15
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Educational Attainment, Unemployment and Poverty
Just over 40% of the region's residents has attained Associate's Degree or higher, and over 82% have a high
school degree or higher certificate/diploma. Unemployment rates are considerably lower the higher a person's
education attainment level.
Figure 17: Pacific-Salish Educational Attainment, Age 25-64: 2020 Snapshot
30%
25.7% 26.2%
25%
20% 18.5%
15%
11.9%
10.0%
10% 7 7%
5%
0%
No High School High School Some College, Associate's Bachelor's Postgraduate
Diploma Graduate No Degree Degree Degree Degree
Source:JobsEQ
Figure 18: Pacific-Salish Ave Annual Unemployment Rate by Educational Attainment, 2010-2020
1 °° 14.9%
14%
12%
9.8%
10%
8% 7.0%
6%
4% 3.7%
2%
0%
No High School Diploma High School Graduate Some College or Bachelor's Degree or
Associate's Degree Higher
Source:JobsEQ
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 16
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
The figures below shows the average decade-long unemployment rate by overall, race cohort and gender.
Overall, the rate grew during and post Great Recession, but has stabilized in ensuing years (COVID data
pending). As the region moves forward, it will be critical to build an inclusive job market through proactive
engagement and promotion of training and educational opportunities. Notably, after nearly a decade of 3-4%
separation, male and female employment appears to have balanced.
Figure 19: Pacific-Salish Unemployment Rate, 2010-2020
120 0 11.1%
10.4% 10.6%
10.0
10% 9.3% 9.3%
8.5%
8.1%
0
8 0 7.2%
6.6%
6.2
6%
4%
2%
0%
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Source:JobsEQ
Figure 20: Pacific-Salish Ave Annual Unemployment Rate by Race, 2010-2020
18%
16.0%
16%
14/
0 13.2% 13.5%
11.7%
12%
10% 8.6% 9.8% 9.1%
8% 7.3%
6%
4%
2%
0%
White Black or American Asian Native Some Other Two or Hispanic or
African Indian and Hawaiian Race More Races Latino (of
American Alaska and Other any race)
Native Pacific
Islander
Source:JobsEQ
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 17
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Figure 21: Pacific-Salish Ave Annual Unemployment Rate by Gender: 2010-2020
14% 13.3%
12.3% 12.6%
11.8%
12%
10.6% 10.9%
10% 9.7% 8.2% 8.6% 8.9/0 9.2% 0 8.4% 9.1%
o
8.0/ 7.9%
8% 7.5% 7.3%
6.8% 7.0%
6.5% 6.5%6.3%
6%
4%
2%
0%
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
■ Male Female
Source:JobsEQ
As unemployment rates declined, so,too, have poverty rates.The regional poverty level (federally defined vs
United Way ALICE data) has dropped 2.4%since 2012. Yet more than 1 in 10 people in the region struggle to
make ends meet (rent, food, childcare, et al). One critical factor in poverty reduction to date has been the
Affordable Care Act.Those suffering major medical setbacks now have a chance to survive the economic
impact. Uninsured residents have dropped from 13.4%(2012)to 5.3% (2020).
Figure 22: Pacific-Salish Poverty Levels, 2012-2020
18%
16%
13.9%
14% 13.2%
12% 13.7%
10% 11.3%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Poverty Level (of all people) Households Receiving Food Stamps/SNAP
Source:JobsEQ
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 18
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Figure 23: Pacific-Salish Uninsured Resident Population by Percentage, 2012-2020
15% 13.4%
10%
5.3
5%
0%
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Uninsured
Source:JobsEQ
Commuting Profile
Over the last decade,the average commute time in the Pac-Salish region has slightly increased.The shift likely
reflects a number of factors, including people finding more affordable housing further from employment
centers and population growth adding traffic volumes on constrained highways and arterials. Public transit use
has declined, but there is hope that growth will occur given the rise of zero-fare transit options (Grays Harbor
{youth}, Mason and Thurston).
Figure 24: Pacific-Salish Mean Commute Time (minutes), 2010-2020
30 25.5 25.6 25.5 25.4 25.2 25.2 25.5 26.2 26.8 27.4 27.8
25
20
15
10
5
0
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Source:JobsEQ
Figure 25: %of Pacific-Salish Workers that Commute via Public Transportation, 2010-2020
3%
2.0%
°
° 1.6%
2%
1%
1%
0%
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Source:JobsEQ
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 19
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY LANDSCAPE
Business Establishments
Since 1990,the region has added nearly 5,000 new establishments. Approximately 4,500 of them are located
in Thurston County.All counties experienced a net decline in establishments during the pandemic, but appear
to be recovering as of mid-2023.
Figure 26: Total Establishments in Pac-Salish EDD by County, 1990-2022
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
w
0
c-I c-I ri c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I ri c-I r-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
i m Ln r` d) ri ri m Ln r\ d) ri ri cn Ln r\ di ri ri m Ln r\ di ri ri m Ln r,
O O O O O O O O O O ri O O O O O ri O O O O O ri O O O O
o r-1 N m -4 Ln r\ oo d) o r-1 N 4 Ln 6 r, oo d) ri (V M 4 Ln w o0 dl o r-1
a) Ql M Ql of of Ql Ql Ol O O O O O O O O O ri ri ri ri ri ri ri r1 N N
a) M Ol (n (n a) a) a) M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
ri e--I ri ri ri c-I c-I ri ri N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Thurston —Grays Harbor
Source:JobsEQ
Industry Group Cluster Insights
This section provides an overview of regional industry sectors through a variety of lenses. The chart below
shows the location quotient of specific sectors relative to the US as a whole. A score of 1 means industry
presence (employment per capita) is similar to national average. Higher scores mean a heavier presence, and
lower scores lighter presence,than might be expected.
The Pacific-Salish economy continues to have a strong natural-resource based economy, with wood products
and agricultural presence more than double the US average. Public administration is nearly quadruple the
national average, not only because Pac-Salish hosts the seat of state government, but because it is also home
to large swath of publicly managed lands and a major military base.There are also six Sovereign Tribal Nations
located within the Pac-Salish region, each with its own governance and administration.
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 20
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Figure 27: Pacific-Salish Industry Groups by Location Quotient, 2023
Public Administration 3.92
Wood/Paper 1 2.59
Agricultural 1.68
Food Manufacturing 1.06
Education 1.04
Construction 0.94
Retail 0.94
Consumer Services 0.93
Health 0.92
Utilities 0.91
Professional Services 0.69
Media 0.67
Freight Transportation 0.62
Auto/Auto-related 0.59
Coal/Oil/Power 0.55
Financial Services 0.52
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50
Source:JobsEQ
Another way to examine industry sector health is through past performance. In the chart below, the vertical
axis represents the annual average industry group wage, and the horizontal axis the annual average rate of
employment growth over the past decade.The size of the bubble represents the relative number of workers
employed in a specific industry group.
Over the last decade, construction and professional services have far outpaced other industries' rate of growth.
Public administration and health have grown more moderately, but remain among the largest regional
employers. Consumer services and education also remain large employment industries, but had a slower
average annual rate of growth due to the disproportionate impacts experienced by those sectors during the
pandemic.The wood/paper industry group, while still more prevalent here relative to the rest of state and US,
has lost employment as have other manufacturing sectors due to increasing regulations and the rapid advent
of automation.
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 21
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Figure 28: Pac-Salish Industry Group 10-Yr Historical Employment Performance, 2012-2022
$120,000
Coal/Oil/Power
1.23
$100,000 U $101,284
Financial Svc.
1.19
$86,0910 a PublicAdmin. Utilities
o $80,000 Media 2.02 2.75
YWood/Paper 6P8aper 0 87 $77,523 $67,942 Professional vc.
$78,986 Freight Tra 4.33
.a $64,128 1.99 $70,785 Construction
c
$64,978 Healt 5.49
w Q0,000 $63,789
Retai 2.34
Education 0
1.96 $59,0 5
3 Food Mfg. 0.40 $59,571
$51,927
-0.48 Auto/Auto-related
$45,044 0,000 1.97
a
$62,792
Consumer Svc Agricultural
1.00 1.09
$20,000 $33,18 $40,286
$0
-2.00 -1.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00
Average Annual Emp Growth Rate:2012-2022
Source:JobsEQ
The graph below shows the annual av growth rate for major industry groups over the past decade.
Figure 29: Pac-Salish Industry Groups, Av Annual Employment Historical Rate (%) Q3 2012- Q3 2022
5.49
4.33
2.75
2.34
2.02
1.99
1.97-�
1.961.19
1.23
1.09 �
0.40
0.87 1.00
0.68 -0.48
45 O N N N N N O O ♦+ N N O
CL c ai " " 3 ari m ' � :� u
a v ., _
3 c w c c O
E 5 a o u
c c u Q w
O O LL
v Q m a o
`o` v a: a
LL
Source:JobsEQ
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 22
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Over the next decade, all major industry groups are expected to experience positive growth. In the chart
below,the vertical axis represents the average annual wage in today's dollars, while the size of the bubble
reflects relative employment volumes and the horizontal axis the estimated annual rate of employment
growth between 2022 and 2032. Overall, growth will be driven by ongoing recovery from the pandemic (e.g.,
return of para-educators to schools, return of retail and consumer service activity) and increased demand for
services among the baby boomer generation (e.g., healthcare, financial service needs). Even Wood/Paper and
Food Manufacturing, which both experienced declines over the prior decade, are projected to see positive
employment growth.
Figure 30: Pac-Salish Industry Group 10 Yr. Employment Growth Forecast, 2022-2032
$120,000
Coal/Oil/Power
$101,284
$100,000 O 765 Financial Svc.
$86,091
3,759 Utilities
$67,942
730 Media
$80,000 Public Admin. ConstruOn
c $77,523 $63,789 $78,986
� 32,091
10,108 4(;
899
O
c Retail Health
Q $60,000 $59,571 $59,075
W Wood/Paper 13,219 23,449
f: $64,128 uto/Auto-r
m 3,66
257
Freight Tran. $i�54
� \ $64,978 /�
a $40,000 3,140 1\ /
Food Mfg. sumer Svc.
$45,044 33,185
2,231 Agricultural
$40,286 25,269
4,178
$20,000
$0
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50
Average Annual Emp Growth Rate:2022-2032
Source:JobsEQ
The following charts show the relative industry growth rates by, a) straight line 10-year forecast; and b)
comparative growth over the past and future decade. Construction growth over the past 10 years was likely
driven by recovery from Great Recession (and also increasing demand/lack of housing supply up to the present
day). Past growth in professional services is likely attributable to former government workers launching news
businesses and a recent flurry of new business starts created during the pandemic (see establishments graph).
The forecast growth of media is based on an anticipated increase in software developers, but also growth at
the Washington State Archives and return to normal attendance at movie theaters.
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 23
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Figure 31: Pac-Salish Industry Groups, Av Annual Employment Growth Forecast (%) Q3 2022-Q3 2032
Media 3.33
Health 2.27
Consumer Services 1.93
Professional Services 1.58
Education 1.57
Financial Services 1 1.24
Utilities 1 1.23
Auto/Auto-related 1.19
Construction 1 1.13
Freight Transportation 1.04
Agricultural 1.01
Retail 0.88
Public Administration 1 0.58
Food Manufacturing � 0.33
Wood/Paper � 0.24
Coal/Oil/Power = 0.09
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50
Source:JobsEQ
Figure 32: Pac-Salish Industry Group Employment Change, 10 Yr. Hist. and 10 Yr. Forecast
Comparison
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.33
3.00
2.27
1.93
2.00 1.57 .58
1.01 .19 .13 1.24 .04 .23
1.00 � H.58
J.88
' .09 O,3 I I 0.24
0.00
hetey A °aC7 c`�
Qo ��
"ao oa\
°\ `° L°�y� a °o��`
�
■Average Annual Employment Historical Rate(%)2012Q3-2022Q3
Average Annual Employment Forecast Rate(%)2022Q3-2032Q3
Source:JobsEQ
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 24
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Core and Emerging Industry Insights
This section provides insights about select industry sectors that have experienced growth or other notable
change over the past five years and/or are forecast to add new or different employment opportunities in the
Pac-Salish region.
Growth in the media sector(the fastest growing in the region) has been driven by Software Publishers and Info
Services (as more services went online during the pandemic). Conversely, in-person subindustries declined
(movie theaters,video production), but are expected to return to growth mode post pandemic. A significant%
of Media jobs are public sector(primarily State jobs).
Table 4: Media (Chmura Cluster) in Pacific-Salish EDD, Q3 2022
Current 5-year History 5-Year Forecast
Industry WW7 Empl LQ Empl Ann% Total Empl Ann%
Change Demand Growth Growth
Software Publishers 528 0.77 414 35.8% 275 47 1.7%
r
Libraries and Archives 237 1.37 -45 -3.4% 158 42 3.3%
Motion Picture Theaters(except 213 1.70 -68 -5.4% 331 74 6.1%
Drive-Ins)
Web Search Portals and All Other 150 0.82 I 81 16.9% 100 27 3.4%
' Information Services
Motion Picture and Video 115 0.35 -153 -15.6% 77 17 2.7%
Production
Media Streaming Distribution,
Social Networks,Other Media 114 I 0.40 30 6.3% I 67 11 1.9%
Networks/Content Providers
Source:JobsEQ
In the healthcare sector, the fastest growing subsectors over the past five years include HMO medical centers
(15.5%), psychiatric and substance abuse hospitals (8.8%) and vocational rehab centers (7.6%). Over the next
five years, annual growth is forecast to be highest for services for the elderly and persons with disabilities
(3.6%), individual family services (3.4%) and offices of physical, occupational and speech therapists and
audiologists (3.3%).
General medical and surgical hospitals will likely remain the largest overall employer in the sector, but services
focused on the aging population are driving overall growth.The ongoing shift to tele-medicine care will likely
continue to drive down hospital admittance rate as well as average length of stay.
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 25
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Table 5: Health (Chmura Cluster) in Pacific-Salish EDD, Q3 2022
Current 5-Year History 5-Year Forecast
Change Demand Growth Growth
General Medical and Surgical Hospitals 4,643 0.70 -186 -0.8% 2,356 312 1.3%
Services for the Elderly and Persons with o 0
Disabilities
4,144 1.72 1,033 5.9/0 3,687 803 3. /06
Offices of Physicians 2,266 0.72 187 1.7% 1,275 216 1.8%
Other Individual and Family Services 2,030 3.04 -142 -1.3% 1,532 375 3.4%
Offices of Dentists 1,493 1.31 -39 -0.5% 938 130 1.7%
Nursing Care Facilities(Skilled Nursing) 1,278 0.82 -270 -3.8% 833 36 0.6%
i Child Care Services 1,003 0.80 6 0.1% 785 88 1.7%
Assisted Living Facilities for the Elderly 802 1.60 46 1.2% 658 96 2.3%
Home Health Care Services 773 0.42 78 2.1% 571 108 2.6%
HMO Medical Centers 512 2.28 263 15.5% 306 71 2.6%
Mental Health and Substance Abuse Centers 508 1.54 80 3.5% 323 63 r33%
4%
Offices of Physical, Occupational and Speech 451 0.86 17 0.8% 297 78
Therapists,and Audiologists
i
Offices of Miscellaneous Health Practitioners 405 1.63 65 3.5% 243 48 2.3%
Vocational Rehabilitation Services 348 1.06 106 7.6% 244 33 1.8%
Psychiatric and Substance Abuse Hospitals 334 1.27 115 8.8% 219 48 2.7%
Offices of Chiropractors 304 1.79 -19 -1.2% 178 25 1.6%
Residential Intellectual and Developmental 278 0.56 -104 -6.2% 194 16 1.2%
Disability Facilities
i
Offices of Mental Health Practitioners(except 252 0.99 53 4.9% 143 26 I 2.0%
Physicians)
Continuing Care Retirement Communities 252 0.51 -60 -4.2% 208 32 2.4%
Source:JobsEQ
The Professional Services sector has experienced considerable growth across the board,with the exception of
facilities management services given the work from home workforce shift. Logistics consulting (36%)and
scientific technical consulting services (25.1%) have grown the fastest,while computer-related services have
been and will continue to be the primary driver of growth volume. and All subsectors are expected to grow
moderately over the next five years.
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 26
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Table 6: Professional Services (Chmura Cluster) in Pacific-Salish EDD, Q3 2022
Current 5-Year History 5-Year Forecast
Change Demand Growth Growth
Temporary Help Services 3,316 0.96 1,101 8.4% 21229 199 1.2%
Computer Systems Design Services 1,388 1.07 504 9.4% 785 194 2.7%
Corporate,Subsidiary, Regional Managing 1,085 0.42 250 5.4% 598 72 1.3%
Offices
Administrative Management and General
Management Consulting Services 835 0.81 293 9.0% 499 91 2.1%
Facilities Support Services 774 3.99 -321 -6.7% 521 56 1.4%
Veterinary Services 768 1.52 124 3.6% 584 98 2.4%
Engineering Services 639 0.50 117 4.1% 309 36 1.1%
Offices of Lawyers 587 0.46 -6 -0.2% 298 43 1.4%
Office Administrative Services 562 0.74 -235 -6.8% 353 59 2.0%
Security Guards and Patrol Services 471 0.57 168 9.2% 367 39 1.6%
Scientific and Technical Consulting Services 465 1.68 313 25.1% 280 52 2.1%
Custom Computer Programming Services 328 0.26 -14 -0.9% 181 42 2.4%
Process, Physical Distribution,and Logistics 327 1.78 257 36.0% 200 38 2.2%
Consulting Services
Other Professional, Scientific,Technical 314 0.60 43 3.0% 165 21 1.3%
Services
I
Payroll Services 313 1.35 191 20.7% 178 19 1.2%
Computer Facilities Management Services 305 3.20 98 8.1% 174 44 2.7%
Employment Placement Agencies 270 0.86 140 15.7% 175 18 1.3%
Marketing Consulting Services 256 0.61 34 2.9% 151 26 2.0%
All Other Support Services 182 0.70 12 1.3% j 138 20 2.1%
Exterminating and Pest Control Services 162 0.98 63 10.4% 117 11 1.3%
Environmental Consulting Services 147 1.24 11 1.5% 89 17 2.2%
Translation and Interpretation Services 131 1.94 62 13.7% 79 15 2.2%
Source:JobsEQ
As noted earlier, the construction sector has undergone considerable growth since the great recession -the
fastest annual rate of growth for any major industry sector. Even with this growth, the region continues to lack
sufficient stock of affordable residential housing.
The baseline forecast for industry growth does not consider several recent developments. For example, the
City of Olympia and PacMtn Workforce Development Council are partnering on multiple job training programs
including a "construction cohort"that is training dislocated workers for jobs in the building industry. This
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
program has also taken place in Grays Harbor and Pacific County, and will be exported to the other Pac-Salish
locations. Local community colleges are also exploring the possibility of creating advanced construction
training through their continuing education departments.These two additions could help stimulate the growth
rate of construction careers locally, rather than remaining dependent on outside labor.
Table 7: Construction (Chmura Cluster) in Pacific-Salish EDD, Q3 2022
Current 5-Year History 5-Year Forecast
Change % Demand Growth Growth
New Single-Family Housing Construction 1,132 1.96 246 5.0% 617 66 1.1%
(except For-Sale Builders)
r
Residential Remodelers 922 1.17 261 6.9% 494 52 1.1%
Commercial and Institutional Building 843 1.04 265 7.8% 456 52 1.2%
Construction
Nonresidential electrical contractors 665 0.90 141 4.9% 387 38 1.1%
Residential plumbing and HVAC contractors 654 0.82 206 7.9% 376 37 1.1%�
r
Residential roofing contractors 499 2.90 101 4.6% 272 25 1.0%
Nonresidential plumbing and HVAC 464 0.72 23 1.0% 268 27 1.1%
contractors
r �
Residential electrical contractors 377 0.81 74 4.5% 220 23 1.2%
Residential site preparation contractors 377 1.20 73 4.4% 214 19 1.0%
r - r -----I
Residential painting contractors 358 1.30 44 2.6% 181 20 1.1%
-r
All other residential trade contractors 338 10.90 103 7.5% 195 19 1.1%
Highway,Street,and Bridge Construction 327 10.57 35 2.3% 187 19 1.2%
Residential drywall contractors 294 1.57 57 4.4% 151 17 1.1%
LResidential finish carpentry contractors 212 0.83 32 3.3% 120 13 1.2%
Source:JobsEQ
While agriculture does not drive regional economic output with respect to gross domestic product, it is
nonetheless integral and essential to the primarily rural portions of the district.The Pac-Salish region is host to
traditional farm-based agriculture as well as covered crops and shellfish/fishing sectors. All four counties have
operating shellfish farms, and the region is one of only that supply clam, oyster and geoduck products to the
US and beyond-hence the LQ of 158.
Over the last several years, most local ag sectors have experienced little employment growth or, in some cases,
declines. Most of the industry challenges are directly attributable to the pandemic and subsequent impacts,
including supply chain challenges, lost customer relationships and labor shortages. Even as these obstacles
subside, only menial growth is forecast for the five years ahead.
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 28
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Table 8: Agricultural (Chmura Cluster) in Pacific-Salish EDD, Q3 2022
Current 5-Year History 5-Year Forecast
Change Demand Growth Growth
Other Food Crops Grown Under Cover 674 16.29 -145 -3.8% 530 52 1.5%
Animal Production (Proprietors) 487 0.99 -68 -2.6% 272 13 0.5%
Shellfish Farming 477 158.71 -26 -1.1% 336 4 0.2%
r
Crop Production (Proprietors) 450 1.31 7 0.3% 250 12 0.5%
Nursery and Tree Production 420 4.34 75 4.0% 328 30 1.4%
r
Shellfish Fishing 332 21.22 -63 -3.4% 199 15 0.9%
Finfish Fishing 222 9.21 35 3.5% 130 8 0.7%
Mushroom Production 189 17.26 -102 -8.3% 152 17 1.7%
Support Activities for Forestry 180 5.83 2 0.2% 149 26 2.7%
Chicken Egg Production 171 7.43 -39 -4.1% 124 4 0.5%
Other Vegetable and Melon Farming 109 1.48 11 2.2% 87 9 1.6%
Source:US Census of Agriculture
Results from the 2022 Census of Agriculture are not expected to be released until early 2024. However, data
from the 2017 Census provide a number of insights into local ag operations.As of 2017,the Pac-Salish
agriculture profile included:
• 2,339 total farms (and 4,095 producers) covering 237,984 acres
• Average farm size ranged between 52 and 224 acres, depending
on the county
• The%of total county land used for farm operations ranged from r "
5%-10%
• The#1 farm use varies by county:
o Grays Harbor-Woodland (70%)
o Mason-Woodland (47%) `�,,,
o Pacific-Other{Cranberries}(38%)
o Thurston-Cropland (36%) "' 1
• Among all US counties, Pac-Salish counties are notable/top 4 ''
producers of:
o Aquaculture t9
o Christmas Trees
o Berries
o Nursery, Greenhouse, Floriculture and Sod
• Notable for future planning:
o Most farms have internet access
o Under 3%farm organically
o Just 12-16%sell directly to consumers =�
o Almost all farms are family owned
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 29
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Table 9: Pac-Salish Agricultural Statistics (2017)
HarborGrays Mason Pacific Thurston Tot!?,
#of Farms 469 324 346 1,200 2,339
Land in Farms(total acres) 105,233 18,136 52,365 62,250 237,984
Average Farm Size(acres) 224 56 151 52
%of Land in Farms 6% 5% 7% 10%
Farms by Use(%total use)
Cropland 16% 20% 30% 36% -
Pastureland 6% 14% 13% 25% -
Woodland 70% 47% 19% 27% -
Other 8% 20% 38% 13% -
Notable Rankings for All US Counties by Market Value of Ag
Products Sold (3,077 Counties,ranks in top 600)
Christmas Trees 379 64 440 61 -
Aquaculture 65 5 17 8 -
Fruits,Tree Nuts,Berries 420 - 188 287 -
Milk from Cows 500 - 591 316 -
Nursery, Greenhouse, Floriculture,Sod - 770 - 64 -
Vegetables, Melons, Potatoes - - - 389 -
Poultry and Eggs - - - 254 -
Sheep,Goats,Wool, Mohair, Milk - - - 396 -
Horses, Ponies, Mules,Burros, Donkeys - - - 432 -
Other Animals and Animal Products - - - 250 -
Total Producers 810 561 604 2,120 4,095
Notable Characteristics(%farms that)
Have Internet Access 81% 83% 88% 87% -
Farm Organically 1% 1% 3% 3% -
Sell Directly to Consumers 13% 16% 12% 16% -
Are family farms 97% 93% 95% 97% -
Source:US Census of Agriculture
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 30
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Occupation Insights
The first chart below shows the relative level of employment volume by major 2-digit occupation code.The
figure below shows the same data, but for 6-digit specific occupation category along with mean wage and
location quotient. Of the top 20 regional occupations,fewer than half offer mean wages above $50,000.
Figure 33: Pacific-Salish EDD Employment Volume by 2-Digit Occupation Codes: Q3 2022
0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000
Office and Administrative Support Occupations 20,923
Sales and Related Occupations 15,205
Food Preparation and Serving Related Occupations 15,015
Transportation and Material Moving Occupations 13,390
Business and Financial Operations Occupations 1 12,411
Educational Instruction and Library Occupations 10,353
Management Occupations 10,240
Healthcare Support Occupations 8,574
Construction and Extraction Occupations 8,500
Healthcare Practitioners and Technical Occupations 8,290
Protective Service Occupations 6,523
Production Occupations 6,171
Community and Social Service Occupations 6,157
Installation, Maintenance,and Repair Occupations 6,077
Computer and Mathematical Occupations 5,827
Building and Grounds Cleaning and Maintenance... 5,735
Personal Care and Service Occupations 5,075
Life, Physical, and Social Science Occupations 3,171
Arts, Design, Entertainment,Sports,and Media... 2,771
Farming, Fishing,and Forestry Occupations 2,583
Architecture and Engineering Occupations 2,556
Legal Occupations 2,104
e.
ilk—
a
` /
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 31
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Table 10:Top 20 6-Digit Pac-Salish Occupations by Volume, Q3 2022
• Mean Ann •
Fast Food and Counter Workers 5,004 $35,000 1.35
Retail Salespersons 4,526 $38,900 1.04
Cashiers 3,957 $35,500 1.03
Personal Care Aides 3,634 $35,900 1.21
Office Clerks,General 3,276 $45,400 1.05
Registered Nurses 2,862 $95,000 0.82
Stockers and Order Fillers 2,668 $39,300 0.94
Laborers and Freight,Stock,and Material Movers, Hand 2,523 $39,600 0.77
Janitors and Cleaners, Except Maids and Housekeeping Cleaners 2,445 $40,500 0.95
i
General and Operations Managers 2,408 $118,700 0.68
Customer Service Representatives 2,378 $44,100 0.73
Secretaries and Admin Assistants, Except Legal, Medical,and Executive 2,230 $50,500 0.97
Business Operations Specialists,All Other 2,118 $77,000 1.53
Teaching Assistants, Except Postsecondary 2,085 $42,000 1.55
Software Developers 2,018 $122,300 1.01
Waiters and Waitresses 2,012 $45,200 0.86
Heavy and Tractor-Trailer Truck Drivers 1,914 $58,400 0.79
Elementary School Teachers, Except Special Education 1,836 $83,600 1.23
First-Line Supervisors of Retail Sales Workers 1,795 $53,200 1.06
Bookkeeping,Accounting,and Auditing Clerks 1,795 $52,300 0.92
With respect to gaps, the figure below shows the anticipated unfilled positions by volume, each year, over the
next ten years. The list is filtered to include occupations that require a 2-year degree or higher (family wage
jobs).
AIM
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Figure 34: Av Annual Occupation Gaps over 10 Years in Pac-Salish, 2-Yr Degree or Higher (Q3 2023)
Lawyers($121,100) ` 6
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Counselors($55,900) 7
Market Research Analysts and Marketing Specialists($72,700) 7
Financial Managers($131,600) 7
Construction Managers($110,400) 8
Elementary School Teachers,Except Special Education($83,600) 11
Management Analysts($87,500) 15
General and Operations Managers($118,700) 18
Registered Nurses($95,000) 25
Software Developers($122,300) M 33
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Source for All Three Charts:JobsEQ
aw
• — - = y 't
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 33
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Resiliency
The Pac-Salish region is manifestly resilient, but not without challenges ahead. Historically,the region has
survived cataclysmic geological events, massive economic shifts—in particular, new policies and rules
governing forestry and fishing, transformative land use regulations (Washington State's Growth Management
Act) and multiple recessions. Most recently, along with the rest of the globe,the region endured the COVID-19
pandemic. Unlike other areas,the regional GDP declined just .6%during the pandemic, but sprang back with
9.6%growth in 2021.The sections below outline areas of ongoing concern regarding the region's ability to
remain resilient or otherwise respond to environmental, socio-economic or geologic threats, as well as the
systems now in place to address these issues as the arise.
ENVIRONMENTAL
Challenges:The impacts of climate change are likely to exacerbate existing regional challenges—namely
wildfires, flooding and severe weather patterns. In addition to threats to human life and property,these
events may result in degradation to wildlife habitat and destruction of natural systems that serve as buffers. All
counties in the region operate Emergency Management operations that help to combat these events, in
partnership with State and Federal partners.
SOCIOECONOMIC
Portions of the region are susceptible to high unemployment. While Thurston County is home to a relatively
stable state government sector,the other counties are periodically impacted by mass layoff events, primarily
at manufacturing-based employers. Overtime,the region has developed strong rapid-response systems, led by
PacMtn Workforce Development Council and supported by various Chambers of Commerce, Economic
Development Councils and other partners. By far, layoffs and resulting unemployment disproportionately
impact those who have not attained a 2-year degree or higher. Multiple efforts are underway to promote
continuing education post-high school.
LEGACY INDUSTRIES
The Pacific-Salish region was built on forestry,fishing/aquaculture and logging (and related ship-based
exporting).Today,these industries remain the backbone for many local economies, but face increasing
operational barriers. Some of the challenges they face are outlined below.
Marine Industry Cluster
The ocean-based fishing industry faces multiple challenges. Increasingly strict rules limit seasonal access and
catch volumes. Some of the marinas that provide safe harbor and repair services are aging beyond functional
use. Critical access points are at risk of becoming inoperable for lack of dredging. For value-added operations,
a dearth of workers limits production and export capacity. Additional funding and coordination at the local,
state and federal level will be required to navigate these obstacles.
While demand for aquaculture products is high, it is increasingly difficult to find and retain workers. More
pressing is the periodic arrival of invasive species. Predators like the European Green Crab and ghost shrimp
can decimate shellfish stocks. But potentially effective treatment measures (first, carbaryl and more recently,
imidacloprid) are often opposed by those fearing larger ecological damage. Ongoing, intensive coordination
with the Washington State Department of Ecology, US Corps of Engineers and other regulatory agencies is
desired so acceptable solutions can be implemented.
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 34
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Other challenges that will require innovation and partnerships to overcome include ocean acidification, sea
level rise, and workforce recruitment and training.
On the positive side, Westport in Grays Harbor County serves as a Pacific Northwest Hub for seafood landings,
processing and cold storage (it is rated as the#1 commercial fish landing port in the state, and loth in the
nation). New processing advances have reduced reliance on sometimes hard-to-find seasonal workers, and
increased wages for year-round workers. State and Tribal hatcheries have helped restore stocks and stability
and, in 2023, Washington experienced the largest crab harvest on record. Similarly, a recent study by
Washington Sea Grant (2020) indicated the Washington Coast Region had a combined gross regional product
of$6.57 billion. Other positive and notable findings:
• Seafood product preparation and packaging provided 771 jobs and $318M in economic output
• Commercial Fishing provided 1484 jobs and $92.7M in economic output
• Boat building provided 333 jobs and $101.5M in output
• Ship building and repairing provided 127 jobs and $40.11VI in economic output— Kevin Decker,Coastal
Economist/Coastal Resilience Team Lead, Washington Sea Grant, University of Washington
Wood Products Industry Cluster
Logging was forever changed in the early 1990's, with passage of the Endangered Species Act. However,the
industry remains a centerpiece of many rural communities and the core component for the broader wood
products value add industry cluster. Present challenges include worker shortages—e.g., timber fallers, loaders
and truck drivers, some resistance to logging and shipping (e.g.,vocal opposition to Port of Olympia log
shipping), and fluctuating market demand.
Agriculture
The primary challenge many local farmers face is reestablishing customer and market connections in the
aftermath of the global pandemic, and finding new workers to ramp up production. WSU Extension and other
workforce partners have initiated workforce training, recruitment and retention efforts to help stabilize and
grow employment in the sector.
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
Economic Disaster
COVID-19 provided a real time test for the region's ability to respond to economic crisis. While all counties
operated some version of a collective impact model (Working Washington recovery gran administration, et al),
Thurston County's example, Thurston Strong, offers a model to build on with respect to a regional approach.
Prior to the pandemic,Thurston County community and economic development practitioners met regularly to
coordinate various efforts. When the pandemic arrived,that group was converted to an "action team"that
was supplemented with nonprofit leaders and tasked with mapping the business and worker portion of the
response.
Even before state or federal aid arrived,the group worked with distilleries to produce hand sanitizer and the
Thurston EDC-managed PTAC program to source masks. Both products were made available to hundreds of
businesses. They created a website to share industry-specific safety information and other helpful information
including how to complete EIDL and SBA forgivable loan applications. When resources did arrive,the team
used data to drive allocation decisions. Ultimately,the team distributed over$26 million in aid to industry
sectors most impacted by the pandemic, and over 30,000 people utilized the website for information and
assistance. Each team member was responsible for engaging city and county councils as well as local tribes.
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 35
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Another form of potential disaster is a mass layoff event. Such events have occurred periodically in the region.
However, in the most recent cases (Cosmopolis Specialty Fiber closure, Ostrom Mushroom departure, Grays
Harbor Call Center facility exit),the community response blunted negative impacts by diverting displaced
employees into new career pathways. The four EDCs Workforce Development Council and associated Chamers
of Commerce coordinate on these and many other issues through a long-standing cooperative network.
Physical Disaster
The Pac-Salish region is particularly susceptible to major geologic disasters including windstorms, earthquakes,
tsunamis and even volcanic activity from nearby Mt. Rainier. While the region has recovered from earthquakes
(Olympia, 2001) and volcanic eruption (Mt. St. Helens, 1980), the most adverse impacts could actually come in
the form of one or more tsunamis.
An estimated 107,281 out our 450,000 person region are potentially at risk from tsunami flooding following a
Cascadia Subduction earthquake, depending on the size event and location of the epicenter.This figure
includes permanent residents only, and excludes other estimates including visitors (17,000) and day workers
(25,000). By far, those likely to be most impacted reside along coastal shorelines or in lowland bay and riparian
areas. Grays Harbor and Pacific Counties account for over 100,000 of those at risk. But even the inland sea
communities of Mason and Thurston Counties could experience flooding.
It is estimated that, even following proper evacuation protocols, some 14,000 to 50,000 people will be unable
to reach high ground before the first wave strikes some 30 to 60 minutes after the quake. In a worst-case
scenario, Aberdeen, Ocean Shores, Westport, Long Beach, Hoquiam, Cosmopolis, and Taholah and Shoalwater
Bay Indian Reservations could be completely decimated. Figures 35 and 36 show the relative risk by location.
For more information,visit the Cascadia Rising emergency response exercise website:
https://cenv.wwu.edu/files/2021-01/Cascadia Rising low O.pdf
Figure 35: Washington Residents in the Tsunami Inundation Zone (tam summer weekend scenario)
Whatcom
San Juan 12796 RESIDENTS
3,450 0 1
60,000
■ Skagit 25,000
■ 7,151
■C7,427 �.......... ........... 6,000 427
Snohomish
■ 2,411
■Jefferson Kitsap
4,203 5.765
King
-- Mason■ 03,591
5,544
Grays Pierce
Harbor Thur•n 7.337
804
Pacific
36,158
Wahluakum
1,364
WASH INGTON
Source:Washington Department of Emergency Management
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 36
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Figure 36: Likely Tsunami Inundation Zones, Pac-Salish Region
0
MONTESANO
OCEAN E AEENSHORES u
WESTPORT
oy
R Y OND
Q
LONG
BEACH
I.eaend ",
CcQrf)iounrMre� o :oc. Tsunami
InuMabort
CA,Limb Area of Operatio HighwaWs Zonc r WA rsww Nxrcaa Co 10 U.
Rexoxcn U
ProledPC lens
'VMorM an4 Stare
Source:Washington Department of Emergency Management
Even without the tsunami factor, 100%of the Pacific-Salish region is located within violent earthquake shake
zones.The region is also frequented by major storms. The following is an abbreviated list of Presidentially
declared disasters overjust the last two years:
Major DR-4650-WA (Dec. 26, 2021-Jan., 15 2022)
Severe Winter Storms, Snowstorms, Straight-line Winds, Flooding
Major DR-4635 (Nov. 13-15, 2021)
Flooding and Landslides
• Major 4593-DR-WA (Dec. 29 2020-Jan. 16, 2021)
Severe Winter Storm, Straight-Line Winds, Flooding, Landslides, and Mudslides
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
SWOT Analysis
The following SWOT Analysis inputs are drawn from a variety of sources, but in particular, findings from the
CEDS data analysis, review of community plans and direct input from stakeholder engagement.
STRENGTHS
• Economic Development Partnerships—the region has a long and successful history of coordinating
economic development activities. Core partners include the four Economic Development Councils,
Chambers of Commerce, Port Districts, Regional Councils of Government (COGS), Workforce Development
Council and City/County Councils.
• State Capitol Presence—As the seat of state government, Olympia and surrounding environs benefit from
a wide range of stable, family-wage jobs occupied by residents in all four Pac-Salish counties. State
government activity also generates incredible supply chain opportunities for the private sector, and in
particular,the professional services, retail, real estate and financial services sectors.
• Geographic Location—The Pacific-Salish region is a preferred destination for residents and visitors alike,
prized for its natural beauty and relative affordability. Ocean beaches, salmon-bearing rivers, glacial
mountains and picturesque lakes and landscapes are all accessible within minutes. Seattle and Portland
are just 60 to 100 miles away, and accessible by vehicle, rail and air.
• Unique Legacy Industries—Timber Products and Marine Industry Clusters are particularly bountiful in the
Pac-Salish region relative to other locales.They provide family-wage jobs and a healthy local supply chain
base.
• Established Industry Clusters and Real Time Data Tracking—The region has already identified industry
clusters and implemented sector navigator support systems for primary and emerging industries. Real-
time data analysis allows workforce planners to build training and promotion packages for in-demand
workforce needs.
• Native American Tribal Enterprises—Area tribes operate a diverse array of successful enterprises that
generate revenue and support broad employment across the region. Operations include fisheries,golf
courses, resorts, casinos,tobacco dispensaries, retail destinations and much more.
• Access to Education—All Pac-Salish communities are served by institutions of higher learning, including
Grays Harbor, South Puget Sound and Olympic Community Colleges, and two four-year universities in
Thurston County; The Evergreen State College (Olympia), and Saint Martin's University (Lacey).The region
is also becoming increasingly adept at creating shorter, skills and trades-based training cohorts that help
non-college bound individuals access higher paying employment opportunities.
WEAKNESSES
• Lack of Affordable Workforce Housing—All counties are years behind in producing sufficient affordable
housing stock to accommodate growth, or even in some cases,to retain affordable options for existing
workers/residents. This challenge has been exacerbated by the shift to work-from-home options, as
workers from more affluent areas migrate into the region and drive housing costs up, as well as conversion
of existing stock into second homes or temporary vacation rentals.
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 38
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
• Lack of Childcare—The lack of affordable childcare stifles economic growth and security, particularly for
women and minority populations. Even before the pandemic, many households found the cost of
childcare, or the lack thereof,to be an impediment to having multiple income earners. Post-pandemic,
with the rapid rise in rent and mortgage insurance expenses, many households need co income earners
and childcare services are now even scarcer.
• Under 50%of High School Graduates Pursue Continuing Ed—Overall, fewer than half of the regions
graduating high school seniors complete the FAFSA or pursue continuing education of any kind post high
school. Statistics show that students who don't complete at least some form of certificate training are
twice as likely to experience unemployment and very unlikely to earn enough income to purchase a home,
save for retirement or even financially survive a major medical event. Work is underway to change that
dynamic in select high schools and should be expanded regionwide.
• Few Large-Scale Private Sector Employers—While the region boasts a fairly diverse economy,there are
few large, high-wage private sector employers (e.g., biotech, advanced manufacturing, financial services).
While there has been growth in the logistics sector,those developments do not generate the same level of
jobs per square foot or economic multipliers as other more intense uses.
• Aging Workforce—In some portions of the region,the population is aging at a much faster rate than the
rest of the country. This has left some employers struggling to find new workers, or younger generations to
take over existing businesses after the current owner retires.
• Dearth of CDFI Lenders—The Pac-Salish region, perhaps because of its relative lower-density population,
does not host many active Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI) lenders. CDFI lenders
inject capital into areas that otherwise lack access to financing.They serve historically underrepresented
populations and ventures that may not qualify for traditional loans (e.g., unbanked, underbanked,
immigrants, etc.) CDFI programs can help jump-start untapped segments of our communities' secure
capital for housing, business start-ups and other essential services.
OPPORTUNITIES
• New Energy Economy—Pac-Salish is an ideal location for alternative energy research and development,
testing and production. Whether wind, electric, biofuels or other alternative energy source, collectively,
the region has the locations and workforce required to potentially operate as a new energy hub.
• Wrap-Around Business Support Services—The Thurston EDC currently operates or hosts a variety of
business training and support services, including PTAC and Tune Up and Scale Up business training through
its Center for Business and Innovation. Greater Grays Harbor, Inc. also offers a wide range of business
training and support services. These services could be expanded to other areas of the Pac-Salish region. In
particular, more help will be needed to facilitate business ownership transitions as current owners retire.
• Ports—There are nine Port Districts' in the Pac-Salish region with various ocean, river and inland sea access.
Cargo terminals primarily serve break bulk customers, as most west coast container traffic is handled by
deepwater ports in Vancouver, Seattle-Tacoma, Portland-Vancouver, Bel lingham-Anacortes, Oakland-San
Francisco and Los Angeles-Long Beach. The Port of Grays Harbor is the only deep-draft port directly on the
Pacific Ocean in the State of Washington capable of handling ocean going vessels and, as such, is classified as
a Global Gateway. It is also the fastest Pacific Ocean route to Asian markets by one full day.
'Port of Allyn(Mason);Port of Grapeview(Mason);Port of Shelton(Mason);Port of Grays Harbor(Grays Harbor);Port of Olympia(Thurston);Port of
WiIlapa Harbor(Pacific);Port of Peninsula(Pacific);Port of Ilwaco(Pacific);Port of Chinook(Pacific)
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 39
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Local cargoes range widely,from biofuels to milk cows, grains,vehicles, ores wind turbines and more. The
majority of local ports were originally created to serve fishing and shellfish related purposes. Over time,
Port's roles and capacities have expanded greatly. Modern Washington State ports, including those without
maritime access, are actively involved in a plethora of economic development activities including broadband
fiber expansion, and industrial property purchase and reclamation. Each has Industrial Development
Revenue Bonding (IDRB) capacity and public taxing authority (should the right taxpayer ROI present itself).
The Ports' singular authorities and powers make them a natural starting point for launching major industrial
and/or tourism related initiatives in the future.
• FTZ#216-The South Puget Sound Foreign Trade Zone serves Thurston, Mason, Lewis and Kitsap Counties, and is
administered by the Port of Olympia. FTZs allow American companies to defer, reduce or eliminate Customs
duties on products admitted to and processed within the zone.The cost savings leaves more profit to invest in
workers, communities or economic expansion. Grays Harbor is served by FTZ 173, administered by the Port of
Grays Harbor.There is considerable opportunity to increase use and activity in both zones.
• Farm to Market Growth-WSU Extension and other partners have been helping the ag community better
connect with local markets.These efforts are expected to expand with the advent of the Ag Hub in Tenino
and growth of local farmers' markets regionwide.
• Sea to Market Growth-Washington Sea Grant is working with
coastal communities to build direct to consumer programs for
shellfish and commercial fishing operations as regional interest in
local seafood has increased post-pandemic.
• Supply Chain Gaps-With access to real time data, all Pac-Salish ,y..
communities can identify local supply chain gaps and pursue
targeted industry engagement and recruitment.
• Creative Arts Accelerator-The creative economy-performing "-' �-
arts,festivals and other cultural events-face dire financial
circumstances. Innovations can spur creative sector equity and
resilience. While there are resources for creatives, most technical -and financial assistance is focused in two regions and not - - - -
accessible to emergent Creative Districts. A new Arts Economy
Equity Accelerator(concept stage) could facilitate creative arts
success in the region via laboratory space, implementation kits
(how to grow a creative district), advocacy, and sponsorship.
• Tax Increment Financing-A tool widely used in other states, but continually in exploratory more in
Washington,TIF could enable cities to invest in infrastructure improvements up-front via bonding (usually
the barrier to getting started) and pay for those enhancements through new revenue generated by the
resulting economic development project by collecting incremental taxes over a reasonable period of time.
A related "pay as you go" model would encourage developers to invest considerable capital into
infrastructure improvements up-front, but then allow them to be "repaid" if and when tax revenues grow
at an appreciable rate,thus vindicating the overall public investment.
• Opportunity Zones- Designed to make long-term capital available to low-income communities. US
investors will be able to defer taxes on capital gains reinvested in Opportunity Funds that invest in eligible
purposes such as stock, partnership interest, and business property. More focus should be used to draw
investors and make use of this opportunity.
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 40
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
THREATS
• Aging and Undersized Infrastructure—Infrastructure challenges are various. On the transportation front,the
Nisqually Bridge is a pressure point that restricts interstate commerce on 1-5 in Thurston County, and will
need to be elevated to avoid flooding in coming years. Regionwide, many bridges are at risk of failure (e.g.,
Grays Harbor County has 321 bridges of which 31 are classified in poor condition...about 1 out of 10 bridges),
while roads in rural areas are to narrow and completely devoid of bicycle amenities. All communities lack
charging stations to serve electric vehicles. Most rural and suburban communities lack substations required to
power new industry or neighborhoods. Local marinas lack infrastructure to serve increasingly large boats, and
even those with a recreational focus have outdated equipment and facilities.
• Lack of Stable Funding for Economic Development—Local EDCs are designated Associate Development
Organizations (ADOs)for their respective counties and receive an annual stipend from the State.To fully
fund operations,they pursue municipal contracts, public grants, corporate sponsorships and membership
dues, all of which are uncertain revenue flows at best. No money is dedicated to business recruitment
activities. Few funds are set aside for emergency infrastructure, business innovation or entrepreneurial
start up grants. In Washington, the use of public funds for private profit(incentives) is constitutionally
prohibited. Without steady funding,the EDCs and the counties they represent will be at a disadvantage
relative to communities in other states when it comes to recruiting and supporting business and industry.
• Growth Management Act Limitations for Rural Areas—Outside of major cities and a few medium-sized
towns, it is difficult to develop large facilities in the Pac-Salish region. While the Washington State GMA is
effective in preventing urban sprawl and the proliferation of inefficient urban systems (water, sewer, et al)
in urbanized areas of the State (e.g., along 1-5 corridor), it may have unintended consequences for more
rural communities where land availability does not necessarily align with urban system capacity.
• Lack of Funding and Support for Essential Waterway Dredging—Seaports struggle to secure approval and
funding for dredging, putting fishing and export industries at significant risk.
• Artificial Intelligence—While not exclusively a local problem,the rapid growth of artificial intelligence and
robotics threatens to replace many traditional jobs. It has already happened in manufacturing, retail and
even food service. While there are certainly productivity advantages to Al,the region must quickly identify
other employment opportunities for those holding at risk of replacement occupations.
• Invasive Species—As referenced earlier, invasive species such as the European Green Crab and Ghost
Shrimp pose an existential threat to the shellfish industry. But similar risks have and could again impact the
wood products and agricultural industries. Current effort to combat these plagues are not centralized or,
as of yet, sufficiently effective.
• Sea Level Rise—Many Pac-Salish population centers are built along shorelines susceptible to the impacts
of sea level rise. In most cases, it will be impractical to simply"move" billions of dollars in infrastructure to
higher ground. Beyond shops and offices, lodging facilities and tourism related infrastructure, most cities
operate wastewater treatment plants in these shore-adjacent, low-lying areas. For most,the solution will
likely involve expensive investment in sea walls and other diversionary engineering.
• Cascade Subduction Zone Earthquake/Tsunami— Perhaps the most formidable threat of all is the prospect
of a major Cascadia Subduction Zone earthquake and resulting tsunami. Over 100,000 people could be
directly impacted by flooding, and many more by disruptions caused by the earthquake. While coordinated
planning is ongoing, more urgent action is required to develop and promote evacuation routes, stand up
community safety centers, install warning alarms and relocate the most at-risk communities.
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 41
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Infrastructure
Most critical infrastructure needs are described in the SWOT Analysis, Goals and Objectives and Action Plan
sections. Updated project inventories and capital improvement plans are managed through the respective
counties, cities, Councils of Government and Regional Planning Councils.
The highest priority needs in the region include:
• Flood protection
• Climate adaptation strategies and associated infrastructure enhancements
• New or improved electric substations for commercial, industrial and prospective neighborhood sites
• Repair and expansion of aging marina infrastructure
• Water system expansion
• New or expanded sewer and wastewater treatment capacity
• Commercial waterway (Port) dredging and fill removal
• Bridge repair, expansion and relocation
• Safety and multimodal enhancements for rural roads and highways
• Industrial land identification and staging
• Brownfields cleanup
• Workforce housing construction to eliminate shortage and improve affordability
• Specific recreation and tourism infrastructure (sports facilities, visitor centers, EV charging, et al)
• Tsunami towners and warning systems in select locations
Another major district-wide infrastructure need is broadband and/or other high-speed communications
expansion.All four counties are currently studying the issue with current progress detailed in the following
section.
BROADBAND INFRASTRUCTURE
As shown in Figure 37, large swaths of the Pac-Salish region do not yet have internet.This is due to a
combination of access barriers and affordability. Currently, all four counties have completed or are actively
working on broadband fiber assessments (most through a multi-partner Broadband Action Team). The
following sections provide a broad overview of conditions and plans for high-speed communication
infrastructure in each county. More detailed analysis is contained within separate broadband action plans—
i.e.,the level of information that would be included in any future federal funding requests.
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 42
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Figure 37: % of Population with No Internet
> 18 +
> 12- 18
h,anTv�nt,
> 6- 12
D0-6 Grayiflii66r Count.
Tsunami Risk Zones
Thur; '� un!,
l'e—wis,Count
Pai ^r^.unt.
4 -
r
1Vahkia4.u^t� un;
Source:ACS Community Survey
Grays Harbor
Rural portions of Grays Harbor are not serviced by fiber and certain urban areas lack adequate speeds. Due to
low population densities in some portions of the County,the cost of extending fiber in financially infeasible
without subsidy. The PUD continually analyzes system expansion opportunities. Recently,the Washington
State Public Works Board awarded Grays Harbor PUD a $50,000 grant to study the feasibility of expanding the
PUD fiber network in East Grays Harbor County.The study will look at the viability of extending the fiber
network from Sund Road in South Elma to the Cedarville substation and the surrounding area, Porter,the City
of Oakville and the Chehalis Tribal Center. When built, it will benefit emergency responders, cities, schools and
residents by bringing improved broadband services to the area.
Mason County
According to Mason County's recently completed Broadband Action Plan,the areas of Mason County most in
need of improved internet access and services are those furthest from its urban core. The extreme corners of
the County lack population densities; this currently makes fiber expansion cost prohibitive without external
resources.Additionally, small to medium-sized communities with underground utilities, even directly off of
main roads are also typically unserved. Other recognized obstacles to the expansion of telecommunications in
the rural areas include workforce, funding, supply chain issues, and outdated or inadequate infrastructure.
The areas outside of Shelton, Belfair and Allyn are recognized by the state as Urban Growth Areas with
commercial and industrial centers that serve the surrounding communities. Both of those areas contain large
pockets of underserved Broadband Serviceable Locations (BSL)s. Efforts have been made in the more recent
past to secure state and federal funding for the expansion of infrastructure to underserved and unserved areas
and increase broadband speed to meet the state's new guidelines.The process of creating the Plan has
illuminated several key issues and service gaps for the provision of broadband and outlined the County's goals
and objectives to remedy them.
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 43
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Pacific County
Over the past several years, a Pacific County Broadband Working Group has been evaluating broadband and
other communications technology access and speeds throughout the county.Their general conclusion is that
broadband offerings are scarce, relatively high-cost and provide low-bandwidth or inconsistent speeds. Along
the way,the Working Group has led or coordinated a variety of actions, including identification of barriers
(topography, storm events, many rural pockets with difficult last-mile challenges) and development of a vision
statement.They estimate that at least$71VI in dark fiber will be required to establish adequate redundancy
and attract additional ISP providers that end-user retail service.
Some progress is already underway, however,following the announcement of Rural Digital Opportunity Fund
(RDOF) awards. By 2027, Spectrum Charter will build broadband infrastructure to census blocks in the Long
Beach Peninsula, Lumen Technologies to Willapa Valley along SR4, and Starlink to the remaining unnerved
Pacific County census blocks.
What is clear is that communications infrastructure is a top priority for Pacific County given its remote location
and the ever-growing need to communicate, work, shop and learn online. It will likely require a variety of
technological solutions to serve its unique geography, including networking equipment,fixed wireless, satellite
and expanded fiber distribution sites. Implementation will require considerable external private and public
investment.
Thurston County
A recent Thurston Broadband Survey shows that many areas remain unserved or have below par
download/upload speeds. South and the northwester tip of the county have the most significant service gaps.
A recent study conducted by NoaNet concluded the county's urban areas are adequately served, but
customers are unsatisfied with the cost of service provided. It was also noted that existing providers have
plans to update broadband infrastructure in rural areas.
The Nisqually Tribe and Thurston County entered into an Interlocal Agreement and are currently undertaking a
major broadband effort throughout Thurston County. The initial project, undertaken by the Nisqually, was
creating a robust fiber-optic network on Tribal lands intended to connect their Tribal members. Since then,
they have expanded the initiative to include other tribes through an inter-Tribal network beginning with the
Chehalis Tribe. Recognizing the potential impacts of such an endeavor, many municipalities, governmental
entities, entrepreneurial associations and residents have expressed their support of, and many have sought to
partner with the Tribe to bring critical broadband access to their communities and businesses.
One such important partnership is the Thurston County Broadband Action Team (BAT). Thurston County and
the Nisqually Tribe participate in the Thurston County BAT along with the Thurston Regional Planning Council,
Port of Olympia, and the Thurston County Economic Development Council.The Thurston County Commission
has awarded the Nisqually$500,000 for a community wide survey of need, and an additional $465,000 for
engineering of routes. The Tribe's multi-phased project would guarantee five gigabytes per second (5gbps)
download speeds and lgbps upload speed to thousands of Thurston County residents.The Tribe has
commissioned the help of Redline Communications and Astound,which plan to offer an affordable lgbps
upload speed starting at$69.00 a month.The Nisqually broadband projects are open-access fiber lines, which
will allow for greater competition among service providers, and potentially lower prices and higher quality
service, or even new innovations.
In 2017,the Tribe created Nisqually Communications, a fiber-optic construction service that works with large
internet providers on the installation of arial and underground fiber-optic lines.As part of the multi-phase
plan,the Tribe has applied and/or secured major state and federal funding for their broadband project that
will support the first phase of their project slated to build 42 miles of fiber connecting their Tribal networks to
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 44
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
the Chehalis Tribe.The project would require the Tribe to weave their networks through Lacey and Tumwater
which will provide high-speed internet access to an estimated 1,200 residential homes, 29 businesses and 16
anchor institutions.
The second phase of their project would connect Nisqually Tribal land to a property along Marvin Road,just
north of Interstate 5, and will supply high-speed internet service to more Tribal members, several Tribal anchor
institutions and businesses. During the third phase of the project,the Tribe envisions building fiber
connections from Rochester to Littlerock.This phase stands to connect 860 residents, a library, a school,
multiple farms and businesses.
The Tribe secured a sizable grant from the State Broadband Office in the amount of$6.775 million as well as a
$2 million CERB grant that will greatly assist in supporting their vision.Additional funding will be required to
complete remaining phases.
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 45
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Vision, Focus Areas, Goals and Objectives
VISION STATEMENT
The Pacific-Salish region sustains a resilient and inclusive economy
through intentional diversification and investment, coordinated
workforce and enterprise support activities, and a proactive culture
of innovation and adaptation.
FOCUS AREAS, GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The following provides an overview of four Pac-Salish Vision Focus Areas and associated goals and objectives.
Focus Area: Industry and Entrepreneurial Networks (IEN)
GOAL: Maintain a diverse and thriving economy with resilient core industry sectors and strong entrepreneurial
support systems that drive job,wage and taxable sales growth.
OBJECTIVES
IEN1: Expand support networks to maintain and grow the region's major industry clusters, including:
o Advanced Manufacturing o IT-Tech
o Food Systems o Tourism and Hospitality
o Health Care o Timber Products
IEN2: Develop and implement strategies to attract and grow manufacturing, aerospace and R+D operations
as American corporation re-shoring intensifies.
IEN3: Monitor, support and invest in the development and expansion of emerging industry sectors.
IEN4: Create diverse economic opportunities and infrastructure through Port District and Tribal Enterprise
partnerships.
TENS: Develop and implement strategies to support recreation, creative arts industries and attractions.
IEN6: Develop an opportunity fund that enables regional leaders to identify and recruit industries that help
close supply chain gaps and attend best practice learning workshops and events.
IEN7: Provide full spectrum entrepreneurial assistance that stimulates new enterprise development and
ensures continued success as businesses grow.
IEN8: Create stable revenue streams and facilitate catalytic investments that allow local downtown or similar
central commercial areas throughout the region to thrive.
IEN9: Identify and invest in emergent BIPOC business enterprises and networking systems.
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 46
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Focus Area: Infrastructure Capacity and Modernization (ICM)
GOAL: Maintain and expand physical infrastructure systems to accommodate economic growth, ensure
continued operation of core industries and facilitate worker and freight mobility.
OBJECTIVES
ICM1: Maintain an adequate supply of shovel-ready commercial and industrial land to support economic
development opportunities.
ICM2: Proactively clean, prep and activate brownfield sites for redevelopment opportunities.
ICM3: Facilitate development of housing stock at all price levels to accommodate need and ensure workers
can remain or relocate to the region.
ICM4: Expand water and wastewater treatment capacity and service areas.
ICM5: Ensure adequate energy to serve underdeveloped economic opportunity areas and projects.
ICM6: Extend high-speed communications capacity to more locations throughout the region.
ICM7: Maximize rail shipping, service area coverage and rail-adjacent business opportunities regionwide.
ICM8: Ensure regional Ports, cargo yards and shipping channels are able to operate at maximum potential.
ICM9: Renovate and modernize regional marina and marine service facilities and related infrastructure.
ICM10: Improve road and bridge safety and carrying capacity and add multi-modal capacity where viable.
ICM11: Continue evolving public transit to better connect workers to employment centers through innovations
like zero-fare options,flexible routes and expanded hours of operation.
ICM12: Work with state and federal officials to increase availability of ongoing roadway maintenance funds for
rural communities.
Focus Area: Economic Opportunity for All (EOA)
GOAL: Create diverse education workforce training and career pathway options to serve a fully inclusive cross
section of our region.
OBJECTIVES
EOA1: Expand early childhood education opportunities to all families.
EOA2: Ensure all children are made aware of career options and opportunities at an early age.
EOA3: Identify accessible, affordable childcare solutions for more working households.
EOA4: Introduce career pathway education and awareness programs to all ages and underserved populations
based on empirical data.
EOA5: Offer creative workforce training programs that facilitate participation for all people.
EOA6: Support workforce training and preferred employer programs that create work opportunities for
formerly justice involved populations.
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 47
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Focus Area: Environmental Stewardship and Resiliency (ESR)
GOAL: Enhance environmental stewardship to preserve the Pac-Salish region natural competitive advantage
and build emergency response networks and capabilities to expedite recovery from natural disasters.
OBJECTIVES
ESR1: Protect against the anticipated increase in coastal and riverine flooding.
ESR2: Reduce exposure to and mitigate outcomes associated with wildfires.
ESR3: Balance development and conservation to preserve critical habitat and species health.
ESR4: Maintain and improve water quality to support habitat, human health and aquaculture.
ESRS: Invest in hatcheries and related species restoration efforts that support local economies.
ESR6: Secure funding to purchase mitigation lands associated with invasive species impacts.
ESRT Identify beneficial uses for highly treated wastewater.
ESRB: Foster the development and adoption of renewable energy sources.
ESR9: Enhance tsunami and earthquake evacuation options and expand advance warning capabilities.
ESR10: Develop a catastrophic emergency mitigation plan or fund to expedite communications, shelter and
transportation restoration.
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 48
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Priority Actions and Projects
The following is an inventory of next-step and shovel-ready priority projects for all Pac-Salish counties.This is
essentially a "short-list" of catalyst projects that will stimulate or preserve economic stability region-wide, and
each is directly connected to a CEDS Vision Focus Area.A more exhaustive inventory of additional project
priorities is included in Appendix C.The priorities list will be reviewed and updated annually.
Grays Harbor
City of Hoquiam Westfork Dam Removal and Ground Water Supply
The City of Hoquiam constructed a concrete dam on the West Fork of the Hoquiam River in 1956.The dam
allows the City to divert 2.2 cubic feet per second from the river for the City's water supply.The dam is located
at approximate river mile 10.8, about north of the water treatment plant. For more than 20 years the City has
considered removing the West Fork Dam and developing an alternative drinking water source due to the need
for significant improvements and maintenance of the dam, and because the adjacent Highway 101 is a source
of potential water contamination. Additionally,the West Fork Dam is the#2 fish passage barrier removal
priority in a basin-wide list of over 2,000 barriers. Removal of the dam would fully restore natural alluvial
processes and quantitatively improve streamflow, benefiting native fish species like salmon,which are
experiencing dramatic declines in the region.
The overall goals of the project include: Removing a major fish passage barrier; restoring the ecosystem
around the existing dam; adding up to 2.2 cubic feet of flow to the river; diversifying the City's water supply;
adding physical capacity for the City's water supply; improving the City's aging water supply infrastructure; and
reducing infrastructure upkeep costs.
(Primary focus areas addressed: ICM, ESR)
City of Ocean Shores Tsunami Tower
Ocean Shores' Vulnerability.To support local tsunami planning efforts, the U.S. Geological Survey and the
Washington Military Department Emergency Management Division assessed variations in exposure of 24
communities along Washington's outer and Strait of Juan de Fuca coasts.They considered how much of a
community's developed land and how many of its residents,visitors, and businesses are within the tsunami
hazard zone.They also considered what percentage this represented of the community's total population and
assets. Ocean Shores,for example, has approximately 7.5 square miles of developed land in the inundation
zone. Because this represents 100%of Ocean Shores' developed area,the potential losses from a tsunami and
the impact such losses will have on the community are likely to be substantial.
(Primary focus areas addressed: ALL)
Port of Grays Harbor Westport Marina Modernization
Economically,the Westport Marina Modernization is a retention and redevelopment project that is required to
continue to generate the economic impacts the Marina is directly responsible for today. The Grays Harbor
region plays a major role in the commercial fishing industry of Washington State and the Nation. Westport is
the largest fishing port in Washington ranking number one in commercial seafood landings in the State and
tenth in the nation for seafood volume, 19th for value of catch.This activity directly supports nearly 2,300 jobs
and generates over$227 million in business revenue each year. Commercial fishing, recreational fishing,
seafood processing,yacht building and tourism are the major economic drivers of the community. All of these
key industries are directly impacted by the condition of the marina moorage infrastructure.
(Primary focus areas addressed: ALL)
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 49
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Aberdeen-Hoquiam Flood Protection Project—North Shore Levee and Levee West
The Aberdeen-Hoquiam Levee Protection projects will protect the Cities of Aberdeen and Hoquiam from
flooding.The North Shore Levee project will construct a 6.2 mile levee across the two cities, providing critical
flood protection and removing over 3,100 properties from FEMA's mapped Special Flood Hazard Area. The
project will build resiliency in the face of future flood events, retaining existing businesses,jobs, and residents
which have been on the decline in the community.The total construction cost of the North Shore Levee is
estimated to be approximately$78 million. The North Shore Levee—West Segment project, estimated to cost
$40 million, will build a 4.7 mile levee (earthen, concrete, sheet pile) bordering the west side of Hoquiam.
(Primary focus areas addressed: ICM, ESR)
Port of Grays Harbor Terminal 4 Expansion and Redevelopment Project
The Port's largest marine terminal customer,AGP, has invested over$100 million at its Terminal 2 Storage &
Export Facility since 2001.Their existing facility is the largest soymeal exporter on the West Coast.AGP will be
investing over$123 million more by constructing an additional export ship loading facility at Terminal 4.To
accommodate this expansion,the Port will need to make significant improvements. This includes a new rail
line within the marine terminal complex, redeveloping a 50-acre pontoon casting basin site, adding new site
access and roadway improvements, and finally, upgrading the marine fendering and stormwater systems.
Design and permitting are funded and underway. Construction funding for Port investments includes$25.5M
from a USDOT MARAD Port Infrastructure Development Program (PIDP)grant awarded in 2022. The Port is
finalizing the construction funding package with local, state and federal sources. Construction is to begin in
2024, with AGP targeting operations in 2025. The Port anticipates needing $55,000,000 in additional funding to
complete the project. When complete,the initiative will result in 80 long-term jobs and doubling of export
cargo capacity.The products shipped will aid in increasing renewable fuel and global food security stores.
(Primary focus areas addressed: IEN, ICM)
Highway 12 Rail Separation Project
This project is integral to the success of both the urban core of Grays Harbor and outlying coastal regions. Due
to geographical factors, including an immovable large bluff to the north, and the Chehalis River to the south,
major transportation corridors (state highway, rail, shipping) are constrained by a narrow bottleneck at the
easter end of Aberdeen—gateway to all other communities in the west as well as large tourism destinations.
As trains grow longer and more frequency (28,000 cars annually), delays (1.6 million tourists annually) are
growing exponentially, which in turn causes economic ripple effects and delayed emergency response times.
The proposed grade separation will allow unrestricted multimodal access into and out of the commercial area.
All engineering phases have been completed, and all partners identified. Remaining steps include installation
of access ramps from Eastbound and Westbound US 12, grade-separation at Chehalis Street, installation of a
roundabout at the US12—Newell Street intersection, removal of the signal at US 12, closure of a major at-
grade crossing, a right of way plan and documentation for all improvements, and grade-separated active
transportation lanes for pedestrians, bicycles, and wheelchairs. Remaining costs are estimated at $74,000,000.
(Primary focus areas addressed: IEN, ICM)
Mason County
Workforce Housing Initiatives
As the housing shortage continues, the local workforce is becoming priced out of the market. Infrastructure is
needed to develop residential housing, as a workforce housing shortage has been identified as a barrier to
workforce development, local business growth, and recruitment for Mason County. Shelton is working with
multiple developers on identified parcels for housing projects that could bring close to 4,000 units online.To
meet this current need,the City of Shelton will require three water storage tanks, costing approximately$5
million each, or a total of$15 million.
(Primary focus areas addressed: EOA, ESR)
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 50
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Core Infrastructure Development and Expansion
Infrastructure capacity is crucial for Mason County's economic and community health and is foundational to all
of our other projects/goals. Not a single development area in Mason County is ready to support a business
relocating here, and our existing businesses face significant economic, disaster, and changing
industry/technology challenges. In the Shelton UGA,to avoid a moratorium on development, Shelton and
Mason County must implement sewer infrastructure projects that total over$20 million. Mason County PUD
No. 3 has at least two substation projects at close to$10 million each needed to support industries looking to
locate with our county.
The Belfair UGA is located less than 5 miles from the Puget Sound Industrial Center(PSIC), a designated U.S.
Department of Commerce Foreign Trade Zone, Bremerton National Airport, and Puget Sound Naval Shipyard
(PSNS). This prime location coupled with large tracts of undeveloped land in proximity to critical urban
infrastructure, makes Belfair a leading candidate for attracting new employers and accommodating much-
needed workforce for Mason County.This collaborative $15 million project between Mason County and Belfair
Water District to fund expansion of infrastructure within our Belfair UGA to include reclaimed water,
additional capacity of the sewer plant, and connector roadways and fund Well 6 development and connection
needed for that expansion.
(Primary focus areas addressed: ICM, ESR)
Workforce Training and Upscaling
Mason County is pursuing sector-specific workforce training. Olympic College has a $5.5 million project to
transition the Shelton campus from one that primarily offers dual-credit), to a campus that primarily focuses
on the trades with an emphasis on emergent, but rapidly-growing industries. K-12 institutions prepare
students for post-secondary success by helping them developing the necessary skills and knowledge. It is
essential to provide meaningful work-based learning experiences that align with regional assets and promote
equity, inclusivity, and diversity.The local school districts have initiated a $1.5 million program focusing on
technical education and employer coordination, but at least$3 million in additional funding is needed to reach
full impact. it aims to provide sector-specific support and training for high-demand local sectors and jobs.
(Primary focus areas addressed: ICM, ESR)
Pacific County
Pacific County Housing
The availability of housing at all income levels is an impediment to economic growth and well-being. Units
available for purchase or rent are few. Median price increased 126% from 2018 and 2023 ($160k-$362k).
While there are 16,000 total housing units, fewer than 10,000 are permanently occupied. Vacation, seasonal,
and second homes comprise 34% of the housing stock.The age of housing is also of concern,with less than
15%of housing built since 2000. Over 40%of housing is at least 50 years old, with many plagued by hazardous
building materials, outdated electrical systems,failing plumbing and septic systems, and energy inefficient
insulation, windows, or roofing. According to Washington State, Pacific County has a shortage of 2,996
housing units (150 per year for 20 years).The target of bringing 100 units of workforce housing to market each
year, for the next 5 years, would require approximately$4 million per year, or a total of$20 million.
(Primary focus areas addressed: EOA, ESR)
Washington Coast Business Accelerator(WCBA)at Bendiksen Landing,South Bend
Coastal areas face maritime industry challenges: sea Level rise; Ghost Shrimp and Green Crab proliferation;
ocean acidification; industry infrastructure maintenance; and loss of workforce.The WCBA aims to become a
hub for sustainable maritime industries, by creating innovation, collaboration, entrepreneurial opportunity and
workforce training. The Port of Willapa Harbor will provide initial facility for WCBA, and other coastal locations
may be incorporated over time. Bendiksen Landing is a 7.4 acre former cannery with Willapa Bay access and
Highway 101 frontage, obtained by the Port through a grant from WA Department of Commerce for the
purpose of renovating and launching the Washington Coast Business Accelerator.
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 51
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Future funding will be used to renovate the site, develop credentialled programs in collaboration with Grays
Harbor College in marine industries, offer business development startup programs in collaboration with
Enterprise for Equity and provide site location for UW Washington SeaGrant. Keeping these programs moving
forward and expanding them to meet growing demand will cost$1-1.5m annually.
(Primary focus areas addressed: IEN, EOA)
Pacific County Water,Wastewater and Septic System Capacity Planning
Increased demand is straining treatment capacity of commercial systems.Additional wastewater treatment
facilities are needed to support long-term growth for all incorporated and unincorporated area. When local
systems experience failure, adequate backup systems do not exist. Multiple areas are dependent upon Dunal
Aquifer as the only feasible source of drinking water. High infiltration rates and shallow groundwater table
leave the aquifer susceptible to contamination from septic tank effluent, storm runoff, seawater inundation
and chemical fertilizers. There is no septage treatment facility within the 932 square mile Pacific County area.
Unified county-wide planning is needed to address long term needs to accommodate the current population
and anticipated water, wastewater management and septage treatment needs for the future.
(Primary focus areas addressed: IEN, ESR)
City of Raymond Downtown Revitalization Master Plan
Historic downtown Raymond will soon serve as a hub for workers, shoppers, students, residents and visitors.
Recent public investment and private redevelopment has stimulated the return of commerce (restaurants,
store, cafes,workplaces)for the largest, most diverse city in Pacific County.The City will soon construct a new
City Hall and Firehouse. The next phase in commercial and residential developments will require a needs
assessment and Mainstreet style planning to restore the city to a strong economic engine for the region.
Raymond is seeking$100,000 to prepare an economic development and urban design strategy.
(Primary focus areas addressed: IEN, EOA, ESR)
Planning for Downtown Revitalization —City of Ilwaco
The future of Ilwaco depends on the presence of a strong local economy that serves the needs of residents and
commercial interests. Improving downtown is a central focus of this effort.The City will provide incentives for
property owners who invest in buildings and make them available for new businesses.The City's significance
on Long Beach Peninsula cannot be overstated, featuring a Coast Guard Station, Cape Disappointment State
Park, Port of Ilwaco, cultural sites, artists and commercial and recreational fishing. Ilwaco has established a
revitalization committee and is seeking$100,000 to prepare an economic development/urban design strategy.
(Primary focus areas addressed: IEN, EOA, ESR)
Thurston County
Olympia Workforce Housing Initiatives
The City has multiple projects associated with increasing workforce housing, but is significantly behind demand
for affordable housing—specifically working individuals earning 40%-80%of AMI.The City has acquired
previously blighted sites to redevelop into affordable housing, but the target of bringing 80-100 units of
workforce housing to market each year,for the next 5 years, would require approximately$2.5 million per
year, or a total of$12.5 million. These funds are used for site acquisition and predevelopment expense.
(Primary focus areas addressed: EOA, ESR)
Olympia Downtown Parking Structure
The City owns and manages multiple surface lots in the downtown core of Olympia. Consolidation of surface
lots into a parking structure would expedite the repurposing of existing lots into affordable workforce housing.
The City will need $1.5 million to initiate predevelopment ad design work for the parking structure.
(Primary focus areas addressed: ICM, IEN, EOA)
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 52
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Olympia Low Barrier Workforce Development Programming and Housing
The City successfully piloted two low-barrier workforce development programs with one-time pandemic
recovery dollars. These programs (Olympia Career Hub and Journey2Jobs) have actively prioritized individuals
from marginalized communities.The City is also launching a tiny home village that will provide emergency
housing for individuals enrolled in these programs, but with funding that expires in 2025. Keeping these
programs moving forward and expanding them to meet growing demand will cost $1.3-1.5m annually.
(Primary focus areas addressed: IEN, EOA)
Olympia Lower Budd inlet Sea Level Rise Improvements
Downtown Olympia, a regional employment and visitor activity hub, is highly susceptible to sea level rise given
the community's location on the shores of Puget Sound (lower Salish Sea). Recent king tides have breached
boardwalks and caused flooding.The City and regional partners have developed an adaptation and
infrastructure plan. Implementation is estimated to cost $75m, including shoreline and estuary restoration,
infrastructure improvements, waterfront access improvements, and property acquisition.
(Primary focus areas addressed: ICM, EOA, ESR)
Olympia US 101 Interchange Project
Limited access to US 101 in West Olympia impacts public safety and the economic health of this region.The
resulting congestion compromises response times to Capital Medical Center and other emergency medical
facilities. Heavy traffic increasingly affects the free flow of freight, hampers accessibility to a vital economic
center, and causes significant delays to the traveling public.The City of Olympia seeks to build new ramps on
US 101 at Kaiser Road and Yauger Way. City is still seeking funding for construction of this project with a
current construction estimate of$35 million.
(Primary focus areas addressed: ICM, ESR)
Lacey Midtown Project
Lacey Midtown will serve as a hub for workers, shoppers, students, residents and visitors. Recent public
investment and private development/redevelopment has yielded restaurants, store, cafes, workplaces, and
recreations spots for this dynamic urban community where people "live, learn, earn, and create."The next
phases will increase densities, expand employer opportunities and build additional connections between the
employment center, Saint Matin's University, City Hall and surrounding retail, commercial and residential
developments. Construction is envisioned to begin between 2024-2027 at an initial cost of$5-7 million.
(Primary focus areas addressed: IEN, EOA)
Lacey Pacific Avenue Project
This project rejuvenates the area by capitalizing on nearby bike trails, road improvement, and better/easier
access to bike trails. Plans call for landscaping that attracts more visitors with bike "rest stops"for those using
the trails, and place-making structures such as arches and overhead lighting/across the street. Construction is
anticipated to begin between 2004-2006 at an anticipated initial cost of$ $2-3 million.
(Primary focus areas addressed: ICM, IEN, EOA)
Tumwater Capitol Boulevard Corridor I Former WSDOT Headquarters Campus
Capitol Boulevard is a major arterial and auto-oriented despite interest in a pedestrian-friendly area for
commerce and community. It has not attracted private investment, with many brownfield properties vacant.
The City adopted a Corridor Plan with three goals: improve business climate/conditions; safety/transportation
options; aesthetic appeal.The plan identifies the former WSDOT Headquarters Campus as the single most
important redevelopment for catalyzing investment and job creation. The brownfield site is 12 acres. Existing
structures will be demolished in 18 months; environmental assessment is ongoing.The City intends to
purchase the site and transfer ownership to a developer. The plan envisions mixed-use buildings (retail, office,
residential), with public sector amenities and critical utility infrastructure. The City will seek EDA Public Works
Program funding to support brownfields redevelopment and extension of utility infrastructure to the site.
(Primary focus areas addressed: ICM, IEN, EOA)
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 53
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Tumwater Brewery District I The Knoll,The Warehouse Valley,and the Historic Brewery
The Brewery District encompasses 300 acres comprised of brownfields, recreation, residential and commercial
areas, and Deschutes River waterfront. Past uses and recent contamination created brownfields infeasible to
redevelop without public investment. Despite being in the city,the properties are not connected to utilities. A
Brewery District Plan (2020) has four goals: strong sense of place (pedestrian access/gathering places, distinct
identity); transportation (access); economic activity; improve function/appearance of built environment.
(Primary focus areas addressed: ICM, IEN, EOA)
The plan endorses job creation and workforce development, and a set of implementation and phasing
strategies to assist in transitioning the Brewery District into a multi-modal activity center with a mixture of
housing and neighborhood-serving businesses.The results of that effort made it clear the community desired
progress that would honor Tumwater's brewing heritage, while meeting present community needs. There are
three brownfield sites prioritized for redevelopment:
• The Knoll
This privately-owned site is 4 acres.This site was last active in 2003. Three structures remain on site from
the former brewery, including the 5-story brewhouse (footprint: 75,900 sf, GSF: 265,600 sf),the 3-story
office and bottling facility (footprint: 30,000 sf, GSF: 73,000 sf), and a 4-story fermentation and storage
facility(footprint: 6,000 sf, GSF: 33,500 sf). The site experienced a fire in 2018, rendering it unusable. The
current owner is working with an architectural on designs for a vertical mixed use development (retail,
office, and residential). Concurrently,the City will be conducting environmental assessments in 2024 with
support from an EPA Community-Wide Assessment grant. The site's greatest challenges are lack of utilities
(water, sewer, power), the lack of transportation access, contamination, and the cost of demolishing the
existing burnt structure. Demolition is estimated to cost $12 million.The City will seek EDA Public Works
Program funding to support brownfields redevelopment and extension of utility infrastructure to the site.
• The Warehouse Valley
This privately-owned site is 22 acres and hosts a large warehouse (footprint: 250,000 sf, GSF: 300,000 sf)
with three covered rail spurs. Various small structures also remain on site: a mix of storage, maintenance,
decommissioned power station and auto repair for the brewery's fleet. A portion of the site is intersected
by rail (Union Pacific)with an overpass (Capitol Boulevard bridge).The warehouse is reusable, attracting
private sector attention for: sound and film studio, manufacturing and distribution, hydroponics, sports
venue/athletics facility. Site challenges: lack of utilities (water, sewer, power), access, contamination, and
flooding. City designs for flood remediation and riparian improvement suggest a cost of$7 million.
Greatest challenge: lack of access. Due to site layout and railroad, degrading condition of sole bridge to
site, above-grade access to the site is necessary to provide vehicle access and avoid conflicts with rail. Cost
for design, right of way, and construction is estimated at $60 million.The City will seek EDA Public Works
Program funding to support brownfields redevelopment and extension of utility infrastructure to the site.
• The Historic Brewery
While most former brewery properties ceased operation in 2003, several have been vacant since
Prohibition in 1920. In total, there are 35 acres with 200,000 sf of historic multi-story structures.The
current owner has a vision to rehabilitate the historic brewery into a world class destination that could
include tourism and hospitality amenities, restaurants and retail, craft brewing facilities, and public
amenities. A site feasibility study is underway, with a focus on analyzing demolition and rehabilitation
costs, access and parking, and connection to utility infrastructure.The City is committed to continuing
restoration of the adjacent publicly-owned historic properties, and exploring public-private funding
opportunities like grants and tax-increment financing.The City will seek EDA Public Works Program funding
to support brownfields redevelopment and extension of utility infrastructure to the site.
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 54
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Economic Development Partners
In addition to, and in support of,the many businesses that drive economic progress,the Pacific-Salish region is
host to many economic development partners.The following is a representative, but not necessarily
exhaustive, list of entities that may help advance economic initiatives in the future.
Grays Harbor County
• APEX Accelerator • Grays Harbor Transit
• Blue Zones Grays Harbor • Greater Grays Harbor, Inc
• Center for Inclusive Entrepreneurship • Hoquiam Business Association
• Chehalis Basin Flood Authority 0 Impact Washington
• City of Aberdeen • Montesano Chamber of Commerce
• City of Cosmopolis • PacMtn Workforce Development Council
• City of Elma • Port of Grays Harbor
• City of Hoquiam • Quinault Corporate Enterprises
• City of McCleary • Quinault Business Enterprises
• City of Montesano • Quinault Nation
• City of Ocean Shores • Satsop Business Park
• City of Westport • Summit Pacific Medical Center
• Downtown Aberdeen Association • The Moore Wright Group
• Economic Development Association • Timberland Regional Library System
• Elma Chamber of Commerce • Washington Department of Commerce
• Enterprise 4 Equity • Washington Economic Development Association
• Grays Harbor Broadband Action Team • Washington Sea Grant
• Grays Harbor College • Washington State Microbusiness Association
• Grays Harbor County • Washington State University Extension
• Grays Harbor County Council of Governments • Westport/Grayland Chamber of Commerce
• Grays Harbor PUD • Westport Marina
• Grays Harbor Small Business Development Center • WorkSource Washington
Mason County
• APEX Accelerator • Port of Dewatto
• City of Shelton • Port of Grapeview
• Enterprise 4 Equity • Port of Hoodsport
• Impact Washington • Port of Shelton
• Mason County • Shelton-Mason County Chamber of Commerce
• Mason County PUD No. 1 • Shelton School District
• Mason County PUD No.3 • Skokomish Tribal Nation
• Mason Economic Development Council • Squaxin Island Tribe
• Mason General Hospital and Family of Clinics • Timberland Regional Library System
• Mason Transit Authority • Washington Department of Commerce
• North Mason Chamber of Commerce • Washington Economic Development Association
• North Mason School District • Washington State Microbusiness Association
• Olympic College • Washington State University Extension
• PacMtn Workforce Development Council • WorkSource Washington
• Port of Allyn
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 55
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Pacific County
• APEX Accelerator • Pacific County Voices United
• Cape Disappointment Coast Guard Station • PacMtn Workforce Development Council
• Chinook Indian Nation 0 Port of Chinook
• City of I Iwaco 0 Port of Ilwaco
• City of Long Beach • Port of Peninsula
• City of Raymond • Port of Willapa Harbor
• City of South Bend • PUD#2
• Economic Development Affiliate partners • Raymond,South Bend,Ocean Beach, Naselle SDs
• Enterprise 4 Equity • Shoalwater Bay Indian Tribe
• Grays Harbor College • Timberland Regional Library System
• Ilwaco Merchants Association 0 Tokeland North Cove Chamber
• Impact WA • Washington Department of Commerce
• Long Beach Merchants Association • Washington Economic Development Association
• Ocean Beach Hospital • Washington Small Business Association
• Ocean Park Area Chamber • Washington Sea Grant
• Pacific County • Washington State Microbusiness Association
• Pacific County Childcare Alliance 0 Willapa Bay Enterprises(Shoalwater Bay Tribe)
• Pacific County Economic Development Council • Willapa Community Development Association
• Pacific County Health Department • Willapa Harbor Chamber
• Pacific County Immigration Services • Willapa Harbor Hospital
• Pacific County Tourism Bureau • WorkSource Washington
• Pacific County Transit
Thurston County
• APEX Accelerator • South Sound Military Communities Partnership
• Center for Business&Innovation • South Thurston Economic Development Initiative
• City of Lacey • Squaxin Island Tribe
• City of Olympia • SW WA Growers Coop
• City of Tumwater • Tenino Chamber of Commerce
• City of Yelm • The Evergreen State College
• Confederated Tribe of the Chehalis Reservation 0 Thurston Chamber of Commerce
• Enterprise 4 Equity • Thurston County
• Experience Olympia &Beyond • Thurston County Broadband Action Team
• Foreign Trade Zone 216 • Thurston County Legislative Partnership
• Lacey Makerspace • Thurston Craft Brewing& Distilling IPZ
• Minority Business Development Agency • Thurston Economic Development Council
• National Association of Government Contracting • Thurston Regional Planning Council
• Nisqually Indian Tribe 0 Thurston Thrives
• NW Cooperative Development Center • Timberland Regional Library System
• Olympia Downtown Alliance • Tumwater Chamber of Commerce
• PacMtn Workforce Development Council • Washington Center for Women In Business
• Port of Olympia • Washington Department of Commerce
• Rochester Chamber of Commerce • Washington Economic Development Association
• Saint Martin's University • Washington State Microbusiness Association
• SBA Small Business Innovation Research • Washington State University Extension
• Small Business Development Center • West Olympia Business Association
• South Puget Sound Community College • WorkSource Washington
• South Sound Lacey Chamber of Commerce • Yelm Chamber of Commerce
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 56
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Evaluation Framework
The Pacific-Salish EDD evaluation framework will likely evolve over time.At least initially,the Board will
evaluate the following start up tasks and data indicators:
Start-Up Tasks:
• Economic Development District approved and launched
• Operating funds secured
• Operations space confirmed
• Executive director retained
• Bylaws developed and approved
• %of priority actions implemented or underway
Data Indicators:
All indicators have established baselines and will be tracked annually unless otherwise noted.
• Population change by county and region
• % households living below ALICE threshold (produced biannually)
• Educational attainment rate by race and ethnicity
• Prime-age labor force participation rate by race and ethnicity
• Unemployment rate by race and ethnicity
• Income by race and ethnicity
• #of business establishments
• Rate of growth by industry category and employment volume
• Gross Regional Product (GRP)
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District 57
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Appendix A - Community Engagement Inventory
MASON COUNTY
EDC Board of Directors Focus Group: May 11, 2023
• Amy Asher, Mason Transit Authority • Lisa Perry, Simpson Lumber
• Jennifer Baria, Mason EDC • Ray Peters, Squaxin Island Tribe
• Kristy Buck, Port of Shelton • Brian Sayler, Mason County
• Jennifer Capps, Mason General Hospital • Joe Schmit, City of Shelton
• Tiana Dunbar, Mason EDC • Judy Scott, South Sound Construction
• Lynn Eaton, Mason PUD 3 • Allison Smith, Olympic College
• Geoff Farrington, Skydive Kapowsin • Trade Schmitt, Ridge MP
• Karin Leaf, Mason EDC • Wes Taylor, Taylor Shellfish
• Donna Moir, Heritage Bank • Sharon Trask, Mason County Commissioner
• Jim Morrell, PCF Credit Union • Jessee Wyeth, Shelton School District
• Mark Nault, OCCU
2nd EDA Visit—July 31, 2023 infrastructure specific discussions
• Meeting 1: Mason County PUD No. 1
• Meeting 2: City of Shelton
• Meeting 3: Mason County PUD No. 3
• Meeting 4: Mason County
GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY
EDA/Laura Ives Team Day Visit: May 3, 2023
Summit Pacific Group, Elma
• Casey Duff, Senator Cantwell Rep • Brad Thomas, SPMC
• Josh Martin, SPMC • Jull Warne, County Commissioner
• Bernie O'Donnell, Rock Construction
Grays Harbor College Group,Aberdeen
• Ed Brewster, Grays Harbor College • Carli Schiffner, Grays Harbor College
• Holly Duffy, Grays Harbor College • Lisa Smith, Grays Harbor College Foundation
• Nicole Lacroix, Grays Harbor College
Grays Harbor PUD Briefing Group(lunch hour)
Briefs:
• Flood Protection Project • Grays Harbor PUD
• Port Marine Terminal 4 and AGP Expansion • Grays Harbor County
• Quinault Indian Reservation Relocation • City of Ocean Shores
• Quinault Enterprises Wellness Center
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District A-1
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Participants (in-person and zoom):
• Nick Bird, City of Aberdeen • Rob Hanny, GH PUD
• Sara Bisson, City of Ocean Shores • Ryan Hendricks, Quinault Indian Nation
• Lynnette Buffington, Greater Grays Harbor • Kris Koski, Port of Grays Harbor
• Schuyler Burkhart, GH PUD • Jon Martin, City of Ocean Shores, Mayor
• Ruth Clemens, City of Aberdeen • Kelsey Norvell, Greater Grays Harbor
• Stephanie Conway, Greater Grays Harbor 0 Bernie O'Donnell, Rock Construction
• Ian Cope, GH PUD • Daniel Pailthorp, Senator Patty Murray
• Mark Cox, Grays Harbor County • Commissioner Vickie Raines
• Vicki Cummings, GH Council of Governments • Haley Schanne, Congressman Kilmer (06)
• Zana Dennis, GH Council of Governments • Alissa Shay, Port of Grays Harbor
• Casey Duff, Senator Cantwell • Brian Shay, City of Hoquiam
• Kayla Dunlap, Port of Grays Harbor • Lisa Smith, Grays Harbor College Foundation
• Tony Enzler, Quinault Corporate, COO • Rep.Jim Walsh, WA Legislature (19th)
• Candie Gleason, Greater Grays Harbor • Senator Jeff Wilson, Washington Leg (#19)
Westport Group
Briefs:
• Ocean Companies and Seafood/Maritime Industries
Participants:
• Brian Blake, Ocean Gold Fisheries • Kelsey Norvell, Greater Grays Harbor
• Molly Bold, Port of Grays Harbor • Daniel Pailthorp, Senator Murray
• Lynnette Buffington, Greater Grays Harbor • Tom Quigg, Port Commissioner
• Mike Cornman, Merino's Seafood • Rep.Jim Walsh, WA Legislature (19)
• Casey Duff, Senator Cantwell • Senator Jeff Wilson, WA Legislature (19)
• Kevin Goodrich, City of Westport • Tanya Woods, Westport/Grayland Chamber
Greater Grays Harbor Board Focus Group (Jason Robertson): May 18, 2023
• Reid Bates, Express Employment Pros • Josh Martin, Summit Pacific Medical Center
• Leonard Bauer, Port of Grays Harbor • Kyle Pauley, City of Cosmopolis
• Schuyler Burkhart, Grays Harbor PUD#1 • Lisa Perry, Sierra Pacific Industries
• Anthony Enzler, Quinault Chair • Kevin Pine, Grays Harbor County
• Ryan Hendricks, Quinault Indian Nation • Brad Shea, HDR, Inc.
• Tom Jensen, Harbor Regional Health 0 Lorna White, 1st Security Bank
• Durk Johnson, Seabrook Hospitality
THURSTON COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners Overview Presentation (Jason Robertson): April 27, 2023
• Commissioner Carolina Mejia • Robin Campbell,Assistant County Manager
• Commissioner Tye Menser • Ramiro Chavez, County Manager
• Commissioner Gary Edwards • Robert Gelder, Assistant County Manager
• Michael Cade,Thurston EDC • Jennica Machado, Ec. Dev. Manager
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District A-2
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Thurston County Economic Development Practitioners Focus Group (Jason Robertson): May 16, 2023
• Michael Cade,Thurston EDC • Mike Reid, City of Olympia
• Jennica Machado,Thurston County • Rick Walk, City of Lacey
• Austin Ramirez, City of Tumwater
Thurston County Economic Development Council Board Briefing (Jason Robertson): May 14, 2023
• Peter Agabi, City of Tumwater 0 Nancy LaPointe, Navigate Financial
• Reid Bates, Express Employment Pros • Cecilia Loveless, MultiCare Foundation
• Heather Burgess, Law Firm • Michael McGauly, StraderHallett PS
• Jim Cooper, City of Olympia • Malcolm Miller, City of Lacey
• Marc Daily,TRPC • Evan Parker, Kidder Mathews
• Joe DePinto, City of Yelm • Annette Pitts, Experience Olympia/Beyond
• Joe Downing, Port of Olympia • Mark Steepy, KPFF Consulting Engineers
• Gary Edwards, County Commissioner • Dr.Timothy Stokes, South Puget Sound CC
• Brian Fluetsch, Sunset Air • Tony Taylor, Leaders Lead the Podcast
• Wayne Fournier, City of Tenino • Carrie Whisler, OlyFed
• Daryl Fourtner, Heritage Bank • Chris Woods, Boys/Girls Club Thurston Co.
• Jessica Jensen, Cap City Law, PS 0 Shina Wysocki, Chelsea Farms
• Dan Jones, NorthAmericaTalk
EDC Board CEDS/EDD Briefing (Jason Robertson): May 24, 2023
• Reid Bates, Express Employment Pros • Michael McGauly, StraderHallett PS
• Jim Cooper,City of Olympia • Malcolm Miller, City of Lacey
• Marc Daily,TRPC • Evan Parker, Kidder Mathews
• Joe DePinto, City of Yelm • Annette Pitts, Experience Olympia/Beyond
• Gary Edwards, County Commissioner • Mark Steepy, KPFF Consulting Engineers
• Daryl Fourtner, Heritage Bank • Dr.Timothy Stokes, South Puget Sound CC
• Dan Jones, NorthAmericaTalk • Tony Taylor, Leaders Lead the Podcast
• Nancy LaPointe, Navigate Financial • Carrie Whisler, OlyFed
PACIFIC COUNTY
EDA Visit— May 2, 2023
Meeting 1. City of Long Beach- Long Beach City Hall (City Leaders, Mayor, City Council, City Managers, LBMA
Rep, PCTB rep)30 minutes meeting in chamber and 30 minutes boardwalk visit.
Participants:
• Bayo Adetunji 0 Mark Newsom
• John Anderson • Jerry Phillips
• Jeanne Brooks • Ariel Smith
• David Glassen • Sue Svendsen
• Laura Ives • Tiffany Turner
• Karla Jensen • Sue Yirku
• Jamie Judkins
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Meeting 2. Pacific County Ports and key Stakeholders-Salt Pub- (Port of Ilwaco, Port of Chinook, Port of
Peninsula, Port of Willapa Harbor) and key Ilwaco City leaders(Mayor, City Council, City Treasurer, IMA rep,
PCTB rep).
Participants:
• Bayo Adetunji • Tracy Loftstrom
• John Anderson • Suzanne Luttrell
• Jenna Austin • Julian Orr
• Holly Beller • Jay Personius
• Jeanne Brooks • Kelly Rupp
• Mike Cassineli • Jim Sayce
• Bill Derion • Butch Smith
• Laura Ives • Katja Spitz
• Jamie Judkins • Sue Yirku
• Matt Lessanau
Meeting 3. Lunch with Raymond and South Bend Key Stakeholders-Willapa Harbor Chamber, South Bend
(Raymond City leaders, South Bend City leaders, PC Commissioners, WH Chamber,Tokeland Chamber)
Participants:
• Bayo Adetunji • Scott McDougal
• Jenn Allison • Paul Plackinger
• John Anderson • Dee Roberts
• Sandy Bell • Kelly Rupp
• Jeanne Brooks • Jim Sayce
• Rebecca Chaffee • Julie Struck
• Jerry Doyle • Jovon Vaughn
• Shawn Humphries • Marc Wilson
• Laura Ives • Sue Yirku
• Jamie Judkins
Tour. Port of Willapa Harbor, Bendicksen Landing/South Bend Boat
Meeting 4. Shoalwater Bay Tribe-Tokeland - Greetings and Blessing;Tsunami Tower; Future Relocation
Community Site Tour
Participants:
• Bayo Adetunji • Laura Ives
• John Anderson • Jamie Judkins
• Jeanne Brooks • Sue Yirku
• Jesse Downs
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District A-4
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Pacific EDC Board Briefing and Discussion (Jason Robertson)—June 14, 2023
Noted priorities:
• Shellfish industry support
• Federal dredging investment
• Help becoming a new energy source R+D center
• Provided expansive project priorities inventory with ratings for community+job creation value
Participants:
• Sandy Bell • Melissa Ramsey
• Jeanne Brooks • Weston Roberts
• Mike Cassinelli • Dee Roberts
• Jerry Doyle • Steve Rogers
• Cheryl Heywood • Kelly Rupp
• Laura Holmes • Jim Sayce
• Karla Jensen • Anne Singer
• Tracy Lofstrom • Steve Sohlstrom
• Andrew Mattingly • Linda Spencer
• Mark Newsom • Tiffany Turner
• Jay Personius • Sue Yirku
• Jerry Phillips
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District A-5
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Appendix B - Regional Plans Summary
Resiliency Focus
INFO SOURCE I MAJOR GOALS/FINDINGS NOTED CHALLENGES OTHER NOTES
Cascadia Rising: 2022 • Exercise focused on identifying response • A consolidated plan does not yet • Unique strength for emergency
preparedness in the event of a significant exist to coordinate the reopening of preparedness and response:strong
Cascadia Zone Subduction Zone(CSZ) regional ports to facilitate the national guard and JBLM/Whidbey
event—most relevant finding for Pac- evacuation of people and movement military presence
Salish: of bulk products in response to a CSZ • Need guidelines and facilities for
• Lack of mitigation funding for surface event establishing adequate sheltering,
roads,airports, rail and marine ports • Need stronger coordination with response base camps,wrap around
following emergency area tribal communities care services
• Incomplete evacuation plans(tsunami,
fire,earthquake)
• Need stronger business reentry and
community reunification plans
• Insufficient funding to modernize and
optimize data and phone warning
Related Regional Plans
INFO SOURCE MAJOR GOALS/FINDINGS NOTED CHALLENGES OTHER NOTES
PacMtn Industry Cluster • Updated every five years • Wood products and fishing/shellfish • Includes all Pacific-Salish Counties,
Analysis: Updated 2020 • Used to identify in-demand jobs;develop remain among highest LQ industries, but also Lewis County—subtract
industry sector engagement strategies; but continue to shed employment small%of manufacturing and ag,and
flag supply chain gaps;compare wage findings are consistent w Pac-Sal
ranges,et al baseline
• Key Industries: Food;Timber Products; • Data helpful for identifying and
Info-Tech; Healthcare; Manufacturing/ supporting emerging sectors(e.g.,
Logistics; Hospitality/Tourism media and brewing-distilling in 2020)
• . • • . • Action
INFO SOURCE MAJOR GOALS/FINDINGS NOTED CHALLENGES OTHER NOTES
Grays Harbor, Mason, • Provided in main plan doc • Provided in main plan doc • Provided in main plan doc
Pacific,Thurston
(All in 2022-2023)
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District B-1
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Grays Harbor I
INFO SOURCE MAJOR GOALS/FINDINGS NOTED CHALLENGES OTHER NOTES
Grays Harbor Economic • Tourism soared during pandemic, likely to • Av Ann Wage are 73% Nat Av • Major employment industries:
Vitality Index: 2022 remain high w return visitors • Just 27%of retail sales occur outside Health,AFS, Retail, Pub Admin,
• Home values and retail sales also up Aberdeen (36%), Unincorporated Manuf.And Ed
• Port handled 2-3 MMT of cargo for about County(24%)or Ocean Shores(13%) • Home sales have grown steadily from
a decade,should see growth w expansion • 44%of adults have HS degree or less 2016
of Terminals 2 and 4
Greater Grays Harbor • Key Industries:Wood Products; Food • Current challenges include flooding • 3 Opportunity Zones: Moclips-Ocean
Website(Facts+ Figures) Products; Hospitality+Tourism and homelessness Shores; Hoquiam;Aberdeen
• Projects: North Shore Levee; US 12 Rail • Noted,separately,#of ALICE • Comprehensive business resources
Separation;Oyhut Bay Expansion threshold HHs rose 32%between and assistance program thru GGH
• Featured Properties:Tech Campus at 2019 and 2021—i.e., nearly 11k HHs • Microenterprise Assistance Fund
Satsop(47,832 SF of office space); do not have enough income to meet (with set aside for childcare facilities)
Hoquiam Marine Industrial Site (93 acres survival budget($22,956 for single
w 1,700 ft river frontage) adult and $68,712 for family of 4)
INFO SOURCE MAJOR GOALS/FINDINGS NOTED CHALLENGES OTHER NOTES
Grays Harbor • Goals: Establish development climate that • The Element notes challenges • The county has an 0.09 Advisory
Comprehensive Plan stimulates economic activity/investment; caused by pandemic; higher than Committee that issues grants,
Economic Development Retain existing businesses and assist in average unemployment; and lagging approved by Commissioners,to
Element: 2021 development/expansion;Strengthen economic growth advance element goals
natural resource-based economy; • Grays Harbor is considered a • Extensive list of Economic
Promote increased employment "distressed county" (with a three- Development Projects with cost
opportunities and incomes for workers; year unemployment rate 20%above estimates and descriptions
Market Grays Harbor as a premier place state average
to visit, live, invest; Invest in maintenance
and expansion of infrastructure that
retains,expands, leads to new economic
growth throughout county
Aberdeen Comprehensive • High level goals include: Healthy • Lack of building maintenance; • Notes significance of natural setting
Plan Economic economy; Diverse talent base;Vibrant population and jobs losses; (tourism and environmental
Development Element: downtown; Healthy businesses; Complete development challenges that led to stewardship responsibilities); Port of
2022 transportation;Active waterfront; Unique limited new construction, limited Grays Harbor economic power
Aberdeen identity; Distinct employment housing options,declining housing
districts; Economic resilience; and affordability,and a limited economic
Regional coordination base; sea level rise
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District B-2
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
•
INFO SOURCE MAJOR GOALS/FINDINGS NOTED CHALLENGES OTHER NOTES
Thurston • Major focus: Career Pathways and Workforce • Notable challenges: periodic reduction in • Action plan needs update
Economic Readiness;Target Industry Growth/ force events at State and JBLM; lack of
Alliance Plan: Innovation;Small Business and funding for last-mile infrastructure(and
2017 Entrepreneurial Resources; Infrastructure, lack of EDD)
Policy/Funding Coordination; Brand
Development, Partnerships and
Communication
• 35 Initiatives:transp.system/transit; reclaim
H2O; broadband; infra.funding; ctr for
biz/innovation; multi-cultural biz
development; IPZ; ag+food man.strategy;
target industry recruitment; business
retention fund
• Adopted indicators instructive for Pacific-
Salish monitoring plan
Thurston Strong • Reset plan to build inclusive, resilient, • Identifies major economic challenges • Notes other community priorities to be
COVID Recovery expanding economic landscape resulting from pandemic: Reduced access implemented by others—e.g.,affordable
and Reset Plan: • 22 actions: childcare support, BIPOC business to critical info; lack of childcare; revenue housing along transit lines, identifying
2021 council; community cultural center; biz collapse for select sectors; shovel-ready infrastructure projects,
training programs; place-based ec dev disproportionate impacts for BIPOC and creating a food hub in south county
engagement;CDFI lender; Education to low-income pops; inability of some
Financial Stability TF;SPSCC scholarships;Job businesses to adapt(i.e.,online presence,
Corps program; ag support; Economic bookkeeping for PPP loans,etc.)
Development District; biz bridge financing;
workforce housing,et al
Thurston County • Emphasizes collaboration with partners • Concern with protection of remaining ag • 2017 update presents a favorable,
Economic including EDC,Chamber, Port lands after rapid deterioration supportive view of economic
Development • Policy 1.4 documents support for creating development(so long as it is sustainable)
Element: 2019 federal EDD
Olympia • Vision—heart of the region • None noted • Increasing housing density adding more
Downtown • Focus Goals:Advocacy;Safety; Image making permanent market
Alliance(ODA) (spaces and places); economic development;
Strategic Plan: funding
2022
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District B-3
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Thurston
INFO SOURCE MAJOR GOALS/FINDINGS NOTED CHALLENGES OTHER NOTES
ODA Annual • New maintenance worker keep streets and • Homelessness and mental health • ODA works w Valeo to help previously
Report: 2023 storefronts clean • Sea level rise,flooding unhoused individuals secure
• Microgrant available to spruce up facades • Capitol employees working from home employment
• Considering forming Improvement District to
fund revitalization
Lacey • Lacey has grown 15%since 2015,twice the • Lack of workforce, large sites for job • Future opportunity to repurpose
Community rate of Thurston/WA; 80%coming from out centers, housing and identity Carpenter Way gravel pit
Market Study: of state • Rick of flooding from Nisqually • Redevelop South Sound Center(Sears)
2022 • Lacey's job base grew 19%,far above peer and Martin Village(Burlington)
and state averages;warehouse jobs led • Potential to host EV battery R+D
growth,then healthcare and manufacturing
• Significant demand for warehouse and
business office park space
Lacey Economic • Strengths are collaboration,demographics • Insufficient funding for dedicated biz • The other two documents are the
Development and workforce retention and recruitment position Economic Development Strategy,and
Element: 2016 • JBLM impact highly significant • Lack of"economic gardening"tools Economic Development Program (Work
• HUB Zone and CB+I notable assets • Without offset, high water connect and Plan).While there is county-wide
• As is location between PDX/SEA traffic fees impede development collaboration,there is no CEDS. CEDS
• Diverse zoning for all types of biz • No strong fin tools like TIF required by EDA for grants, revolving
• Opportunity to develop near Cabela's • Threat of earthquakes/volcano loan. Lacey and Thurston are not
• Luxury auto sales opportunity • Threat of JBLM downsizing considered distressed,and not eligible
• Potential to redevelop SS Center • Endangered species limitations for EDA funding. CEDS
• Potential to redevelop Fred Meyer • Occupation forecast not HW jobs would formalize,on a county/regional
• (Market study updated post 2015)
level,which partners provide services,• Open to incentives for strong R01 protocols for working together, andwhere to effectively focus resources.
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District B-4
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
INFO SOURCE MAJOR GOALS/FINDINGS NOTED CHALLENGES OTHER NOTES
Olympia Strong: Needs • Renters and homeowners living in Key Initiatives
2023 • Close the Equity Gap separate worlds—e.g.,over 90%of • Grow the Olympia Career Hub to
• Boost Affordable Housing& Home Ownership renters had difficulty affording food last prepare people for local in-demand
• Elevate More People Out of Poverty year; under 10%of homeowners occupations (clean energy, construction,
• Champion Youth etc.)
• Cultivate Career Pathways • Journey2Jobs skill-building and
• Support Entrepreneurship and Small employment w wrap-around services
Business, Large Employers&Industry Sectors • Support programs that introduce youth
• Foster Community Vitality to a variety of career options and
employers before graduation
• Convert Plum Street Village into
transitional housing for formally
houseless and incarcerated individuals in
job training and education programs
• Expand access to capital for aspiring
entrepreneurs from underbanked and
underrepresented populations
• Stand up navigator pilot project in target
zone neighborhoods to connect
residents with business and career
training resources
• Develop a climate adaptation and
preparedness plan
• Work with regional economic partners
to better prepare for future economic
disruptions
Tumwater Goals Challenges • This is for lowland section of brewery
Brewery District • Sense of place • Historic structures may require adjacent to Tumwater Falls Park, not
Plan Update: . Pedestrian access demolition/rebuild production facilities in valley
2023 • Gathering places • Access road is limited • EDA could be instrumental for cleaning,
• Better transportation options • Utilities undersized and redeveloping historic brewery for
• Employment/economic opportunity • No parking area major emp center
• Possible event/hotel space
• New brewing/distilling operations
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District B-5
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Pacific
INFO SOURCE MAJOR GOALS/FINDINGS NOTED CHALLENGES OTHER NOTES
Reimagining The Willapa • Focused on sustainability in the Willapa Bay • Decline in wood products industry; • Detailed project descriptions
Report: 2022 region through innovation, resiliency and challenges to fishing and shellfish included in document"Livable
recreation farming;climate change—esp.for Cities Project Descriptions"
• Projects: Sustainable Shellfish Innovation; SB Indian Reservation and Tokeland
Energy Innovation District;Shoalwater Bay
and Tokeland Infrastructure Resilience;
Business-Ready Downtowns; New Housing;
Trail-Ready Willapa;Willapa Hospitality
Institute and Culinary Destination; Restore
Critical Boat Maintenance Infrastructure;
value-added wood products manufacturing at
Port of Willapa Harbor;Street and Sidewalk
Preservation-Construction Grants; EV
Charging Station Grants; Downtown and Small
Business Grants;Willapa Wheelstop;
Complete Streets;South Bend Boardwalk;
Willapa Hills Swing Bridge;Sound Bend Bridge
ADA Access;Tokeland Walk/Bike
Infrastructure;South Bend Bendiksen Landing
Restoration; Hospitality Education Center; Bay
Center Shellfish Education
Recreation Development • Focus on dispersed recreational tourism • Dramatic fluctuation(and more • Divide PC into 6 sub-regions:
Plan: 2018 . Projects: Bay Center rec facilities and trails; recently)decrease in razor clam Tokeland; Long Beach Peninsula;
water trails;docks; marketing;viewing days open has hurt visitation Naselle Valley; Raymond/S Bend;
platforms;Countywide trail system; signage; • Lack of connectivity limits visitor Willapa Valley; Bay Center
Haunted history project;focus on biking, stay length and spending
birdwatching,eco-adventurers
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District B-6
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Pacific
INFO SOURCE MAJOR GOALS/FINDINGS NOTED CHALLENGES OTHER NOTES
Pacific County Overall • Ag and Forest: adapt to tech changes in • Impacts of people moving to online • Serves as a substitute for Economic
Economic Development resource production and manufacturing shopping(away from local Element in County Comp Plan
Plan: 2019 • Transportation: improve channel and harbor economy) • Need to follow up on status of
access; over the dock freight transfer • Lack of broadband coverage conceptual "online marketplace"
capacity; EV stations • Business seasonality • Excellent overview of Branding
• Industrial Lands:Consider mixed use housing e Low to no pop growth in some baseline: Columbia,Cranberry,
on certain industrial lands areas Rainkist,Willapa, Long Beach,etc.
• Commercial Lands: Mixed use housing for . Lack of workforce housing • Transportation priorities: Bridges
workers • Aging pop on Willapa Hills Trail,SR6; erosion;
• Housing: Diversify housing types; increase a Lack of specialty medical services Bike-ped separation;trestles;
density;workforce housing for resource . Majority living in unincorporated Connecting Discovery Bay rail to
workers area (68%) puts strain on County Refuge;Stream culverts;
• Maritime:Spin-off industries; energy budget Replacement of bridges;
production or support; channel nav • Isolation from 1-5 Corridor and Maintenance of shoulders (SR103)
• Forest Industrial:Value-added sector larger urban centers • Safety is a recurring theme across
development e Overabundance of vacant and sub-region,as is youth
• Water Resources: Drinking water quality; vacation homes • Noted funding sources: LTA, .09
water resource protections • Low labor force participation rate Sales Tax; CERB; PWTF; USDA; DNR
• Rec: build recreation network with emphasis • Transient segment of workforce Rural Communities; FLAP;WWRP;
on public lands; enhance connectivity; a Vulnerability of resource industries RCO; Other Funds: County,Special
modernize amenities to drastic climate change Purpose Districts, Nonprofits, Ports
• Education: More afterschool activities; more . Loss of local businesses; rise of
broadband REITs
• Communications: sufficient broadband to e Lack of cohesive brand
support growth of in-home internet based a Shortage of industrial lands
businesses . Incomplete info on home-based biz
• Brand: Grow county and sub-region brands a Sales tax depletion,threat from OR
with local products border and internet
• Resource Lands: protect from erosion a Underbuilt downtown amenities
• Other Goals: Maintain and protect high LQ, . Lack of social media/internet skills
but declining workforce base:wood,ocean, among business operators
rivers;Convert jobs from PT to FT; housing • Gaps in poverty reduction
trusts education and resources
• Rising costs overwhelming financial
capacity of fixed income residents
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District B-7
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Pacific I
INFO SOURCE MAJOR GOALS/FINDINGS NOTED CHALLENGES OTHER NOTES
Pacific County OEDP Annex: • Current inventory of ec dev projects(those • NA • Need to see if cost estimates
2022 above+others)—major focus on marina and available
Boatworks;water systems;cold storage;
industrial yard enhancements
Pacific County Bike and Fed • Adjacent doc to Recreation Development Plan • Cost estimates not provided • Excellent overview of segment
Route Plan: 2018 • Proposal to connect the dots(link bike trails) deficiencies and needs
between Discovery Trail and Willapa Hills Trail
• And regionally,to Cape Shoalwater Trail into
Aberdeen/101 and SR 105
• Identifies 13 trail segments; almost all are
proposed v existing
Population At Risk—Pacific • Actual data year: 2019 • Clearest depiction yet of"missing • NA
County: 2022 • Good news:Only 28%of HI-Is pay more than middle"age cohort(under 5 and
30%of income for rent v 46%for US over 65 rising at twice the US rate)
• Shows 16%of Pacific County
residents in "poverty"and 7%in
"deep poverty"—Over 19%of HHs
receive food stamps v 12%for US
• Good graphic showing 35%of
Pacific labor force "did not work"v
23%for US; increase of 6%over
past decade
• 24.7%of Pacific population self-
reports a disability v 12.6%of US
Joint Pacific County Housing • Interest in Community Land Trust w • Notable that,of 16,000 homes, • Companion "Dimensions" doc also
Authority Strategic Plan: permanent affordable housing only 9,000 are occupied v seasonal identifies need for tiny home
2018 • Acquire more units countywide • JPCH operates 4 properties with 64 village,overnight shelters, re-
• Promote ADUs units for all income levels purposed commercial lodging as
• Focus on affordable workforce housing supply • Estimate 110-130 homeless potential solutions for closing stock
families gap
Benchmark Demographics: • NA,outdated (2019 data)and replaced with • NA • NA
2022 JobsEQ data
Pacific County EDC Annual • Launched Long Beach Merchants Services • Major focus on administering • Incredible list of EDC members
Report: 2021 Center; DART Trail Mapping COVID response aid
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District B-8
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Pacific
INFO SOURCE MAJOR GOALS/FINDINGS NOTED CHALLENGES OTHER NOTES
Pacific County Property • Livable Communities Year—UW student eval • Under-regulated vacation homes • Products include database with
Inventory: 2022 (UW) of underutilized structures for potential are driving affordable market out property specifics and GIS
housing use of reach storyboard to visualize options
• Locations that have access to sewer,water,
and broadband,as well as have an existing
building foundation
• Each municipality has 25-50"good fit"
properties
Regional Transportation Opportunities Challenges • 4 projects were identified as top
Plan Update—Discussion • Major Project Development with WSDOT • Underfunded for known needs priorities,with 2 in South County
Doc(2023) • Passenger rail expansion • Challenges with Road Usage Charge and 2 in North County
• Emerging Technology(EVs, Hydrogen Fuel Cell • Tourism-related traffic overtaxing
Vehicles,Connected and Autonomous local roads
Vehicles) • Lack of ADA improvements
EDA Project Funding • 34 top priorities,countywide • NA • Each project informally graded for
Priorities Inventory: 2023 • Arranged by category(e.g., Ports,shoreline, relative job-creation and
recreational, et al) community value
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District B-9
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
INFO SOURCE MAJOR GOALS/FINDINGS NOTED CHALLENGES OTHER NOTES
Mason County Economic • Notes high proportion of resident who live in • Lack of housing stock • Population growth had been declining
Development Element: 2017 Mason but community out of County for work diversity could inhibit large since 2006(but appears to have shot
• Emphasis on place making and building lifestyle employers from locating in up in 2022 due to pandemic)
choice community brand Mason
• Major focus areas: Infrastructure and Capital • Mason has a relatively low
Improvements; Permitting and Regulation; jobs to housing ratio(i.e., .4
Education,Training and Business Development; vs.9 in Thurston)
Community Development and Quality of Life; • 21%of vacant housing is
Key Industries due to seasonal use
• Identified capital investments: expanded • Government accounts for
internet and cell phone coverage; utility nearly half of total covered
extension; shovel-ready sites;freight mobility payroll employment
on Hwy 3; expansion of Olympic College; •
facilities to support outdoor recreation industry;
cross laminated timber industry growth;
shellfish habitat protection; USDA slaughter
facility, cold storage, processing facilities,
commercial kitchen; infrastructure to reduce
nonpoint pollution in shellfish areas;visitor
signage;cycle route enhancements
City of Shelton Economic • 5-year plan (end in 2023) • Rural location; lack of • Noted target industries:timber milling;
Development Strategic Plan: • Emphasis on business retention and expansion; dedicated resources for specialized ag; hospitality and tourism;
2018 workforce partnerships; external marketing economic development retail; light industrial
(logo and tagline,online presence); internal activities
marketing(conveying value of economic
development); place and talent(real estate
development, housing options,downtown,
tourism, infrastructure,transportation);and
recruitment(focus on inventory provided)
Mason PUD 3 Broadband • Cool effort to create"Fiberhoods"through • Fiberhoods definitely help, • Notable that homeowners have
Fiber News: 2022-2023 network line extensions into qualifying but won't alone solve the multiple providers to choose from
neighborhoods where 75%of area homes rural, low-density service (which helps keep costs reasonable)
register interest.Cost is share for establishing challenge • Qualifying households can receive a
home connection (for homeowner,$3,600 up reduction in service costs
front, or$25 per mo. up to 12 yrs).
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District B-10
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
INFO SOURCE MAJOR GOALS/FINDINGS NOTED CHALLENGES OTHER NOTES
Target Industries Study— • Mason transitioning from anchor natural • Closure of the Simpson Mill • Document identifies many specific
Sparking Solutions(Draft): resource economy to diverse industry base: was a major hit to the actions within goal areas—will need to
2017 tourism; healthcare;government; retail; economy and workers w/o reconfirm top priorities given origin
specialty manufacturing and prof services readily available and (2015-2017)and economic impact
• Notes growth in Construction and Ag equivalent alternative emp legacy of the pandemic
• Notes several economic anchors:two public opportunities
utility districts;several ports;Transit Authority;
Mason General Hospital; Belfair Urgent Care;
Olympic College; Squaxin Tribe and Little Creek
Casino/Island Enterprises; Corrections Center;
School District;Taylor Shellfish
• "Getting to Yes"Workshop and 6 follow up
forums focused on linking community
/economic development priorities:tourism;
value-added ag;adv manufacturing; career and
tech education; info and comms tech;forest
products; healthcare
• Resulting Goals:Annual Community and
Economic Development Summit; Industry
Roundtable Meetings; Business Retention and
Expansion Program; Linking Workforce
Development to Industry Clusters; New
Business Resource Center and
Entrepreneurship;Shellfish Advocacy
Mason County Business • SWOT style report • Weaknesses:commuter • Notes the economic impact of
Demographics Phase III • Strengths: retail and health sector growth; outmigration; marijuana production, processing and
Report: 2017 location relative to Oly,Tacoma and Seattle manufacturing contraction; sales(good for state and local sales
• Key recommendations:wrap-around business wage levels; status as rural tax, but not eligible for federal
services for all stages; inventory of vacant are under GMA rules investment)
commercial and shovel-ready industrial sites; (limited large employer • Interesting profile of Thermedia which
streamlined permitting process opportunities) chose Port of Shelton for business
conditions and superior fiber
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District B-11
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
Appendix C — Pacific-Salish EDD Project Inventory by County
Updated October 1, 2023
Individual Economic Development Councils will maintain their respective project inventories, with additional details regarding anticipated cost,
partnerships and timelines. New projects will be added to the Top Priorities Action section and this inventory list during CEDS updates.
Grays Harbor County Project Inventory
• Aberdeen-Hoquiam Flood Protection Project • Port of Grays Harbor Terminal 4 improvements
• Buildable lands study • Public infrastructure enhancement for development-ready sites at Satsop
• Built Environment Infrastructure for Healthy Communities 9 Rural broadband in Chehalis River Valley
• Chehalis River Bridge • Satsop power upgrade
• Commercial and industrial development outside of flood zone • Simpson Ave. Bridge
• Development of housing options in all categories • Small Business Resource Network and Technical Assistance Funding
• Development of McCleary Industrial site • Support for publicly and privately owned tourism assets
• Expansion of resources for childcare providers • Tsunami mitigation resources
• Grays Harbor College housing • Water conveyance and storage infrastructure
• Health care facility and service expansion to coastal communities a Westport Marina Modernization
• Highway 12 Rail grade Separation Project • Workforce development training for legacy industries
• Hoquiam 15 MW substation ($2M) • Workforce training for skilled labor and trades
• Port of Grays Harbor Terminal 3 improvements
Mason County Project Inventory
• 7th Street Reconstruction • Duckabush Bridge Replacement
• Agate Beach Mainline Replacement Project • Electric Vehicle Infrastructure
• Alderbrook Lower Aquifer Testing • Electrical System Intertie PUD1-PUD3
• Allyn Transit Center Planning project • Evergreen Town Square
• Aviation Business Park • Express Feeder(via Simmons Rd)to Squaxin Island Tribe
• Backup Emergency Generators • Harstine Dedicated Feeder
• Belfair Sewer, North Extension/Belfair Freight Corridor/PSIC • Harstine Pointe Rural Broadband Fiberhood
• Belfair Substation Transformer Upgrade • Hoodsport Transit Center Planning
• Belfair WRF Critical Equipment Replacement Project • Hwy 108 Fish Culvert Projects
• Belfair WRF Resiliency Project • Johns Prairie Facility Upgrade/Construction
• Canal View Water Systems Rehabilitation • Jorstad Substation
• Coloquallum Communities Rural Broadband Fiber Project • Lake Arrowhead Main Line Replacement
• Construct Maintenance Wash Facility • LED Streetlight Upgrades
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District C-1
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
• Manzanita Substation • Submarine Distribution Cable Replacement
• Mason Plan Update • Substation: Belfair
• Membrane Treatment Plant Phase 1 Expansion Design and Construction • Substation: Dayton Shelton
• New Well-Pressure Zone 2 • Substation: Potlatch
• New Well Belfair UGA and commercial core • Switching Yard/Transmission Lines/Substation: Belfair (3phases)
• North Bay Case Inlet WRF GSP/FP Update • Switching Yard/Transmission Lines/Substation: Dayton Shelton (3phases)
• North Diversion Sewer Lift Station and Force Main • Tenant Consolidation &Expansion
• Port Security • Trails Road Alternative-Razor Road Extension
• Razor&Alderwood Rd Rural Broadband Fiberhood • Union Water System: Project A: Manzanita Water Reservoirs
• Replacement Well • Union Water System: Project B:Vuecrest&Union Ridge Water Main
• Ripplewood Main Line Replacement • Union Water System: Project D: Manzanita Reservoir Mainline
• Rural Broadband-Fiberhoods • Union Regional Water System: Project F Alderbrook Mainline Replace
• Sargent Oyster House • Water Reclamation Plant Headworks Capacity Upgrades
• Shadowood Reservoir& Booster Station • Water Reclamation Plant Membrane Filter Replacements
• SR3 Freight Corridor-Romance Hill Connector • Wildfire Prevention Equipment-Multi Year Project
Pacific County Project Inventory
• Affordable Housing Development(County-wide) • Ilwaco Boatyard Expansion (in-water pier/lift to enable larger boats
• American Legion Post 150 Veteran Resource& Housing Center(WCDA) • Ilwaco Discovery Trail Connection Project(City of Ilwaco/Port of Ilwaco)
• Beach to Bay Trail (Port of Peninsula) • Industrial Log Yard/Saw Mill Storm Water Improvements(Pacific County)
• Bendicksen Landing revitalization (South Bend) • Invasive species mitigation (County-wide)
• Boardwalk Reconstruction (City of Long Beach) • Klean Building re-development into workforce housing(Long Beach)
• Boat Hoist Dock Construction Phase I (Port of Chinook) • Long Beach Peninsula Event Center(Port of Peninsula)
• Broadband redundancy+Wi-Fi (County-wide) • Marina Based Research Facility and Seed Tank Co-Op(Port of Peninsula)
• Bulkhead Replacement Project(Port of Ilwaco) • Marina Reconstruction Project(Port of Chinook)
• Clam Shell Rail Car Rescue(Port of Peninsula) • Marina Reconstruction Project(Port of Peninsula)
• Cold Storage Project(Port of Ilwaco) • Marine Fueling Facility Improvements(Port of Chinook)
• Community Multipurpose Event Site(Port of Ilwaco) • Multi-year dredging(County-wide)
• County-wide septage disposal (County-wide) • Strategic Inventory Plan for Nature Based Tourism (Long Beach)
• Discovery Trail Mid-Peninsula Link(Port of Peninsula) • Recreational Boating Facility Redevelopment(Port of Chinook)
• Downtown revitalization (Raymond/South Bend, Ilwaco) • Re-purpose Naselle Youth Camp(Naselle)
• Dylan Jude Harrell Community Center(Ilwaco) • Robert Bush Park Overlay and Drainage(City of South Bend)
• EDC Staffing(Pacific County EDC) • Seaview Connector Trail (City of Ilwaco)
• Erosion Protections for North Willapa Shoreline • Septage Management Feasibility Study(Pacific County/City of Ilwaco)
• EV Charging-EV charging stations(County-wide) • Shoalwater and Tokeland area infrastructure resilience-Shoreline
• Expansion of Raymond wastewater treatment facility(Raymond) @Shoalwater Bay Upland Project(Tokeland)
• Hospital Expansion—Willapa Harbor and Ocean Beach (Raymond, Ilwaco) • South Bend Mill Revitalization (brownfield, multiuse development)
• South Bend-Raymond Waterline Extension (City of South Bend)
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District C-2
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
• SR101 Charging Stations(EDC/PCOG) • Water System Infrastructure Improvements(City of Raymond)
• Tokeland Marina Fishers RV Park&Campground (Port of Willapa Harbor) • Water System Plan Update(City of Ilwaco)
• Tri-district Harbor Trade and Technology Center(County-wide) • Water Treatment Plant Emergency Generator(City of South Bend)
• Tsunami towers(Long Beach Peninsula) • Willapa Bay Boatyard for haul out and large scale rework (Raymond)
• Washington Coast Business Accelerator(South Bend) • Willapa pedestrian/bicycle ferry(County-wide)
• Water Booster Station Improvements(City of Ilwaco) • WN88 Airport Improvement and Industrial Park Project(Port of Peninsula)
• Water installation/hookup for Chinook area (Chinook) • WTP SCADA Upgrade(City of Ilwaco)
Thurston County Project Inventory
• Lacey Food Truck Plaza amenities • Thurston County EV charging stations
• Lacey Hawks Prairie destination development • Thurston County Fairground redevelopment
• Lacey indoor sports facility • Thurston County Gates-Belmore Trail expansion
• Lacey MakerSpace expansion and training center • Thurston County Grand Mound infrastructure
• Lacey Phase II RAC expansion • Thurston County Grand Mound master plan
• Lacey Phase III RAC expansion • Thurston County land use and building permit technology upgrades
• Olympia coastal tourism amenities • Thurston County marina modernization
• Olympia Highway 101 interchange at mall • Thurston County market analysis for new incubator programs
• Olympia sea wall, boardwalk,jetty, pier,wharf,dock, landing protections • Thurston County Martin Way Corridor
• Port of Olympia Foreign Trade Zone expansion • Thurston County meeting space
• Thurston County affordable housing development • Thurston County Rochester Main Street
• Thurston County broadband infrastructure and digital equity a Thurston EDC revolving loan fund
• Thurston County childcare • Thurston EDC Scale Up Training Program
• Tumwater Pocket Gopher land mitigation purchase
Pacific-Salish Economic Development District C-2
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS)
RESOLUTION APPROVING A COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY AND FORMATION
OF AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT KNOWN AS THE PACIFIC-SALISH EDD AND ENCOMPASSING
GRAYS HARBOR, MASON, PACIFIC AND THURSTON COUNTIES IN WASHINGTON STATE.
WHEREAS, the federal government allows for and encourages the creation of multi-jurisdictional
Economic Development Districts (EDD)to facilitate funding and technical assistance programs through
the US Economic Development Administration (EDA), and;
WHEREAS,Thurston is one of only two counties in Washington State not included in a federally-
recognized EDD, and the former EDD, Columbia-Pacific (ColPac),that housed Grays Harbor, Mason and
Pacific County is no longer in operation, and;
WHEREAS, the four counties have jointly completed,through the leadership of their respective
Economic Development Organizations (EDOs) an EDA-approved Comprehensive Economic Development
Strategy(CEDS)that includes multiple geographical areas that meet EDA's regional distress criteria as set
out in 13 CFR § 301.3(a), and;
WHEREAS, federal investment and technical assistance will help the Pacific-Salish region advance
capital intensive infrastructure and other project priorities that are beyond local jurisdiction financial
means, and;
WHEREAS, the EDD will be professionally managed with supportive federal funding and local in-
kind match, governed by a Board of Directors comprised of the four EDO Executives, and incubated at
the Thurston County EDC Center for Business and Innovation (CBI), and;
WHEREAS, the formation of an Economic Development District does not supplant any existing
roles or authorities in the region and is effectively a new tool for achieving locally-defined economic
development goals and priorities.
NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,that the Mason County Board of County Commissioners and
Economic Development Council of Mason County Board of Directors supports and approves the CEDS
Plan and formation of the new Pacific-Salish Economic Development District pending final approval by
the Washington State Governor.
Adopted this day of 12023.
Chairperson Attest
C
Mason County
Agenda Request Form
Y
/A t!
To: Board of Mason County Commissioners
From: Patti McLean Ext.498
Department: Assessor's Office Briefing: ❑X
Action Agenda: ❑X
Public Hearing: ❑
Special Meeting: ❑
Briefing Date(s): October 16,2023 Agenda Date: October 24,2023
Internal Review: ❑ Finance ❑ Human Resources ❑ Legal ❑ Information Technology ❑ Risk
(This is the responsibility of the requesting Department)
Below for Clerk of the Board's Use Only:
Item Number:
Approved: ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Tabled ❑ No Action Taken
Ordinance/Resolution No. Contract No. County Code:
Item:
Senior Appraisal Analyst Position
Background/Executive Summary:
We are requesting this position as an additional position within the Assessor's office. We currently have
two appraiser analysts within the office;however,one is more of a lead position as they are currently
tasked with supervising/training all appraisers along with reviewing their work. They also create the reval
plan and monitor work to ensure it is completed in a timely manner. It also requires different training
from the Department of Revenue regarding the annual update.
Budget Impact(amount, funding source,budget amendment):
10%increase over the Appraisal Analyst position. Included in our 2024/2025 budget.
Public Outreach (news release,community meeting, etc.):
N/A
Requested Action:
Approval to create a Senior Appraisal Analyst position within the Assessor's Office.
Attachments
Job Description
C
Mason County
Agenda Request Form
Y
/A t!
To: Board of Mason County Commissioners
From: Luke Viscusi on behalf of the Mason County Ext.282
Historic Preservation Commission
Department: Community Services Briefing:
Action Agenda: ❑X
Public Hearing: ❑
Special Meeting: ❑
Briefing Date(s): October 16,2023 Agenda Date: October 24,2023
Internal Review: ❑ Finance ❑ Human Resources ❑ Legal ❑ Information Technology ❑ Other
(This is the responsibility of the requesting Department)
Below for Clerk of the Board's Use Only:
Item Number:
Approved: ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Tabled ❑ No Action Taken
Ordinance/Resolution No. Contract No. County Code:
Item•
Two Open Positions on the Mason County Historic Preservation Commission
Background/Executive Summary:
The Mason County Historic Preservation Commission is a seven-member commission which serves to
identify and actively encourage the conservation of Mason County's historic resources. Currently,the
HPC has one open position and one position which will expire in November 2023.
Budget Impact (amount, funding source,budget amendment):
None
Public Outreach (news release,community meeting, etc.):
News release
Requested Action:
Approval to place the news release on the upcoming action agenda.
Attachments
News Release
�ASpN CpU���
NEWS RELEASE
OCTOBER 24, 2023
MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE
1854 411 N 5TH ST, BLDG 1, SHELTON,WA 98584
TO: KMAS, KRXY, SHELTON-MASON COUNTY JOURNAL, THE OLYMPIAN,
SHELTON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,NORTH MASON CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE, CITY OF SHELTON, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
COUNCIL, THE SUN
RE: Mason County Historic Preservation Commission Open Positions
The Mason County Commissioners are seeking applicants to fill two open positions on
the Mason County Historic Preservation Commission.
The major responsibility of the Historic Preservation Commission is to identify and
actively encourage the conservation of Mason County's historic resources by initiating
and maintaining a register of historic places and reviewing proposed changes to register
properties. They also work to raise community awareness of Mason County's history and
historic resources and serve as Mason County's primary resource in matters of history,
historic planning, and preservation.
Commission members serve three-year terms and meet monthly, during business hours,
at the County offices in Shelton and via Zoom. There is currently open position and one
position which will expire in November 2023. Applicants must be residents of Mason
County.
Interested persons are encouraged to apply for this commission by completing an
advisory board form that can be downloaded from our website—
https://masoncoLi t a. og v/ac or by calling the Commissioners' office at 427-9670 ext.
419. Completed applications should be submitted in the Commissioners' office at 411 N
5th Street, Shelton. Positions are open until filled.
If there are questions about these positions, please contact Luke Viscusi at 427-9670 ext.
282 or by e-mail at HPC(a masoncountywa.gov.
BOARD OF MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Sharon Trask, Randy Neatherlin, Kevin Shutty,
Chair Vice-Chair Commissioner
MASON COUNTY
rTi
Public Health & Human Services
Briefing
October 16, 2023
Briefing Items
Emergency Housing Funds Request for Proposal(RFP)—Melissa Casey
C
Mason County
Agenda Request Form
Y
/A t!
To: Board of Mason County Commissioners
From: Melissa Casey Ext.404
Department: Public Health Briefing: 0
Action Agenda: 0
Public Hearing: ❑
Special Meeting: ❑
Briefing Date(s): 6/12/23,7/17/23,8/21/23, Agenda Date: 10/24/23
10/16/23
Internal Review: ❑ Finance ❑ Human Resources ❑ Legal ❑ Information Technology ❑ Other
(This is the responsibility of the requesting Department)
Below for Clerk of the Board's Use Only:
Item Number:
Approved: ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Tabled ❑ No Action Taken
Ordinance/Resolution No. Contract No. County Code:
Item:
Request for Proposal—Emergency Housing Funds
Background/Executive Summary:
The Department of Commerce has allocated$884,950 in Emergency Housing Funds (EHF)to Mason
County for the 2024 fiscal year. The purpose of these funds is to maintain current levels of homeless
subsidies and emergency housing capacity from sun-setting funds for services such as Rapid Rehousing,
Emergency Shelters,or Street Outreach. The Board approved this contract on the 7/18 action agenda and
agency subcontracts on the 8/29 action agenda. The remaining EHF will be allocated via a Request for
Proposal.
Budget Impact(amount, funding source,budget amendment):
$101,071 available funds
Public Outreach (news release,community meeting, etc.):
News Release
Requested Action:
Approval to release RFP for remaining Emergency Housing Funds and read news release at 10/24 regular
meeting
Attachments
News Release
�ASpN CpU���
NEWS RELEASE
October 24, 2023
MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE
1854 411 N 5TH ST, BLDG 1, SHELTON,WA 98584
TO: KMAS, KRXY, SHELTON-MASON COUNTY JOURNAL, THE OLYMPIAN,
SHELTON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,NORTH MASON CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE, CITY OF SHELTON, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
COUNCIL, THE SUN
RE: Request for Proposal Emergency Housing Funds
Mason County Public Health&Human Services is pleased to announce the Request for
Proposal Application for Emergency Housing Funds for the FY2024 contract term.
The Department of Commerce contracts with Mason County to administer the
Emergency Housing Fund; the purpose of this funding is to maintain current levels of
homeless subsidies and emergency housing capacity from sun-setting funds. Mason
County is releasing an RFP to fund services for Rapid Rehousing, Street Outreach, or
Emergency Shelters. Mason County Public Health& Human Services is responsible for
contracting and compliance activities related to these funds.
Eligible Applicants: To be eligible to submit a proposal for the Emergency Housing Fund
you must have had a program operating in Mason County in February 2023 for the
following project types: Street Outreach, Rapid Rehousing, or Emergency Shelters. Part
of the federal requirement is to not have been debarred from receiving federal funding.
The RFP Application materials can be found on the Mason County website under
Request for Proposals at: hops://masoncopEbywa.gov/
CONTACT PERSON:
Haley Foelsch
Phone: (360) 427-9670 ext. 704
Email: haley_(i,masoncountywa.gov
BOARD OF MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Sharon Trask, Kevin Shutty, Randy Neatherlin,
Chair Commissioner Commissioner
MASON COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS
COMMISSIONER BRIEFING
October 16, 2023
ON Co
Action Items•
One -Year extension to multiple consultant and project agreements expiring at end of 2023 calendar year.
Discussion Items:
Welcome Stephanie Buhrman, Finance Manager
Local and Community Grant Award—North Bay and Beard's Cove
Belfair sewer extension schedule and budget update
Belfair screen replacement
Commissioner Follow-Up Items:
October 30, 2023 Local and Community Grant Request
Upcoming Items•
November 7, 2023 at 9:15am Hearing to consider establishing speed limits on Kelly Hall Road,
Sunnyslope Road and changing a section of Brockdale
C
oo �
Mason County
Agenda Request Form
A(i
To: Board of Mason County Commissioners
From: Mike Collins,PLS,PE,Deputy Director/County Ext.450
Engineer
Department: Public Works Briefing: 0 Public Hearing: ❑
Action Agenda: 0 Special Meeting: ❑
Briefing Date(s): October 16, 2023 Agenda Date: October 24, 2023
Internal Review: ❑ Finance ❑ Human Resources ❑ Legal ❑ Information Technology ❑ Other
(This is the responsibility of the requesting Department)
Below for Clerk of the Board's Use Only:
Item Number:
Approved: ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Tabled ❑ No Action Taken
Ordinance/Resolution No. Contract No. County Code:
Item: One-Year Extension to multiple Public Works Consultant and Project Agreements
Background/Executive Summary:
The following agreements will be expiring at the end of the 2023 calendar year. Public Works is requesting
authorization to extend these agreements to continue these necessary services during the 2024 calendar year.
Consultant Services/Project Consultant/ Requesting Current Requesting
Contractor to Extend Maximum Increase
Agreement Pa out Maximum Payout
On-Call Geotechnical Services Landau Yes $200,000 No
Associates
On-Call Structural Engineering Sargent Yes $200,000 No
Engineers
On-Call Hydraulic Services Skillings Yes $200,000 No
Engineering
On-Call Cultural Resource Services Drayton Yes $50,000 Yes, additional
Archaeological $15,000
Research
Hydraulic/Hydrological Analysis and Parametrix Yes $50,000 No
Design for Uncle Johns Lower Creek
Culvert project
Public Works Facility Water & Gibbs &Olsen Yes $90,000 No
Wastewater System Design
Budget Impact:
All agreements are in the current Road and Utility budget and the requested agreement increases are in the
proposed draft budget for 2024.
Public Outreach:
N/A
Requested Action:
Requesting the Board authorize the Public Works to extend the following agreements to continue services into
the 2024 calendar year:
C
Mason County
Agenda Request Form
Y
/A t!
1. On-Call Geotechnical, Structural Engineering, Hydraulic and Cultural Service Agreements and add an
additional $15,000 for Cultural Services.
2. Hydraulic/Hydrological analysis for Lower Uncle Johns Creek Culvert, Participation on PSIC Belfair Sewer
Connection project design committees and Water/Wastewater System Design for the Public Works Facility.
�r�ON CO&
Mason County Administrator
411 N 5th Street
Shelton, WA 98584
(360) 427-9670 ext. 419
Mason County Commissioner
Briefing Items from County Administrator
October 16, 2023
Specific Items for Review
Setting of 2024 Budget Hearings—Jennifer Beierle
September financial report—Jennifer Beierle
Office of Public Defense labor contract—Mary Ransier
Building 10 update—Mark Neary
Administrator Updates
Commissioner Discussion
Operation Green Light for Veterans proclamation—Cmmr. Trask
Commissioner calendar updates
C( ,
Mason County
Agenda Request Form
To: Board of Mason County Commissioners
From: Jennifer Beierle Ext. 532
Department: Support Services Briefing: ❑X
Action Agenda: ❑X
Public Hearing: ❑
Special Meeting: ❑
Briefing Date(s): 10/16/2023 Agenda Date: 10/24/2023
Internal Review: ❑ Finance ❑ Human Resources ❑ Legal ❑ Information Technology ❑ Other
(This is the responsibility of the requesting Department)
Below for Clerk of the Board's Use Only:
Item Number:
Approved: ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Tabled ❑ No Action Taken
Ordinance/Resolution No. Contract No. County Code:
Item: Approval to set a public hearing for Monday,December 4,2023 at 9:00 a.m.to consider adoption
of the 2024 budget for Mason County. Copies of the 2024 preliminary budget will be available to the
public on November 20,2023.
Background/Executive Summary:
Pursuant to RCW 84.52.070,the Commissioners must hold a public hearing on the 2024 preliminary
budget to allow taxpayers to"appear and be heard for or against any part of the budget". The public
hearing also allows county departments to publicly testify if they so desire.
Budget Impact(amount, funding source,budget amendment):
2024 Adopted Budget
Public Outreach (news release,community meeting, etc.):
The 2024 proposed budget will be posted on the County's website: www.masoncounta.gov by
November 20,2023
Requested Action:
Approval to set a public hearing on Monday,December 4,2023 at 9:00 a.m. to consider adoption of the
2024 budget for Mason County. Copies of the 2024 preliminary budget will be available to the public on
November 20,2023.
Attachments
C
Mason County
Agenda Request Form
Y
/A t!
To: Board of Mason County Commissioners
From: Jennifer Beierle Ext. 532
Department: Support Services Briefing: 0
Action Agenda: ❑X
Public Hearing: ❑
Special Meeting: ❑
Briefing Date(s): 10/16/2023 Agenda Date: 10/24/2023
Internal Review: ❑ Finance ❑ Human Resources ❑ Legal ❑ Information Technology ❑ Other
(This is the responsibility of the requesting Department)
Below for Clerk of the Board's Use Only:
Item Number:
Approved: ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Tabled ❑ No Action Taken
Ordinance/Resolution No. Contract No. County Code:
Item: Approval to set a public hearing for Tuesday,November 21, 2023, at 9:15 a.m.to certify to the
County Assessor the amount of taxes levied for Current Expense and County Road for 2024.An increase
to the Current Expense and County Road property tax levies for 2024 may be considered.
Background/Executive Summary:
Pursuant to RCW 84.52.070,the Commissioners must certify to the County Assessor the amount of taxes
levied upon the property in the county for county purposes by adoption of a resolution, on or before the
15'day of December in each year, and on or before the first Monday in December the respective amounts
of taxes levied by the board for each taxing district,within or coextensive with the county, for district
purposes..
Budget Impact(amount, funding source,budget amendment):
The estimated levies for Current Expense and County Road are included in the 2024 proposed budget.
Public Outreach (news release,community meeting, etc.):
The notice of public hearing will be advertised in the Shelton-Mason County Journal for two weeks prior
to the hearing.
Requested Action:
Approval to set a public hearing on November 21,2023, at 9:15 a.m. to certify to the County Assessor the
amount of taxes levied for county purposes and the amount of taxes levied for each taxing district for
2024.An increase to the Current Expense and County Road property tax levies for 2024 may be
considered.
Attachments
C
Mason County
Agenda Request Form
Y
/A t!
To: Board of Mason County Commissioners
From: Jennifer Beierle Ext. 532
Department: Support Services Briefing: ❑X
Action Agenda: ❑
Public Hearing: ❑
Special Meeting: ❑
Briefing Date(s): October 16,2023 Agenda Date: Click or tap here to enter text.
Internal Review: ❑ Finance ❑ Human Resources ❑ Legal ❑ Information Technology ❑ Other
(This is the responsibility of the requesting Department)
Below for Clerk of the Board's Use Only:
Item Number:
Approved: ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Tabled ❑ No Action Taken
Ordinance/Resolution No. Contract No. County Code:
Item•
Mason County Monthly Financial Report for September 2023
Background/Executive Summary:
Review of Cash Balances, and Budget to Actual Revenues and Expenditures for all County Funds
through September 2023.
Budget Impact(amount, funding source,budget amendment):
Budget to Actual Comparison of 2022 &2023
Public Outreach (news release,community meeting, etc.):
N/A
Requested Action:
N/A
Attachments
Mason County Monthly Financial Report for September 2023
ooUNr� SEPTMB
�
MASON COUNTY MONTHLY
FINANCIAL REPORT 2023
J:\Financials\2023 Financials\2023 September Financial Report
�P0°NC
°HTf SEPTEMBER
MASON COUNTY MONTHLY FINANCIAL
1854 REPORT 2023
2022 vs 2023 Current Expense Revenue Comparison
Revenue Revenue
Collected Collected Actual dif 2022
Department Name 2022 Budget Through End Uncollected %2022 2023 Budget Through End of Month Uncollected %2023 vs 2023
of Month Revenue Revenue
WSU Extension 40,600 25,977 (14,623) 64% 20,000 23,997 3,997 120% (1,980)
Assessor 9,000 6,090 (2,911) 68% 7,000 17,314 10,314 247% 11,225
Auditor 1,142,750 884,970 (257,780) 77% 1,172,200 792,579 (379,621) 68% (92,391)
Emergency Management 75,912 37,408 (38,504) 49% 139,347 180,977 41,630 130% 143,569
Facilities&Grounds - 1,848 1,848 0% - 1,256 1,256 0% (592)
Human Resources - - 0% - 132 132 0% 132
Clerk 378,377 239,263 (139,114) 63% 478,377 263,012 (215,365) 55% 23,749
Commissioners - - 0% - 0% -
Support Services 92,078 98 (91,980) 0% 86,522 (86,522) 0% (98)
District Court 1,080,400 649,677 (430,723) 60% 855,300 669,451 (185,849) 78% 19,775
Community Development 2,434,000 1,903,856 (530,144) 78% 2,666,374 2,043,911 (622,463) 77% 140,055
Historical Preservation 24,000 14,795 (9,205) 62% 20,000 10,145 (9,855) 51% (4,650)
Parks&Trails 44,000 19,198 (24,802) 44% 53,235 55,061 1,826 103% 35,863
Juvenile Court Services 1,255,805 1,106,540 (149,265) 88% 1,366,600 1,153,954 (212,646) 84% 47,414
Prosecutor 239,471 121,060 (118,411) 51% 216,249 118,495 (97,754) 55% (2,565)
Child Support Enforcement 159,679 134,207 (25,472) 84% 171,310 70,830 (100,480) 41% (63,377)
Coroner 35,000 48,680 13,680 139% 35,000 63,426 28,426 181% 14,746
Sheriff 953,505 813,941 (139,564) 85% 1,167,789 608,767 (559,022) 52% (205,174)
Indigent Defense 245,267 177,669 (67,598) 72% 240,767 140,467 (100,300) 58% (37,202)
Superior Court 69,650 58,517 (11,133) 84% 195,846 125,512 (70,334) 64% 66,994
Family Court 2,500 2,328 (172) 93% 2,500 1,904 (596) 76% (424)
Therapeutic Court 811,347 286,102 (525,245) 35% 776,228 312,619 (463,609) 40% 26,517
Murder Expenditures - - 0% - 0% -
Treasurer 26,983,596 22,903,585 (4,080,011) 85% 28,417,341 22,339,617 (6,077,724) 79% (563,968)
Non Departmental 4,619,977 3,404,722 (1,215,255) 74% 4,729,045 4,432,533 (296,512) 94% 1,027,811
Motor Pool 72,000 (72,000) 0% - 0% -
Totals $ 40,768,914 $ 32,840,530 $ (7,928,384) 81% $ 42,817,030 $33,425,959 $ (9,391,071) 78% 1 585,429
J:\Financials\2023 Financials\2023 September Financial Report 2
co-e_�- MASON COUNTY MONTHLY FINANCIAL sE �, B �
REPORT 2023
Treasurer Department Receipts
Treasurer#001-260-000 2022 Budget 2022 YTD This Month %2022 2023 Budget 2023 YTD This Month %2023
REAL&PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES 11,331,824 6,896,254 167,286 61% 10,389,391 6,332,533 163,416 61%
SALES TAX TITLE PROPERTY - - 0 0% - - 0 0%
LOCAL RETAIL SALES&USE TAX 7,200,000 6,738,257 835,635 94% 8,400,000 7,013,978 861,616 83%
LOCAL PUBLIC SAFETY-CITY 50,000 37,935 4,401 76% 50,000 40,243 4,697 80%
CRIMINAL JUSTICE 800,000 765,395 93,463 96% 900,000 801,235 97,402 89%
LEASEHOLD EXCISE TAX 30,000 28,026 387 93% 35,000 23,038 1,052 66%
FOREST EXCISE TAX 100,000 298,707 0 299% 200,000 381,792 0 191%
FRANCHISE FEES 500,000 302,382 0 60% 500,000 309,894 0 62%
PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAX/B OF L 340,000 354,065 0 104% 350,000 350,317 0 100%
PUD PRIVILEGE TAX 750,000 797,422 0 106% 800,000 875,638 0 109%
DNR OTHER TRUST 2 100 119 0 119% 100 368 0 368%
LE&CJ LEG 1 TIME COSTS - - 0 0% - - 0 0%
CITY-COUNTY ASSISTANCE 1,750,000 3,646,928 1,185,929 208% 2,500,000 1,574,780 755,438 63%
4,000 - 0 0% 4,000 - 0 0%
CRIMINAL JUSTICE-COUNTIES 775,000 575,534 0 74% 775,000 575,081 341 74%
ADULT COURT COST-JUVENILE OFFE 5,000 3,345 353 67% 5,000 2,799 0 56%
CRIMINAL JST-MARIJUANA ENFORCE 85,000 101,378 39,378 119% 125,000 104,319 38,042 83%
DUI-OTHER CRIMINAL JUSTICE A 17,000 8,383 0 49% 17,000 3,436 0 20%
LIQUOR/BEER EXCISE TAX 165,000 123,110 0 75% 165,000 127,962 0 78%
LIQUOR CONTROL BOARD PROFITS 200,000 149,115 49,733 75% 200,000 149,557 50,076 75%
IN LIEU OF-CITY OFTACOMA 210,000 162,572 18,064 77% 210,000 190,700 18,967 91%
TREASURER'S FEES 30 - 0 0% 30 - 0 0%
TREASURER FEES CLEAN WATER DIS 0 0% - 1,846 0 0%
PAYMNT FOR SRVCS-MASON LK DIST 360 378 0 105% 375 397 0 106%
PAYMNT FOR SRVCS-SPENCER LK FND 100 152 0 152% 150 160 0 107%
PAYMNT FOR SRVCS-ISLAND LK FND 100 100 0 100% 100 - 0 0%
CHARGES FOR SRVCS-MACECOM 1,375 1,514 0 110% 1,500 1,632 0 109%
RETURNED REMITTANCE(NSF)FEES 2,500 1,800 120 72% 2,500 2,160 40 86%
REET COLLECTION FEES 125,000 134,014 14,834 107% 170,000 106,640 13,567 63%
REET COLLECTIONS COSTS 10,000 6,362 645 64% 10,000 5,762 600 58%
TREAS.FIRE PROTECTION ASSESSM 15,000 10,241 181 68% 15,000 10,257 192 68%
3
Treasurer Department Receipts
Treasurer#001-260-000 2022 Budget 2022 YTD This Month %2022 2023 Budget 2023 YTD This Month %2023
TREAS OTHER WORD PROCESSING 200 151 1 75% 200 29 0 14%
PUBLIC DISCLOSURE CHGS SRVCS - - 0 0% - 100 0 0%
DATA PROCESSING SERVICES - 0 0% 3 0 0%
GAMBLING TAX PENALTY - 731 231 0% - 554 0 0%
REAL&PERSONAL PENALTY 150,000 160,657 5,057 107% 150,000 94,647 12,756 63%
PERSONAL PROP FILING PEN 20,000 14,853 168 74% 30,000 28,806 1,870 96%
PENALTY ON REAL&PERSONAL PRO - - 0 0% - - 0 0%
FAILURE TO LIST PERSONAL PROP - - 0 0% - - 0 0%
INTEREST&OTHER EARNINGS 250,000 312,299 85,914 125% 250,000 1,769,746 208,532 708%
INVESTMENT SERVICEFEES(TREAS. 6,000 10,545 2,335 176% 10,000 27,477 3,131 275%
INT.ON CONT.NOTES-ACCTS.HELD,S 8,500 9,869 1,957 116% 10,000 46,432 5,376 464%
LEASEHOLD EXCISE TAX INTEREST - 5 2 0% - 15 4 0%
EXCISE INTEREST 50 156 70 312% 100 98 45 98%
INV PURCHASED INT - (2,900) (1,989) 0% - (7,542) 0 0%
INTEREST ON DELINQUENT PR TAX 600,000 361,843 17,077 60% 600,000 391,951 51,959 65%
RENTS/LEASES-DNR TRUST 10,000 19,229 1,124 192% 20,000 15,899 3,082 79%
RENTS/LEASES-DNR TMBR TRUST 1 250,000 171,146 723 68% 250,000 165,048 27,736 66%
UNCLAIMED MONEY/PROCEEDS-SALES 100,877 102,188 0 101% 100,000 91,770 0 92%
TREASURER TAX FORECLOSURE TRUST - - 0 0% - - 0 0%
CASH ADJUSTMENTS/OVER-UNDER 10 (273) 1 -2731% 10 (1,333) (104) -13327%
TAX DISTRIBUTION ROUNDING 10 (46) (2) -460% 10 (66) (4) -658%
MISCELLANEOUS-OTHER REVENUE 100 234 0 234% 100 115 2 115%
ROAD DIVERSION 1,080,000 654,906 15,357 61% 1,080,000 662,571 14,555 61%
SALE OF TAX TITLE PROPERTY - (87) 0 0% - - 0 0%
LEASEHOLD EXCISE TAX 2,000 1,522 40 76% 1,600 2,469 120 154%
TIMBER EXCISE TAX 10,000 5,825 0 58% 10,000 43,520 0 435%
DNR PILT NAP/NRCA 900 (378) (378) -42% 1,275 - 0 0%
DNR OTHER TRUST 2 50 900 0 1799% 50 44 2 87%
OTHER INT-DNR INTEREST 10 (25) 388 -251% 50 113 12 227%
RENTS&LEASES/DNR OTHR TRST 1 2,500 (787) 117 -31% 3,800 1,785 352 47%
RENTS&LEASES-DNR TMBR TRST 1 25,000 (62,468) 75 -250% 75,000 18,843 3,166 25%
Grand Total $26,983,596 $22,903,585 2,538,678 85% $28,417,341 $22,339,617 $2,338,038I 79%
Unaudited*Benchmark for Month is 75%
4
SEPTEMBER
MASON COUNTY MONTHLY FINANCIAL
REPORT 2023
2022 vs 2023 Current Expense Expenditure Comparison
Expenditures Expenditures Unexpended
2022 Budget through End of Unex ended %2022 2023 Budget through End of Budget %2023 Actual 0 3 vs
Department Name g g p g g g zo2a
Month Budget Authority Month Authority
WSU Extension 347,244 209,723 137,521 60% 386,072 252,830 133,242 65% 43,107
Assessor 1,453,707 1,060,946 392,761 73% 1,475,815 1,097,934 377,881 74% 36,988
Auditor 1,887,225 1,311,854 575,371 70% 1,964,162 1 1,351,861 612,301 69% 40,007
Emergency Management 353,422 272,384 81,038 77% 540,330 417,251 123,079 77% 144,867
Facilities&Grounds 1,440,148 994,907 445,241 69% 1,545,159 1,075,852 469,307 70% 80,945
HR/Risk Mngt 679,310 383,283 296,027 56% 926,434 585,546 340,888 63% 202,263
LEOFF 100,000 54,878 45,122 55% 100,000 75,894 24,106 76% 21,017
Clerk 1,128,716 841,185 287,531 75% 1,208,905 918,422 290,483 76% 77,236
Commissioners 357,704 267,108 90,596 75% 390,615 283,344 107,271 73% 16,237
Support Services 1,005,923 737,733 268,190 73% 1,064,379 754,984 309,395 71% 17,252
District Court 1,458,412 988,458 469,954 68% 1,526,343 1,049,878 476,465 69% 61,419
Community Development 2,976,073 2,008,791 967,282 67% 3,256,041 2,183,965 1,072,076 67% 175,174
Historical Preservation 24,000 8,539 15,461 36% 41,150 12,262 28,888 30% 3,723
Parks&Trails 795,136 521,699 273,437 66% 814,815 570,742 244,073 70% 49,043
Juvenile Court Services 2,022,773 1,328,397 694,376 66% 2,155,933 1,369,675 786,258 64% 41,278
Prosecutor 2,080,150 1,253,048 827,102 60% 2,188,840 1,371,258 817,582 63% 118,211
Child Support Enforcement 161,447 82,515 78,932 51% 174,363 75,204 99,159 43% (7,311)
Coroner 347,914 238,732 109,182 69% 640,942 445,217 195,725 69% 206,486
Sheriff 15,047,209 10,631,151 4,416,058 71% 16,183,144 11,016,430 5,166,714 68% 385,279
Courthouse Security 303,755 197,388 106,367 65% 309,300 205,144 104,156 66% 7,757
Indigent Defense 1,271,847 898,183 373,664 71% 1,538,125 1,160,537 377,588 75% 262,353
Superior Court 1,132,810 790,121 342,689 70% 1,530,861 1,098,335 432,526 72% 308,214
Family Court 2,500 - 2,500 0% 2,500 - 2,500 0% 0
Therapeutic Court 816,662 376,202 440,460 46% 787,786 381,746 406,040 48% 5,543
Murder Expenditures 50,000 5,756 44,244 12% - - 0% (5,756)
Treasurer 878,239 610,687 267,552 70% 913,511 655,223 258,288 72% 44,536
Non Departmental 5,316,129 3,083,943 2,232,186 58% 5,884,219 3,215,551 2,668,668 55% 131,609
Motor Pool 50,829 20,512 30,317 40% - - 0% (20,512)
Transfers Out to Other Funds 466,282 84,387 381,895 18% 11 464,021 81,970 382,051 18% (2,416)
Totals $ 43,955,566 $ 29,262,509 $ 14,693,057 67% $ 48,013,765 $ 31,707,057 $ 16,306,708 66% 2,444,548
Unaudited"Benchmark for Month is 75%
JAFinanciais\2023 Financials\2023 September Financial Report 5
i
SEPT EMBER 2023
Six Year Specific Revenue Streams Comparison
9/30/2018 1 9/30/2019 9/30/2020 9/30/2021 1 9/30/2022 9/30/2023
Community Development Revenues 1,383,224 1,560,427 1,717,307 2,377,011 1,903,856 2,043,911
Detention &Correction Services 17,908 20,118 84,445 92,800 84,969 46,452
Current Expense Property Taxes 5,833,801 6,082,021 6,121,843 6,931,297 6,896,254 6,332,533
Road Diversion Property Tax 1,290,035 1,316,617 1,313,312 676,998 654,906 662,571
County Road Property Tax 5,148,598 5,394,251 5,496,320 5,669,821 5,628,329 6,323,415
Current Expense Sales Tax 3,939,023 4,450,596 4,874,269 6,185,907 6,738,257 7,013,978
Criminal Justice Taxes/Entitlements 1,084,295 1,160,088 1,237,195 1,386,346 1,320,843 1,486,869
Rural Sales & Use Tax Fund 508,944 601,178 629,104 761,193 809,765 846,368
800,000
600,000
400,000 -
Com Srvcs-Homelessess Preven Filings 411,523 515,539 613,972 753,970 556,720 405,386
800000
600:000
400000
200:000
Lodging (Hotel/Motel)Tax 312,187 392,156 317,325 618,823 711,516 765,370
800,000
600,000
400,000
200,000
REET 1 Excise Tax Only 948,179 950,508 1,165,967 1,609,629 1,489,408 1,160,895
REET 2 Excise Tax Only 948,179 950,508 1,165,967 1,609,629 1,489,408 1,160,895
1,600,000
�,zo6,0a0
fi00,0o6
400,000
J:\Financials\2023 Financials\2023 September Financial Report 6
i
I
AgoN oop SEPTEMBxAn
MASON COUNTY MONTHLY
I.Y S4
} FINANCIAL REPORT PW 0 243
REVENUE MONTH 12022 REVENUE 1 2023 REVENUE DIFFERENCE
JANUARY $ 678,071.10 $ 762,082.70 $ 84,011.60
FEBRUARY $ 735,573.58 $ 761,133.57 $ 25,559.99
MARCH $ 605,844.73 $ 661,034.70 $ 55,189.97
APRIL $ 648,208.19 $ 675,943.00 $ 27,734.81
MAY $ 819,079.72 $ 788,344.00 $ (30,735.72)
JUNE $ 758,195.22 $ 763,504.00 $ 5,308.78
JULY $ 789,558.43 $ 808,992.00 $ 19,433.57
AUGUST $ 868,091.16 $ 931,329.00 $ 63,237.84
SEPTEMBER $ 835,635.35 $ 861,616.00 $ 25,980.65
OCTOBER $ 874,640.36 $ (874,640.36)
NOVEMBER $ 933,808.65 $ (933,808.65)
DECEMBER $ 847,167.46 $ (847,167.46)
TOTAL COLLECTED REVENUE $ 9,393,873.95 $ 7,013,978.97 PROJECTED END OF YEAR REVENUE
REVENUE BUDGETED $ 7,200,000.00 $ 8,400,000.00 $ 9,669,595.44
YET TO BE COLLECTED $ (1,386,021.03)
ANTICIPATED INCREASE $ 1,269,595.44
12 MONTH ROLLING AVERAGE CHANGE 6.8%
PRIOR MONTH 12 MO. ROLLING AVG CHANGE 7.2%
J:\Financials\2023 Financials\2023 September Financial Report 7
P00N COpNrA
y SEPTEMBER 2023
Current Expense Recap 9/30/2018 9/30/2019 9/30/2020 9/30/2021 9/30/2122 9/30/2023
General Fund Operating Reserves 6,520,791 6,817,603 10,044,540 9,614,040 10,191,954
Contingency Reserve 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000
Technology Replacement Reserves 200,000 200,000 264,295 336,000 386,000
Equipment&Vehicle Replacement Reserves 525,000 525,000 932,475 1,040,500 790,000
Accrued Leave Reserve 520,000 530,805 347,742 502,000 413,000
Capital Reserve 5,000,000
Current Expense Unreserved Cash 677,699 3,520,434 7,420,954 12,922,702 10,679,681
This Month Current Expense Cash 5,719,621 9,443,491 12,593,842 20,010,006 25,415,242 28,460,634
Adopted Budget on December 31st 36,930,990 41,404,349 49,581,229 53,464,511 62,188,434 68,492,402
Supplemental Appropriations 1,059,364 263,253 407,320 142,422 275,304 980,661
Total Budget including Supplementals 37,990,354 41,667,602 49,988,549 53,606,933 62,463,738 69,473,063
Budgeted Beginning Fund Balance 3,061,750 5,786,719 11,636,958 14,000,000 21,694,824 26,656,033
Budgeted Ending Fund Balance 5,185,957 5,185,957 11,291,981 12,459,079 18,508,172 21,459,298
Revenue Budgets 34,928,604 35,880,883 38,351,591 39,606,933 40,768,914 42,817,030
Revenues thru This Month of each year 25,611,041 26,704,001 27,564,365 31,703,495 32,840,530 33,425,959
Budgeted Revenues Received 73% 74% 72% 80% 81% 78%
Expenditure Budgets 34,652,959 36,481,645 38,696,568 41,147,854 43,955,566 48,013,765
Expenditures thru This Month of each year 24,275,623 25,323,033 27,258,249 28,086,202 29,155,680 31,707,057
Budgeted Expenditures Expended 70% 69% 70% 68% 66% 66%
8
Special Fund Cash Balances 9/30/2018 9/30/2019 9/30/2020 9/30/2021 9/30/2022 9/30/2023
Rural County Sales&Use Tax Fund (.09) 508,267 675,187 887,143 1,246,219 2,121,416 2,134,572
Auditor's 0&M 282,685 289,968 321,863 416,066 473,801 511,130
County Roads Fund 9,295,488 8,714,792 10,840,407 12,480,272 10,956,043 12,639,440
Paths&Trails 256,053 267,688 277,521 286,273 295,775 310,940
Election Equipment Holding 158,094 170,212 228,158 242,887 286,733 256,828
Crime Victims 207,330 198,982 204,868 218,707 197,288 168,692
Victim Witness Activities 24,415 22,587 23,688 21,951 14,281 307
Historical Preservation Fund 49,399 28,596 42,005
Community Support Services Fund 632,936 775,936 979,341 1,182,704 1,616,153 1,821,429
Abatement/Repair/Demolition Fund 272,372 277,643 279,006 278,031 278,138 288,856
Reserve for Technology Fund 165,718 92,891
REET&Property Tax Admin Asst 72,787 77,357 71,878 84,169 91,937 94,150
National Forest Safety 47,752 33,076 21,533 9,270 24,813 41,618
Trial Court Improvement Fund 100,455 106,480 120,199 86,945 106,634 109,668
Sheriff Special Funds 267,616 246,188
Sheriff's Boating Program 111,329 114,946 68,843 57,671
Narcotics Investigation 86,738 99,234 94,831 93,840
Mason County Clean Water District 116,980 294,426
Public Health Fund 223,241 350,777 992,287 1,435,799 2,024,850 3,363,557
American Rescue Plan Act 5,717,761 10,549,863 6,378,668
Law Library 78,796 73,244 62,663 53,028 40,961 30,108
Lodging(Motel/Hotel)Tax Fund 496,619 694,350 781,951 1,003,049 1,496,472 2,068,635
Mental Health Tax Fund 1,486,938 1,466,501 1,518,678 1,857,576 2,049,599 2,549,401
Treasurer's M&O Fund 122,050 80,522 190,420 140,565 108,276 151,505
Veterans Assistance 79,755 54,330 77,270 126,589 177,324 243,928
Skokomish Flood Zone 180,942 18,942 80,190 17,547 12,102 43,502
Mason Lake Management District 126,319 134,722 115,677 90,776 86,323 90,374
Spencer Lake Management District 1,060 2,442 16,397 17,499
Island Lake Management District 16,522 25,866 26,135 24,935 21,776 13,418
Capital Improvement/Reet 1 Fund 1,785,534 2,129,468 2,217,304 1,788,172 2,097,282 2,512,699
Capital Improvement/Reet 2 Fund 2,759,714 2,995,440 3,435,912 4,197,629 5,700,377 6,029,037
Mason County Landfill 505,573 620,106 845,847 1,988,734 2,899,288 3,283,034
N. Bay/Case Inlet Utility 876,510 862,728 1,380,148 1,789,621 2,258,537 2,968,647
N. Bay/Case Inlet Utility Reserve 729 362
Wastewater System Development 3,986 3,986 3,986
Rustlewood Sewer&Water 230,438 159,891 77,904 193,639 114,543 47,052
Beards Cove Water 419,243 457,903 537,366 587,269 686,117 1,011,560
Belfair WW&Water Reclamation 188,571 305,866 594,261 1,644,671 1,649,222 4,369,520
Reserve Landfill 487,399 470,383 446,422 443,871 440,366 442,739
Reserve Beards Cove Ulid 353,882 199,214 206,906 213,514 221,968
Storm Drain System Development 217,182 184,069 180,256 179,064 178,447
Information Technology 268,427 345,883 175,320 509,302 472,055 699,203
Equipment Rental &Revolving Fund 2,636,137 3,719,230 2,094,620 1,617,626 4,578,809 5,311,107
Unemployment Fund 175,769 162,141 181,507 201,302 223,704 254,839
TOTALS 26,061,643 27,493,509 30,719,767 42,592,156 54,848,325 60,703,602
CD
MASON COUNTY MONTHLY FINANCIAL SEp°� 13Fp,REPORT 2023
2022 vs 2023 Motor Pool Expenditure Comparison
FUND OR DEPARTMENT 2022 Expenditures Unexpended %2022 2023 Expenditures Unexpended %2023
Budget through End of Budget Budget through End of Budget
Month Authority Month Authority
WSU 1,500 1,614 -114 107.57% 4,790 5,122 -332 106.93%
ASSESSOR 29,963 18,878 11,085 63.00% 32,910 26,719 6,191 81.19%
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 990 521 469 52.60% 2,540 1,340 1,200 52.76%
FACILITIES&GROUNDS 27,731 16,143 11,588 58.21% 85,685 34,631 51,054 40.42%
COMMUNITY SERVICES 47,254 33,454 13,800 70.80% 66,645 44,409 22,236 66.64%
PARKS&TRAILS 57,615 13,972 43,643 24.25% 51,043 31,052 19,991 60.83%
JUVENILE COURT SERVICES 8,006 5,867 2,139 73.28% 8,570 5,475 3,095 63.88%
PROSECUTOR 6,691 4,348 2,343 64.98% 7,127 2,698 4,429 37.85%
CORONER 14,250 10,937 3,313 76.75% 50,891 13,678 37,213 26.88%
SHERIFF ADMIN 1,202,975 1,050,364 152,611 87.31% 1,354,357 808,775 545,582 59.72%
MOTOR POOL 50,829 20,533 30,296 40.40% 0 0%
Total 001 GENERAL FUND 1,447,804 1,176,629 271,175 81.27% 1,664,558 973,898 690,660 58.51%
SHERIFF'S BOATING PROGRAM 0 1,244 -1,244 0% 439 -439 0%
NARCOTICS INVESTIGATION FUND 0 0% 100 -100 0%
COMMUNITY SERVICES HEALTH 57,077 34,566 22,511 60.56% 47,172 37,106 10,066 78.66%
AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT 0 0% 0 0%
TOTAL SPECIAL FUNDS 57,077 35,810 21,267 62.74% 47,172 37,645 9,527 79.80%
Total GENERAL FUND&SPECIAL FUNDS 1,504,881 1,212,439 292,442 80.57% 1,711,730 1,011,543 700,187 59.09%
2022 Expenditures Unexpended %2022 2023 Expenditures Unexpended %2023
TOTAL MOTOR POOL EXPENDITURES BY Budget through End of Budget Budget through End of Budget
OBJECT CODE Month Authority Month Authority
MOTOR POOL SALARIES&BENEFITS 39,689 18,203 21,486 45.86% 40,275 10,470 29,805 26.00%
MOTOR POOL SUPPLIES 80,150 25,751 54,399 32.13% 54,050 25,261 28,789 46.74%
MOTOR POOL FUEL 245,045 207,991 37,054 84.88% 402,000 235,190 166,810 58.51%
MOTOR POOL LEASE 226,180 394,353 -168,173 174.35% 712,272 510,030 202,242 71.61%
MOTOR POOL MAINT-MONTHLY 17,230 7,827 9,403 45.42% 12,000 17,654 -5,654 147.12%
MOTOR POOL REPAIRS&MISC. 62,100 27,835 34,265 44.82% 72,775 47,619 25,156 65.43%
MOTOR POOL INSURANCE 20,170 2,534 17,636 12.56% 16,640 3,822 12,818 22.97%
MOTOR POOL CAPITAL LEASE 406,717 3,033 403,684 0.75% 147,000 33,960 113,040 23.10%
MOTOR POOL CAP UPFIT 407,600 524,913 -117,313 128.78% 254,718 127,536 127,182 50.07%
Total GENERAL FUND&HEALTH FUND 1,504,881 1,212,439 292,442 80.57% 11711,730 1,011,543 700,187 59.09%
Unaudited *Benchmarl<for month is 75% 10
MASON COUNTY MONTHLY FINANCIAL
REPORT SEPTEMBER 2023
2022 vs 2023 Special and Other Funds Revenue Comparison
Revenue Revenue
Fund Fund Name 2022 Budget Collected Uncollected %2022 2023 Budget Collected Uncollected %2023 Actual dif 2022
No. Through End Revenue Through End Revenue vs 2023
of Month of Month
103 Sales&Use Tax 866,000 819,060 (46,940) 95% 963,000 915,474 (47,526) 95% 96,414
104 Auditor's 0&M 140,250 119,514 (20,736) 85% 127,250 85,646 (41,604) 67% (33,868)
105 lCounty Road 21,367,763 11,738,676 (9,629,087) 55% 1 21,099,126 13,183,197 (7,915,929) 62% 1,444,521
106 Paths&Trails 10,136 8,743 (1,393) 86% 9,707 13,368 3,661 138% 4,625
109 Election Equipment Holdings 42,250 39,856 (2,394) 94% 42,250 39,050 (3,200) 92% (806)
110 Crime Victims 41,910 49,109 7,199 117% 59,010 46,848 (12,162) 79% (2,261)
114 Victim Witness Activities 55,683 23,618 (32,065) 42% 51,191 14,182 (37,009) 28% (9,436)
117 Community Support Services 8,572,928 7,962,713 (610,215) 93% 2,254,928 3,155,352 900,424 140% (4,807,361)
118 jAbatement 7,920 1,441 (6,479) 18% 1 1,200 9,884 8,684 824% 8,443
120 REET&Property Tax Admin 25,600 17,323 (8,277) 68% 25,750 16,184 (9,566) 63% (1,139)
134 National Forest Safety 21,457 25,638 4,181 119% 21,500 22,936 1,436 107% (2,702)
135 Trial Court Improvements 22,652 17,012 (5,640) 75% 22,684 16,888 (5,796) 74% (124)
141 Sheriff's Boating Program 38,800 - (38,800) 0% 38,800 - (38,800) 0% -
142 Narcotics Investigation Fund 6,000 1,789 (4,211) 30% 6,500 44,107 37,607 679% 42,318
145 Mason County Clean Water District 190,000 116,980 (73,020) 62% 190,000 120,174 (69,826) 63% 3,194
150 Community Services Health 3,398,154 3,466,570 68,416 102% 3,349,997 4,315,271 965,274 129% 848,701
155 American Rescue Plan Act 6,484,450 6,507,221 22,771 100% 22,500 255,490 232,990 1136% (6,251,731)
160 Law Library 24,900 15,952 (8,948) 64% 23,260 17,088 (6,172) 73% 1,136
163 Lodging Tax(Hotel/Motel) 500,500 712,165 211,665 142% 600,750 803,111 202,361 134% 90,946
164 Mental Health 1,243,736 1,046,332 (197,404) 84% 1,414,765 1,160,414 (254,351) 82% 114,083
180 Treasurer's M&O Fund 338,999 209,258 (129,741) 62% 274,062 173,511 (100,551) 63% (35,747)
190 Veterans Assistance 141,340 91,030 (50,310) 64% 146,524 101,937 (44,587) 70% 10,907
192 Skokomish Flood Zone 10,020,250 - (10,020,250) 0% 6,897,203 47,675 (6,849,528) 1% 47,675
194 Mason Lake Mngmt Dist#2 37,900 22,921 (14,979) 60% 39,990 26,758 (13,232) 67% 3,837
195 Spencer Lake Mngmt Dist#3 15,225 9,623 (5,602) 63% 16,036 10,316 (5,720) 64% 692
199 Island Lake Mngmt Dist#1 10,000 5,970 (4,030) 60% 100 838 738 838% (5,132)
350 REET 1 Capital Improvements 1,562,000 1,498,229 (63,771) 96% 1,866,000 1,236,665 (629,335) 66% (261,564)
351 REET 2 Capital Improvements 1,505,000 1,516,399 11,399 101% 1,813,000 1,356,945 (456,055) 75% (159,454)
402 Mason County Landfill 5,868,714 4,717,092 (1,151,622) 80% 7,216,147 5,067,856 (2,148,291) 70% 350,764
403 N.Bay/Case Inlet Utility 2,404,398 1,605,858 (798,540) 67% 2,337,004 1,723,800 (613,204) 74% 117,942
411 Rustlewood Sewer&Water 544,257 232,173 (312,084) 43% 704,210 279,428 (424,782) 40% 47,255
412 Beards Cove Water 332,230 192,172 (140,058) 58% 367,564 220,599 (146,965) 60% 28,427
413 Belfair WW&Water Reclamation 11,209,208 1,116,927 (10,092,281) 10% 4,526,622 5,056,125 529,503 112% 3,939,198
428 Reserve Landfill 700 2,296 1,596 328% 700 15,631 14,931 2233% 13,335
429 Reserve Beards Cove ULID 10,800 9,943 (857) 92% - - 0% (9,943)
480 Storm Drain System Development 500 - (500) 0% - - 0% -
500 Information Technology Dept 922,819 929,047 1 6,228 1 101% 1 1,151,233 1 1,151,255 22 100% 222,207
501 Equipment Rental&Revolving 2,840,187 1,832,824 (1,007,363) 65% 2,812,088 1 2,156,905 (655,183) 77% 324,081
502 Unemployment Fund 73,420 73,420 - 100% 76,204 1 76,204 - 100% 2,784
Totals $80,899,036 46,754,895 $ (34,144,141) 58% $60,568,855 1 42,937,112 $ (17,631,743) 71% (3,817,783)
Unaudited *Benchmark for Month is 75%
J:\Financials\2023 Financials\2023 September Financial Report 11
iT MASON COUNTY MONTHLY FINANCIAL
REPORT SEPTEMBER 2023
2022 vs 2023 Special and Other Funds Expenditure Comparison
Fund Expenditures Expenditures Actual dif 2022
Na Fund Name 2022 Budget through End of Unexpended %2022 2023 Budget through End of Unexpended %2023 vs 2023
Month Budget Authority Month Budget Authority
103 Sales&Use Tax 660,415 50,995 609,420 8% 678,711 621,344 57,367 92% 570,350
104 Auditor's 0&M 108,074 76,702 31,372 71% 111,635 51,611 60,024 46% (25,091)
105 1 County Road 22,849,454 10,390,126 12,459,328 1 45% 23,793,040 12,440,137 11,352,903 52% 2,050,011
106 Paths&Trails 2,223 1,578 645 71% 2,047 1,481 566 72% (96)
109 Election Equipment Holdings 51,781 1,253 50,528 2% 51,642 77,284 (25,642) 150% 76,031
110 Crime Victims 99,426 65,047 34,379 65% 106,491 66,907 39,584 63% 1,860
114 Victim Witness Activities 55,635 23,320 32,315 42% 52,740 22,525 30,215 43% (794)
117 Community Support Services 8,250,242 7,530,128 720,114 91% 2,456,488 1 3,346,622 (890,134) 136% (4,183,505)
118 jAbatement 54,296 997 53,299 2% 54,155 936 53,219 2% (61)
120 REET&Property Tax Admin 100,589 14,603 85,986 15% 110,750 17,894 92,856 16% 3,290
134 National Forest Safety 26,525 5,892 20,633 22% 36,500 5,817 30,683 16% (75)
135 Trial Court Improvements 54,213 2,701 51,512 5% 53,715 515 53,200 1% (2,186)
141 Sheriff's Boating Program 42,533 88,513 (45,980) 208% 42,083 25,718 16,365 61% (62,795)
142 Narcotics Investigation Fund 7,669 4,802 2,867 63% 5,869 44,822 (38,953) 764% 40,020
145 1 Mason County Clean Water District 100,000 - 100,000 0% 190,153 1,927 188,226 1%
150 Community Services Health 3,832,359 2,805,189 1,027,170 73% 4,077,531 3,179,849 897,682 78% 374,660
155 American Rescue Plan Act 11,541,329 1,014,238 10,527,092 9% 7,562,927 1,439,749 6,123,178 19% 425,511
160 Law Library 36,307 24,200 12,108 67% 34,856 25,155 9,701 72% 955
163 Lodging Tax(Hotel/Motel) 772,900 321,087 451,813 42% 988,514 1 408,457 580,057 41% 87,370
164 Mental Health 1,491,138 653,587 837,551 44% 1,464,058 648,271 1 815,787 44% (5,315)
180 Treasurer's M&O Fund 395,672 157,655 238,017 40% 354,062 129,461 224,601 37% (28,193)
190 Veterans Assistance 241,340 74,493 166,847 31% 252,000 77,389 174,611 31% 2,896
192 Skokomish Flood Zone 10,035,620 3,268 10,032,352 0% 6,908,235 15,205 6,893,030 0% 11,937
194 Mason Lake Mngmt Dist#2 106,877 5,720 101,157 5% 108,367 4,762 103,606 4% (959)
195 Spencer Lake Mngmt Dist#3 22,017 415 21,602 2% 23,876 657 23,219 3% 243
199 Island Lake Mngmt Dist#1 30,000 13,303 16,697 44% 26,078 13,398 12,680 51% 96
350 REET 1 Capital Improvements 2,101,978 1,485,639 616,339 71% 2,101,804 1,035,778 1,066,026 49% (449.962)
351 REET 2 Capital Improvements 2,103,831 46,454 2,057,377 2% 2,103,875 524,115 1,579,760 25% 477,662
402 Mason County Landfill 6,433,279 3,892,010 2,541,269 60% 6,760,452 4,417,348 2,343,104 65% 525,338
403 N.Bay/Case Inlet Utility 2,110,929 1,124,363 986,566 53% 2,235,214 992,693 1,242,521 44% (131,670)
405 Wastewater System Development - - 0% - - 0% -
411 Rustlewood Sewer&Water 665,793 250,644 415,149 38% 776,347 304,513 471,834 39% 53,869
412 Beards Cove Water 327,750 110,390 217,360 34% 335,427 125,706 209,721 37% 15,316
413 Belfair WW&Water Reclamation 7,604,413 661,998 6,942,415 9% 7,142,083 3,302,067 3,840,016 46% 2,640,068
428 Reserve Landfill 301,597 5,450 296,147 2% 1 300,950 14,345 286,605 5% 8,895
429 Reserve Beards Cove ULID 4,508 3,381 1,127 75% 0% (3,381)
480 Storm Drain System Development 571 374 197 65% 0% (374)
500 Information Technology Dept 987,073 696,967 290,106 71% 1,261,915 704,133 557,783 56% 7,166
501 Equipment Rental&Revolving 3,987,878 2,056,108 1,931,770 52% 3,345,768 1,571,933 1,773,835 47% (484,175)
502 Unemployment Fund 234,420 1 45,944 188,476 20% 276,204 35,921 240,283 13% (10,022)
Totals $ 87,832,654 $ 33,709,533 $ 54,123,121 38% $ 76,186,562 $ 35,696,446 $ 40,490,116 47% 1,986,913
Unaudited *Benchmark for Month is 750.
J:\Financials\2023 Financials\2023 September Financial Report 12
C
Mason County
Agenda Request Form
Y
/A t!
To: Board of Mason County Commissioners
From: Mary Ransier Ext.422
Department: Human Resources Briefing: ❑X
Action Agenda: ❑X
Public Hearing: ❑
Special Meeting: ❑
Briefing Date(s): October 16,2023 Agenda Date: October 24,2023
Internal Review: ❑ Finance ® Human Resources ® Legal ❑ Information Technology ❑X Risk
(This is the responsibility of the requesting Department)
Below for Clerk of the Board's Use Only:
Item Number:
Approved: ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Tabled ❑ No Action Taken
Ordinance/Resolution No. Contract No. County Code:
Item•
January 2024—December 2027 Collective Bargaining Agreement(CBA) for Mason County Office of Public
Defense and Woodworkers Local Lodge W38,I.A.M.
Background/Executive Summary:
The exclusive representatives of Woodworkers Local Lodge W38,I.A.M have reached a tentative agreement
with Mason County for the 2024-2027 term. It is noted and commended to the Commissioner's that the parties
reached this Agreement through a very collaborative negotiations process.
Budget Impact(amount,funding source,budget amendment):
Supplemental—Funded by Ending Fund Balance
Public Outreach (news release,community meeting, etc.):
N/A
Requested Action:
Approval of the January 2024—December 2027 Collective Bargaining Agreement(CBA)for Mason County
Office of Public Defense and Woodworkers Local Lodge W38,I.A.M.
Attachments:
CBA
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT
By and Between
MASON COUNTY
And
MASON COUNTY OFFICE OF PUBLIC DEFENSE
co
1854
And
WOODWORKERS LOCAL LODGE W38, I.A.M
\Q'o�pF MACHI�y�sTs9y
a O o
J � y
y a�
�e Vr
0
Ni * Sb'���
January 1 , 2024 through
December 31 , 2027
2024-2027 Agreement-Mason County Deputy Public Defenders/Woodworkers Local Lodge W38, IAM
Page 1 of 15
Table of Contents
PREAMBLE.............................................................................................3
ARTICLE I: RECOGNITION........................................................................ 3
ARTICLE II: GRIEVANCES.......................................................................... 4
ARTICLE III: RIGHTS OF
MANAGEMENT........................................................................................6
ARTICLE IV: NON-DISCRIMINATION............................................................7
ARTICLE V: WAGES AND BENEFITS...........................................................7
ARTICLE VI: HOLIDAYS............................................................................9
ARTICLE VII: VACATION............................................................................9
ARTICLE VIII: SICK LEAVE, BEREAVEMENT LEAVE, FMLA............................10
ARTICLE IX: CIVIL LEAVE.........................................................................13
ARTICLE X: LONGEVITY............................................................................13
ARTICLE XI: SAVINGS CLAUSE..................................................................13
ARTICLE XII: DURATION...........................................................................13
SIGNATURES..........................................................................................14
APPENDIX A...........................................................................................15
2024-2027 Agreement-Mason County Deputy Public Defenders/Woodworkers Local Lodge W38, IAM
Page 2 of 15
PREAMBLE
This Agreement entered by Mason County and the Mason County Office of Public Defense,
hereinafter referred to as the "Employer" and Woodworkers Local Lodge W38, I.A.M., hereinafter
referred to as the "Union," has as its purpose the promotion of harmonious relations between
Mason County, the Employer and the Union, and the establishment of an equitable and peaceful
procedure for the resolution of differences, in the public interest.
ARTICLE I: RECOGNITION
Section 1,The Employer recognizes the Union as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent for the
purpose of negotiations concerning salaries, hours, and other conditions of employment for all full-time
and regular part-time deputy public defender attorneys in the Office of Public Defense, hereinafter
referred to as "employee", "employees", "DPD" or"DPDs", except for Rule 9 interns and confidential
employees.
Section 2. Union Representation
a. It is mutually agreed that only Union members of this unit shall engage in active
participation in Union affairs of this unit or serve in a role of leadership of the unit such as:
serving as a delegate or representative, serving on negotiating or other Union committees,
or participating in other similar activities to the interest of the unit.
b. Within ninety (90) days of the new employee's start date, the Union shall have no less than
thirty (30) minutes during the employee's work hours to present information about the Union.
The Union will explain that it is designated as the exclusive representative for all
employees covered under the Collective Bargaining Agreement. The Union shall inform
each new employee that membership in the Union is voluntary and only when an employee
clearly and affirmatively consents to joining the Union may collect fees. In addition, the
Union shall explain to the new employee the rights and the benefits the employee would
forgo by being a non-member.
c. The Union agrees to accept employees as members without discrimination asto race,color,
creed, sex, sexual orientation, national origin or physical, sensory, or mental disabilityor
protected classes under the law.
d. The Employer will provide for payroll deduction of Union dues and initiation fees upon
authorization by the employee. Payroll deduction authorization cards must be received by
the County department by the 151h day of the month to be recognized as effective for that
month. The County will transmit to the duly designated officer of the Union the total amount
so deducted together with the list of names of the employees from whose pay deductions
were made. All refunds of such deductions which may be required to be made to any
employee shall be made by the Union, and the Union shall settle all questions, and
disputes between it and its members with reference to the deductions or refunds of the like
without recourse to the County.
e. The Employer will distribute one copy of this Agreement to each employee in the unit and to
each newly hired employee of the unit. The cost of printing this Agreement shall be equally
shared between the Department and the Union.
2024-2027 Agreement-Mason County Deputy Public Defenders/Woodworkers Local Lodge W38, IAM
Page 3 of 15
f. The Union agrees to supply the Employer with lists of officers of the Union and
representatives and to keep such lists current.The Employer will recognize the officers and
representatives, or shop stewards.
g. Signatory organization will indemnify, defend,and hold the Employer harmless against any
claims made and against any suit instituted against the County on account of any check-off
of dues for the Union organization. The Union agrees to refund to the County any amounts
paid to it in error on account of the check-off provisions upon presentation of proper
evidence thereof by the County.
ARTICLE II: GRIEVANCES
Section 1. The purpose of this grievance procedure is to promote harmony and efficiency
between the employees and the Employer by providing for the timely settlement of grievances
without fear of discrimination or reprisal.
Section 2. The term "grievance" shall mean any dispute between the Employer and the Union
or an employee covered by this Agreement, concerning the interpretation, application, claim, or
breach or violation of the terms of this Agreement and established personnel matters.
Section 3. Employees will be unimpeded and free from restraint, interference, coercion,
discrimination, or reprisal in seeking adjudication of their grievances.
Section 4. Any time limits stipulated in the grievance procedure may be extended for stated
periods of time by appropriate parties by mutual agreement in writing with copies to the Union
and the Employer.
Section 5. Failure of the Employer to comply with any time limitations of a procedure in this
Article shall automatically permit the aggrieved employee to advance their grievance to the next
step of these procedures.
Section 6. A grievance of interest to several employees may be filed as a "group" grievance at
Step 2 of the Grievance Procedure and be processed within the time limits set forth herein.
Either the Union or the Employer may initiate a grievance. The Employer may not grieve the acts
of individual Employees, but rather, only orchestrated acts or actions of authorized
representatives believed to conflict with this Agreement. An Employer grievance will not be
subject to Arbitration and may go to mediation.
Section 7. Grievance Procedure
Step 1. Within fourteen (14) calendar days of the incident, giving rise to the grievance or
within fourteen (14) calendar days of the date the grievant knew or reasonably should have
known of the incident-giving rise to the grievance, the employee and/or the shop steward or
other representative of the Union shall discuss the grievance with the Supervisor. The
Supervisor shall notify the employee of any decision on the grievance within fourteen (14)
calendar days of the discussion with the employee.
Step 2. If the grievance is directly related to Termination, Suspension or Article V, Wages and
Benefits, then within fourteen (14) calendar days after receipt of the response or expiration
2024-2027 Agreement-Mason County Deputy Public Defenders/Woodworkers Local Lodge W38, IAM
Page 4 of 15
of the time for response in Step 1, the employee and/or Union shall reduce to writing a
statement of the grievance, which shall contain the following:
(1) the facts upon which the grievance is based.
(2) the Article(s) and/or Section(s) of the Agreement allegedly violated; and
(3) the remedy sought.
The written grievance shall be filed with the Human Resources Director, with a copy to the
Supervisor. The Human Resources Director shall schedule a meeting with the Union
Representative, affected employee(s) and the Supervisor(or designee) to hear and seek to
resolve the grievance. Within fourteen (14) calendar days of the meeting, the Human
Resources Director shall provide a written response to the Union Representative,
employee(s) and the Supervisor. If the grievance is not resolved at Step 2, it may be
advanced to arbitration by the Union.
Section 8. Grievance Arbitration
A. Should the Union choose to advance the grievance to arbitration, written notification of its
intent to arbitrate shall be submitted to the Supervisor and Human Resources Director
within fourteen (14) calendar days of receiving the written response in Step 2. Thereafter,
the parties will attempt to agree on an arbitrator to hear the grievance. If the parties are
unable to agree to an arbitrator, then a list of nine (9) names shall be jointly requested by
the parties from the Public Employment Relations Commission (PERC) within thirty (30)
calendar days of the date the Union filed its notice of intent to arbitrate with the County.
B. If a list of arbitrators is requested, both parties will attempt to agree upon an arbitrator from
this list. If they cannot agree within fourteen (14) calendar days from the receipt of the list,
a flip of the coin will determine which party strikes the first name from the list. This striking
of names will alternate between the parties until one name remains. This person shall be
the arbitrator.
C. The Parties shall jointly submit a written referral to the arbitrator that will contain the following:
1) A stipulated agreement of the question or questions at issue. If unable to stipulate,
parties shall frame their own question or questions and the arbitrator shall have
authority to define the question as a first order of business at any subsequent
hearing;
2) Statement of facts and position of each respective party; and
3) Copy of the grievance and related correspondence.
The arbitration hearing shall be scheduled at a date, time, and location mutually acceptable to
the parties.
D. For any grievance arbitration proceeding held pursuant to this Article, it is understood as
follows:
1) The arbitrator shall have no power to render a decision that will add to, subtract from
or alter, change, or modify the terms of this Agreement, and their power shall be
limited to interpretation or application of the terms of this Agreement, and all other
matters shall be excluded from arbitration.
2024-2027 Agreement-Mason County Deputy Public Defenders/Woodworkers Local Lodge W38, IAM
Page 5 of 15
2) The decision of the arbitrator shall be final, conclusive, and binding upon the
Employer, the Union and the employees involved, provided the decision does not
involve action by the Employer, which is beyond its jurisdiction.
3) Each party may call witnesses. Such testimony shall be sworn and shall be limited
to the matters set forth in the written statement of the grievance and shall be subject
to cross-examination. The arguments of the parties may be supported by oral
comment and rebuttal. Either or both parties may submit post-hearing briefs within
a time mutually agreed upon. Such arguments of the parties,whether oral or written,
shall be confined to and directed at the matters set forth in the written statement of
the grievance.
4) Either party may request that a stenographic record of the hearing be made. The
party requesting such record shall bear the cost thereof; provided, however, if the
other party requests a copy, such cost shall be shared equally.
5) The cost of the arbitrator shall be borne equally by the Employer and the Union, and
each party shall bear the cost of presenting its own case.
ARTICLE III: RIGHTS OF MANAGEMENT
Subject to the terms of this Agreement, it is understood and agreed that the County possesses
the sole right to operate the Mason County Public Defense, whether heretofore or herein after
exercised, and regardless of the frequency or infrequency of the exercise. It is expressly
recognized that such rights include, but are not limited to the following:
A. To determine the Mason County Public Defense mission, policies and set forth all
standards of service offered to the public.
B. To Plan, direct, control and determine the operations or services to be conducted by the
employees.
C. To utilize personnel, methods and means in the most appropriate and efficient manner
possible.
D. To manage and direct the employees of the Public Defense Office
E. To hire, promote, transfer, train, evaluate performance and retain employees in positions
of the Public Defense Office
F. To establish work rules and rules of conduct
G. To determine the size and composition of the work force and to lay off employees in the
event of lack of work or funds. If a layoff is imminent due to a lack of funds or work, the
parties shall meet to discuss efforts to preserve the bargaining unit workforce and develop
potential alternatives to curtailment.
H. Determine the methods, maintenance, equipment, number and kinds of personnel, the
job, work, or position content required to accomplish governmental operations and
maintain the efficiency and safety of those operations.
2024-2027 Agreement-Mason County Deputy Public Defenders/Woodworkers Local Lodge W38, IAM
Page 6 of 15
I. Determine and change the number and locations and types of operations, processes, and
materials to be used in carrying out all County functions.
J. Control departmental budgets and financial policies, including accounting procedures.
K. Take whatever actions are necessary in emergencies or exigent circumstances in order
to ensure the proper function of the Public Defense Office. Exigent circumstances are
declared by the Board of County Commissioners or designee in writing and are
circumstances which, through no fault of the employer, result in a situation that impacts
safety of efficient operation.
L. The Union and the employer will work together to develop and implement a system of
Case Load weighting or Case Load distribution that is beneficial to both the employer and
employees.
ARTICLE IV: NON-DISCRIMINATION
Section 1. Neither the Employer, Union, nor any employee shall in any manner whatsoever
discriminate against any employee on the basis of race, color, religion, creed, sex, marital status,
national origin, age, or sensory, mental or physical handicaps; Except,that such factors may be considered
in employment decisions where determined to be a bona fide occupational qualification under the
guidelines promulgated by the Federal Equal Employment opportunity commission.
Section 2. No employee shall be discharged or discriminated against for engaging in lawful Union
activities, fulfilling duties as an officer in the union, serving on a Union committee or member thereof, or
exercising the employee's rights as a Union member, or for acting in compliance with the rules of
professional conduct as mandated by the Washington State Supreme Court.
ARTICLE V: WAGES AND BENEFITS
Section 1.
Effective January 1, 2024, salaries for this bargaining unit shall be established as listed in the
wage scale as set forth in Appendix A which includes a onetime 10% market adjustment. Effective
January 1, 2025, through December 31, 2027, each employee shall also have their base wage
adjusted by an across the board (ATB) increase as set forth below:
INCREASE
1/1/2025 2.00%
1/1/2026 2.00%
1/1/2027 2.25%
Step increases shall occur on the employee's anniversary date. If an employee's performance is
unsatisfactory, the supervisor may defer a scheduled pay increase for a stipulated period of time
or until the employee's job performance is satisfactory. The anniversary date is defined as the
employee's actual date of appointment to their current job classification. The actual date of the
pay increase shall be the first or the 16th of the month, depending on the date of the anniversary
day. (e.g.., if an employee's anniversary date is on January 14th, the pay increase will take effect
January 1st)
2024-2027 Agreement-Mason County Deputy Public Defenders/Woodworkers Local Lodge W38, IAM
Page 7 of 15
Section 2. The County shall pay any court-sanctioned fine levied against an employee where, in
the reasonable judgment of the Supervisor, such employee was fined in the good faith
performance of his duties.
Section 3. The County shall pay the regular, active annual dues to the Washington State Bar
Association for each employee covered by this Agreement. Should an employee terminate
employment with the County prior to July 1 of the current calendar year, they shall reimburse the
County a pro-rated share of dues paid to be deducted from their last paycheck.
Section 4. The County shall provide indemnification and defense of an employee from liability
that may arise out of the good faith performance of their duties.
Section 5. The County shall contribute as below each month during the term of this Agreement
for each eligible employee for medical, dental, vision, and life insurance coverage. This
contribution is to be applied to premiums for PEBB medical and WCIF dental, vision and life or,
with the provision of adequate notice to the County, applied to the premiums of such other carrier
or carriers as designated by the Union. Eligible employees are those regular full-time and regular
part-time employees compensated for eighty (80) man-hours (excludes vacation, sick and comp
time upon separation) or more per month during the calendar year.
A. Effective January 1, 2024, the contribution shall be increased to one thousand, five
hundred and eighteen dollars ($1518.00) per month during the term of this Agreement for
each eligible employee for medical, dental, vision, and life insurance coverage.
B. Effective January 1, 2025, the contribution shall be increased to one thousand, five
hundred and seventy dollars ($1570.00) per month during the term of this Agreement for
each eligible employee for medical, dental, vision, and life insurance coverage.
C. Effective January 1, 2026, the contribution shall be increased to one thousand, six
hundred and twenty-two dollars ($1622.00) per month during the term of this Agreement
for each eligible employee for medical, dental, vision, and life insurance coverage.
D. Effective January 1, 2027, the contribution shall be increased to one thousand, six
hundred and seventy-four dollars ($1674.00) per month during the term of this Agreement
for each eligible employee for medical, dental, vision, and life insurance coverage.
Section 6. The Employer shall provide an Employee Assistance Program (EAP) benefit for all
bargaining unit employees.
Section 7. In the event either party is subject to carrier plan design change or a penalty, tax, fine
or increased costs as a result of requirements or provisions of the ACA, not within their control,
the parties agree to meet and negotiate regarding the impacts of any such cost or plan design
impacts and immediately bargain alternative provisions.
Section 8. Clothing Allowance: All employees shall receive, payable on the second pay date
in July of the current calendar year, an annual clothing allowance of five hundred dollars ($500)
for professional business attire.
Section 9. DUI Hotline Allowance: DUI Hotline is for on-call for DUI Hotline Phone service
during non-duty hours to be rotated throughout the staff based upon an on-call schedule agreed to
2024-2027 Agreement-Mason County Deputy Public Defenders/Woodworkers Local Lodge W38, AM
Page 8 of 15
by Chief Public Defender and staff. The rate of the stipend will be thirty-two dollars ($32.00) per
hour for three (3) hours per week for each week the employee is on call.
Section 10. Continuing Legal Education (CLE): Attorneys will be provided an annual
membership to the WDA (Washington Defender Association) and attendance to the annual WDA
Conference paid for by the County. Additional flexibility in the training budget will allow for up to one
thousand dollars ($1,000) annually for the office for training and obtaining CLE credits, in addition
to unused WDA training funds, to be used at the discretion and prior approval of the Director.
Section 11. The County and Union mutually agree to comply with all Washington State Long
Term Services Trust Act statutes, in accordance with RCW 50B.04.
ARTICLE VI: HOLIDAYS
Section 1. The following is a list of the annual recognized holidays for employees in the
Supervisor's Office:
New Year's Day Labor Da
Martin Luther King Day Veterans' Da
Presidents' Day Thanksgiving Day
Juneteenth Friday after Thanksgiving Da
Memorial Day Christmas Eve Da
Independence Day Christmas Da
Two 2 Floating Holidays
Christmas Eve may be taken off based on the operational needs of the County and the prior
approval of the Deputy Public Defender, and if this cannot be accommodated, the employee will
schedule an alternate day with their supervisor's approval.
Section 2. Where there is a conflict or difference between either a federal or state designated
holiday, the parties may agree to honor either one but not both.
Section 3. When a recognized holiday falls on Saturday, the Friday preceding it will be allowed;
and when a recognized holiday falls on a Sunday, the Monday following will be allowed as a
regular paid holiday.
Section 4. Floating holidays may be taken at the discretion of the employee, provided the
approval of the Employer is obtained and one week's advance notice is given. The one-week
notice requirement may be waived by the Employer. Floating holidays not used by the end of the
calendar year during which they accrued will be lost.
ARTICLE VII: VACATION LEAVE
Section 1. Each regular full-time employee shall accrue paid vacation leave as follows:
Years of Continuous Service Annual Accrual
1st through 3rd year of employment 96 hours
4t" through 7t" year of employment 120 hours
81" through 91" year of employment 144 hours
10t" through 111" year of employment 160 hours
12t" through 14t" year of employment 176 hours
2024-2027 Agreement-Mason County Deputy Public Defenders/Woodworkers Local Lodge W38, AM
Page 9 of 15
151" through 161h year of employment 184 hours
17t" through 19th year of employment 192 hours
20 or more years of employment 200 hours
Section 2. All new employees must satisfactorily complete six(6) months of service to be entitled
to the accrual and use of vacation leave. Regular part-time employees will receive vacation on a
pro-rata basis. Extra help employees are not eligible for any vacation benefits. Employees do
not accrue vacation benefits during a leave without pay.
Section. 3. Regular full-time employees must work, or be in a paid status, at least eighty (80)
hours in a month to accrue vacation for the month. Regular part-time employees must work, or
be in a paid status, at least in the same proportion to eighty (80) hours as their regular hours are
to full-time employment to accrue vacation leave for that month.
Section 4. The first day of the month of hire shall be the effective date of subsequent increases
in the vacation accrual rate for employees hired between the first and the fifteenth of the month.
The first day of the month following the month of hire shall be the effective date of subsequent
increases in the vacation accrual rate for employees hired between the sixteenth and the last day
of the month.
Section 5. The Supervisor is responsible for scheduling its employees' vacations without undue
disruption of department operations. Leave requests shall normally be submitted, in writing, at
least two weeks prior to taking vacation leave.
Section 6. The maximum vacation leave hours that may be accrued at any point in time is four
hundred (400) hours. No additional vacation leave accrual will be added to the employee's
vacation leave benefit when the maximum accrual of four hundred (400) hours has been attained.
Section 7. Eligible employees will be paid for unused accrued vacation leave upon termination
of employment with Mason County, provided that no employee may receive payment for more
than four hundred (400) hours. Employees shall provide at least ten (10) working days written
notice of their effective resignation date. The time limit of the resignation may be waived at the
discretion of the Department Head. Pay in lieu of unused vacation shall be forfeited if ten (10)
working days written notice is not provided or waived.
ARTICLE VIII: SICK LEAVE, BEREAVEMENT LEAVE AND FMLA
Section 1. Per the Washington State Paid Sick Leave law, RCW 49.46, in accordance with WAC
296-130 and Initiative 1433, the County and the Union mutually agree to comply the with the laws.
Regular full-time employees must work or be in a paid status at least eighty (80) hours in a month
to accrue sick leave for the month. Sick leave shall accrue for all regular full-time employees at the
rate of eight (8) hours per month for each month of employment. Regular part-time employees
shall accrue sick leave on a pro-rated basis in proportion to the number of hours the part-time
employee is in a paid status during the month as compared to that required for full-time employment.
Sick leave cannot be taken before it is earned. Sick leave accrual may not exceed one thousand
two hundred (1,200) hours. Usages of sick leave shall be consistent in accordance with the
Washington State Paid Sick Leave law, RCW 49.46, WAC 296-130 and Initiative 1433,the County
and the Council mutually agree to comply with the laws. Authorized uses of sick leave may be
utilized for immediate family as defined below:
2024-2027 Agreement-Mason County Deputy Public Defenders/Woodworkers Local Lodge W38, IAM
Page 10 of 15
"Immediate family"shall be defined as persons related by blood, marriage,
or legal adoption in the degree of relationship of spouse, registered
domestic partner, grandparent, parent (biological, adoptive, de facto, or
foster parent, stepparent, or legal guardian of an employee or employee's
spouse or registered domestic partner, or a person who stood in loco
parentis when the employee was a minor child), sibling, child (biological,
adopted, or foster child, stepchild, or a child to whom the employee stands
in loco parentis, is a legal guardian, or is a de facto parent, regardless or
age or dependency), grandchild, in compliance with WAC 296-130-030
and RCW 49.12.270 (or subsequent statutes) and other persons with the
approval of the Employer or designee.
Section 2. A written certificate from an employee's medical provider may be required when the
employee is absent for a period in excess of three (3) days or when a pattern of sick leave use
indicates possible sick leave abuse. To the extent allowed by law, the County also may request the
opinion of a second medical provider, at County expense, to determine whether the employee
suffers from a condition which impairs their ability to perform the essential functions of the job.
Section 3. Sick Leave Cash Out: Employees hired before January 1, 2011, shall receive payment
for unused sick leave upon termination of employment with fifteen (15) years of continuous county
service; or upon termination of employment with Mason County when the termination is
contemporaneous with retirement from an applicable Washington State Public Employees
Retirement System; or upon the death of the employee, in which case payment shall be made to
their estate. Employees hired on or after January 1, 2011, neither they nor their estate shall be
eligible to receive any cash out of the employee's accrued sick leave upon separation from county
service.
Section 4. Sick Leave Adjustment for Worker's Compensation:
A. For a period of absence from work due to injury or occupational disease resulting from
County employment, the employee shall file an application for Worker's Compensation in
accordance with state law.
B. If the employee has accumulated sick leave credit, the County shall pay the sick leave
difference between their time loss compensation and their full regular salary unless the
employee elects not to use their sick leave.
C. Should an employee receive Worker's Compensation for time loss and they also receive
sick leave compensation, their sick leave accrual prior to the time loss will be reduced by
the total number of hours they were on sick leave minus the number of hours at full salary
for which they are paid to the nearest hour.
D. Until eligibility for Worker's Compensation is determined by the Department of Labor and
Industries, the County may pay full sick leave accumulated, provided that the employee shall
return any subsequent over-payment to the County.
E. Should an employee apply for time loss compensation and the claim is then or later denied,
sick leave and vacation leave may be used for the absence in accordance with other
provisions of this rule.
F. Nothing herein pertains to a permanent disability award.
2024-2027 Agreement-Mason County Deputy Public Defenders/Woodworkers Local Lodge W38, IAM
Page 11 of 15
G. If an employee has no sick leave accumulated, or has exhausted all sick leave, vacation
leave, or comp time, may be substituted.
Section 5. Bereavement Leave: The County will provide regular, full-time, and part-time
employees with paid bereavement leave for up to three (3) days in the event of the death of an
immediate family member. Two (2) additional days chargeable to accrued sick leave will be
granted at the request of the employee. Immediate family for purposes of bereavement leave
includes only the employee's spouse, parent, grandparent, child, grandchild, sibling, grandparent-
in-law, parent-in-law, sibling-in-law, child-in-law, pibling and niblings.
Section 6. Family Leave: The County and the Union mutual agree to comply with all State
and Federal Family Leave laws (FMLA, RCW 49.78), whichever is more advantageous to the
employee Employer will grant leave consistent with the FMLA and the adopted conditions and
provisions of the state and federal law and are not intended to expand upon the rights thus set
forth. For purposes of this Article, the definition of "immediate family" will be found in Article VIII,
Section 1. If an employee has any questions regarding the State and Federal Family leave laws,
they may contact the County's Human Resource Department for guidance.
Maternity Disability Leave - Consistent with WAC 162-30-020, the Employer will grant a leave
of absence for a period of temporary disability because of pregnancy or childbirth. This may be
in addition to the leave entitlements of FMLA.
This leave provides female Employees with the right to a leave of absence equivalent to the
disability phase of pregnancy and childbirth. There is no eligibility requirement, however, the
Employer has no obligation to pay for health insurance benefits while on this leave (unless utilized
concurrent with FMLA or otherwise entitled under disability or sick leave paid status).
Leave for temporary disability due to pregnancy or childbirth will be medically verifiable. There is
no limit to the length of the disability phase, except for the right for medical verification and the
right of second opinion at the Employer's expense. At the end of the disability leave, the
Employee is entitled to return to the same job or a similar job of at least the same pay.
Employees must use their accrued sick leave and vacation, if any, during the leave period and,
at their election, any accrued comp time. Once this paid leave is exhausted, the Employee's leave
may be switched over to unpaid leave.
Section 7. Military Leave: Employees enlisting or entering the military service of the United
States, pursuant to the provisions of the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment
Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA) shall be granted all rights and privileges provided by the Act. In
addition to benefits granted under USERRA, Employees shall be allowed military leave as
required by RCW 38.40.060 and as interpreted by the Court. This provides for twenty-one (21)
working days of military leave per year (October 1 through September 30).
Section 8. Leave Without Pay: Except in the case of Family Medical Leave Act related leave
(and/or other protected leaves), an employee may be granted leave without pay with prior
approval of the Supervisor or designee.
2024-2027 Agreement-Mason County Deputy Public Defenders/Woodworkers Local Lodge W38, IAM
Page 12 of 15
ARTICLE IX: CIVIL LEAVE
Section 1. Jury Duty: The County provides all employees leave for jury service. Regular full-
time and part-time employees who have completed their probationary period receive paid jury
duty leave each time they are called for jury service. Payment provided by the courts during
periods of paid jury duty leave must be paid over to the County, excluding expense
reimbursements, such as mileage. You must provide your supervisor with a copy of the jury duty
summons as soon as possible after receiving it. Upon completion of jury duty, you are required
to provide your supervisor with proof of jury service. Employees who have been released by the
court during their period of jury duty service may be required to report to work.
An employee who is called to jury service for a matter which is discovered to be likely multiple-
week litigation agrees to ask to be excused from such service on the basis of hardship to the
Employer.
Section 2. Witness Duty: All employees summoned to testify in court are allowed time off for
the period they serve as witnesses. Employees are paid by the County for time they testifying,
payment provided by the courts during periods of paid witness duty must be paid over to the
County, excluding expense reimbursements, such as mileage. In general, witness duty leave is
paid unless employees are a party in the case.
ARTICLE X: LONGEVITY
Section 1. Longevity:
Continuous Years of Service Monthly Amount
61 through 10th Year $65.00
11th through 14th Year 1.5%
15th through 19th Year 3.0%
201h through 241h Year 4.5%
251h Year and Over 6.0%
Employees hired on or after January 1st, 2020, shall receive longevity pay, commencing upon
completion of their 10th year of service, in addition to their base pay as set forth above. Employees
hired before January 1st, 2020, shall receive longevity pay, commencing upon completion of their
fifth year of service, in addition to their base pay, as set forth above.
ARTICLE XI: SAVINGS CLAUSE
Should any clause of this Agreement be found to be in violation of any law, all other provisions
shall remain in full force and effect. If any provision in this Agreement is determined to be invalid,
the parties shall meet to renegotiate the substance of the provision if demanded by either party.
ARTICLE XII: DURATION
This Agreement shall be effective upon signing by both parties and shall remain in full force and
effect through December 31, 2027, by mutual agreement superseding previous Agreements in
term and effective date.
Any retroactive application of the provisions of this agreement shall apply only to those eligible
employees under this bargaining unit who are actively employed by Mason County on the date of
signing by both parties.
2024-2027 Agreement-Mason County Deputy Public Defenders/Woodworkers Local Lodge W38, IAM
Page 13 of 15
SIGNATURES
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement this
Day of 2023.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WOODWORKERS LOCAL
MASON COUNTY LODGE W38, I.A.M.
r
Sharon Trask, Commissioner rry Bickett, Business Agent
Randy Neatherlin, Commissioner
Kevin Shutty, Commissioner
ATTEST
McKenzie Smith, Clerk of the Board
2024-2027 Agreement-Mason County Deputy Public Defenders/Woodworkers Local Lodge W38, IAM
Page 14 of 15
APPENDIX A
Advancement from step to step occurs on annual anniversary date. Bi-Monthly salary table is illustrated to enhance efficiency and reduce errors
in payroll calculations and simplifying tracking and reporting processes. Note: Figures are rounded and will vary slightly in MUNIS as MUNIS
calculates out four(4)decimal places.Step 7 will not be accessible until 1/1/2025.Step 8 will not be accessible until 1/1/2026. No step increases
to step 7 until annual anniversary date in 2025.
Effective 1/1/2024-includes onetime 10% market adjustment.
CLASSIFICATION STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 Step 7 Step 8
DEPUTY PUBLIC DEFENDER III $4,277.18 $4,384.11 $4,493.72 $4,606.06 $4,721.21 $4,839.24 $4,960.22 $5,084.23
DEPUTY PUBLIC DEFENDER II $3,688.20 $3,780.41 $3,874.92 $3,971.79 $4,071.09 $4,172.86 $4,277.18 $4,384.11
DEPUTY PUBLIC DEFENDER 1 $2,955.73 $3,119.20 $3,251.23 $3,340.16 $3,510.48 $3,598.25 $3,688.20 $3,780.41
Effective 1/1/2025—includes a 2.00%ATB Increase
All bargaining unit employees who were at step 6 on or before 12/31/2024 will receive their step increase to step 7 on 1/1/2025 and their
anniversary date for step increases will change to January 1.All other eligible employees will move to step 8 on their regular anniversary date in
2025.
CLASSIFICATION STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 Step 7 Step 8
DEPUTY PUBLIC DEFENDER III $4,583.59 $4,698.18 $4,815.64 $4,936.03 $5,059.43 $5,185.91 $5,315.56 $5,448.45
DEPUTY PUBLIC DEFENDER II $3,856.02 $3,952.42 $4,051.23 $4,152.51 $4,256.32 $4,362.73 $4,471.80 $4,583.59
DEPUTY PUBLIC DEFENDER 1 $3,014.85 $3,181.58 $3,316.26 $3,406.97 $3,580.69 $3,670.21 $3,761.97 $3,856.02
Effective 1/1/2026—includes a 2.00%ATB Increase
All bargaining unit employees who were at step 7 on or before 12/31/2025 will receive their step increase to step 8 on 1/1/2026 and their
anniversary date for step increases will change to January 1.All other eligible employees will move to step 8 on their regular anniversary date in
2026.
CLASSIFICATION STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 Step 7 Step 8
DEPUTY PUBLIC DEFENDER 111 $4,911.95 $5,034.75 $5,160.62 $5,289.63 $5,421.87 $5,557.42 $5,696.35 $5,838.76
DEPUTY PUBLIC DEFENDER 11 $4,031.47 $4,132.25 $4,235.56 $4,341.45 $4,449.98 $4,561.23 $4,675.26 $4,792.15
DEPUTY PUBLIC DEFENDER 1 $3,075.14 $3,245.21 $3,382.58 $3,475.10 $3,652.31 $3,743.62 $3,837.21 $3,933.14
Effective 1/1/2027—includes a 2.25%ATB Increase
CLASSIFICATION STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 Step 7 Step 8
DEPUTY PUBLIC DEFENDER III $5,022.47 $5,148.03 $5,276.73 $5,408.65 $5,543.86 $5,682.46 $5,824.52 $5,970.14
DEPUTY PUBLIC DEFENDER II $4,122.17 $4,225.23 $4,330.86 $4,439.13 $4,550.11 $4,663.86 $4,780.46 $4,899.97
DEPUTY PUBLIC DEFENDER 1 $3,144.34 $3,318.23 $3,458.69 $3,553.29 $3,734.49 $3,827.85 $3,923.54 $4,021.63
2024-2027 Agreement-Mason County Deputy Public Defenders/Woodworkers Local Lodge W38, AM
Page 15 of 15
Mason County
Agenda Request Form
To: Board of Mason County Commissioners
From: Mark Neary
Ext. 530
Department: County Administrator
Briefing: ☒
Action Agenda: ☐
Public Hearing: ☐
Special Meeting: ☐
Briefing Date(s): 10/16/2023 Agenda Date: Click or tap here to enter text.
Internal Review: ☐ Finance ☐ Human Resources ☐ Legal ☐ Information Technology ☐ Other
(This is the responsibility of the requesting Department)
Below for Clerk of the Board’s Use Only:
Item Number: __________
Approved: ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Tabled ☐ No Action Taken
Ordinance/Resolution No. __________ Contract No. __________ County Code: __________
Item:
Final Buildout of Building 10 District Court
Background/Executive Summary:
Building 10 District Court needs the final phase of construction complete so that we can move District Court
operations into the building. District Court administration and Support Services met with our design
consultant Helix design group to develop a conceptual framework of the remodel. The final phase of
construction includes the follow: Probation and storage; District Court administration, Judges offices and Jury
Deliberation/ rooms, staff break rooms and bathroom facilities; Confidential meeting rooms.
The estimated cost of construction is $1,875,000 and Architectural and Engineering fees of approximately
$250,000 for a total project cost of $2,125,000.
Mason County received Local Assistance and Tribal Consistency Fund (LATCF) $797,000 and we currently
have $1.5 million budgeted for capital projects in the REET1 fund.
Budget Impact (amount, funding source, budget amendment):
$2,125,000
Public Outreach (news release, community meeting, etc.):
Requested Action:
Approve County Administrator to enter into A/E contract with Helix Design Group for completion of District
Court.
Attachments:
Mason County Court House Phase 2 Pricing Proposal.pdf
O:\03-Fee Proposals-Contracts\2022\i22-137 Mason Co. Court Remod. Ph.2\02-Fee Proposals\Working\B2_Mason County Court House Phase 2 Pricing Proposal.docx
July 26, 2023
Mr. Mark Neary, County Administrator
Mason County
Bldg. 1
411 N. 5th Street
Shelton, WA 98584
RE: Mason County Courthouse, Phase 2 (*REVISED*)
Dear Mark:
Thank you for inviting us to propose our services for the next phase of this interesting and challenging project. We
have enjoyed working with you on Phase 1, and look forward to continue our excellent working relationship.
Per our discussions, we will credit fees already invoiced and paid for the Concept phase to the Schematic Design
(SD) phase. This will include $19,402 for Basic Services and $2,376 for Cost Estimating. We will also assume
Permitting under Basic Services, although we reserve the right to discuss this further given the potential impact on
the process by issuing several, separate bid packages.
We will are also attempting to quantify fees for Bidding and Construction Support.
We are pleased to submit the following revised proposal for your consideration.
I. PROJECT SCOPE
Please refer to attached, color-coded Sheet A100 (Exhibit 1). Because of available budget, the Phase 2
project will be bid and constructed in increments. Phases 2A and 2B (green and purple, blue and
turquoise respectively) will be competitively bid and constructed; Phase 2C (yellow) will be constructed
by the County’s own personnel. However, we will design all three (3) phases at one time, and separate
the documents into three separate bid packages.
II. PROPOSED SERVICES AND CONSULTANT TEAM
Our proposed services and associated consultant team remains the same as for Phase 1:
Helix Design Group, Inc.
Tacoma, WA
Prime Consultant. Architecture, Interior Design:
Project Management.
Hultz/BHU Engineers, Inc.
Tacoma, WA
Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing (M/E/P)
Engineering.
PCS Structural Solutions, Inc.
Tacoma, WA
Structural Engineering.
Bill Acker Consulting Services
Gig Harbor, WA
Cost Estimating.
III. TASKS AND FEES
A. GENERAL
We propose to use the State of Washington (OFM) Fee Schedule for Basic Services, which include
Architecture; M/E/P and Structural Engineering. Cost Estimating is an added service, as is the
preparation of multiple bid packages. Renovation projects carry a fee premium of 2%. Courthouses
fall under Schedule A in the OFM document, but there are general office components also included
in this project so we propose a “hybrid” fee percentage of 50% ‘A’ and 50% ‘B’.
Overall fee is computed as follows:
Maximum Allowable Construction Cost (MACC) = $1,875,000
Fee: (11.19% + 9.75%) x 0.5 + 2% = 12.47%
Full Fee: $1,875,000 x 12.47% = $233,813
B. DESIGN
1. BASIC SERVICES
Fee is computed as follows, with Design representing 69% of full fee:
Fee: $1,875,000 x 12.47% x 69% =$161,331
By Design Phase (as % of full fee):
Schematic Design @ 18%:$ 42,086
Less: Credit for Concept < 19,402 >
Net: SD $ 22,684
Design Development @ 20%:46,763
Construction Documents @ 31%:72,482
TOTAL:$141,929
2. ADDITIONAL SERVICES
a. COST ESTIMATING
Please refer to Attachment ‘A’.
FEES:*
Schematic Design: $ 4,455
Less: Credit for Concept < 2,376 >
Net: SD $2,079
Design Development:4,455
Construction Documents:4,455
TOTAL:$10,989
*Incudes Helix mark-up @ 10%.
b. MULTIPLE BID PACKAGES
Splitting the project up into three (3) separate bid packages will cause added work, and is
recognized as such in the OFM Schedule. Suggest approx. 10% of Design fee.
FEE:$14,000
C. PERMITTING
We will have discussions with the County and City; prepare and submit building permit applications;
respond to questions; and follow up through the permitting process for building permit.
These services are covered under “Basic”.
With an uncertain schedule and considering serval bid packages, we may need to re-visit this task.
D. BIDDING
Services during bidding may include, but not necessarily be limited to the following:
Bidding solicitation support, clarifications, and review.
Review and respond to substitution requests and questions.
Under the State fee schedule, Bidding support is tagged at 2% of total fee, or in their case $4,676.
With an uncertain schedule and considering several bid packages, we cannot accurately assess the
actual level of effort. For budgeting purposes, we suggest an amount of at least $3,000 per bid
package.
FEE: Estimate:$ 9,000
E. CONSTRUCTION
Services during construction may include, but not necessarily be limited to the following:
Visit site at appropriate intervals to verify that construction meets the design intent, and
attend construction meetings.
Respond to construction questions, RFI’s, etc.
Review submittals and shop drawings.
Review and respond to change order requests.
Prepare punch lists at substantial and final completion stages.
Prepare as-built drawings based on contractor mark-ups.
Under the State fee schedule, Construction support is tagged at 27% of total fee, or $63,130.
Including Close Out (as-builts) at 2% or $4,676, total fee would be $67,806.
With an uncertain schedule and considering serval bid packages, we cannot accurately assess the
level of effort. We will provide any request for fee adjustments if the multiple bid packages have an
adverse effect on the fee estimate.
FEE: Budget Estimate:$67,806
IV. REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES
Reimbursable expenses (e.g., prints, copies, postage, etc.) will be invoiced at cost +10%; personal auto
mileage at $0.655/mile. Reimbursable expenses are additional to quoted fees.
ALLOWANCE:$ 7,500
V. ASSUMPTIONS
Our proposal has been based on the following assumptions:
A.Design will be completed for the entire project, but will be “split” into three (3) separate bid
packages.
B.Our fee has been developed based on an assumed cost of construction of $1,875,000. If the
County decides to increase this budget, we reserve the right to revise our proposal accordingly.
C.This project area is free of hazardous materials (e.g., asbestos; pcb’s; etc.).
D.We will provide one set of check prints/hard copies and electronic files at each submittal stage. The
County will be responsible for reproduction and distribution.
E.Any hourly services will be provided per attached rates; please see Exhibit 2.
We hope this proposal is acceptable. If you have any questions, please call.
Thank you!
Sincerely yours,
HELIX DESIGN GROUP, INC.
Erik Prestegaard
Principal
Attachments
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
A
B
C
D
E
F
design group
AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS
HELIX DESIGN GROUP, INC
DATE JOB NO.
REVISION DATE
DRAWING NO.
9
10
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
A B C D E F G H J K
A B C D E F G H J K
9
10
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Ó HELIX DESIGN GROUP, INC.: All rights reserved.
No part of this document may be reproduced in any
form or by any means without permission in writing
from Helix Design Group.
PL
O
T
T
E
D
:
FI
L
E
P
A
T
H
:
3/
1
/
2
0
2
3
1
1
:
1
2
:
3
6
A
M
C:
\
U
s
e
r
s
\
b
a
s
s
i
m
k
\
D
e
s
k
t
o
p
\
R
e
v
i
t
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
B
a
s
s
i
m
K
\
a
2
0
-
0
3
7
M
as
o
n
C
o
C
o
u
r
t
s
R
e
m
o
d
e
l
_
T
i
_
r
2
0
-
P
h
a
s
e
2
_
b
a
s
s
i
m
k
.
r
v
t
03.01.23 i22-137
A100
FLOOR PLAN
SHELTON, WASHINGTON
CONCEPT DESIGN
PR
O
J
E
C
T
:
i
2
2
-13
7
-
MA
S
O
N
C
O
U
N
T
Y
-
PH
A
S
E
2
MASON COUNTY
-PHASE 2
COURT REMODEL
BUILDING 10
WHITE
1/8" = 1'-0"8A FLOOR PLAN
NORTH
2'8'
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
0'
4'16'1'
2' 8'
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
0'
4'16'1'
1
O:\03-Fee Proposals-Contracts\Proposal Form & Tools\HELIX BILLING RATES\2023 - Rates\Helix Design Group - Billing Rates January 2023.docx
Standard Billing Rates 2023
Position Hourly Rate
Principal $ 220.00
LEED Specialist $ 185.00
Sr. Architect / Project Manager $ 185.00
Job Captain $ 165.00
Architect / Designer $ 145.00
Sr. Interior Designer $ 170.00
Interior Designer $ 145.00
Sr. Graphic Designer $ 170.00
Graphic Designer $ 130.00
Permit Specialist $ 100.00
Administration $ 70.00
NOTE: Rates are subject to annual adjustments at the beginning of each new fiscal year, 01 January.
Proclamation
Supporting Operation Green Light for Veterans
November 6 — 121 2023
WHEREAS,the residents of Mason County have great respect,admiration,and the utmost gratitude for all the men and
women who have selflessly served our country and this community in the Armed Forces; and,
WHEREAS,the contributions and sacrifices of those who served in the Armed Forces have been vital in maintaining
the freedoms and way of life enjoyed by our citizens;and,
WHEREAS, Mason County seeks to honor individuals who have made countless sacrifices for freedom by placing
themselves in harm's way for the good of all;and,
WHEREAS,Veterans continue to serve our community in the American Legion, Veterans of Foreign Wars, religious
groups, civil service, and by functioning as County Veterans Service Officers to help fellow former service members access
more than$52 billion in federal health,disability, and compensation benefits each year; and,
WHEREAS,approximately 200,000 service members transition to civilian communities annually; and,
WHEREAS,an estimated 20 percent increase of service members will transition to civilian life in the near future;and,
WHEREAS, studies indicate that 44-72 percent of service members experience high levels of stress during transition
from military to civilian life; and,
WHEREAS,Active Military Service Members transitioning from military service are at a high risk for suicide during
their first year after military service;and,
WHEREAS, the National Association of Counties encourages all counties, parishes, and boroughs to recognize
Operation Green Light for Veterans; and,
WHEREAS, Mason County appreciates the sacrifices of our United States Military Personnel and believes specific
recognition should be granted;and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, with designation as a Green Light for Veterans County, the Board of
Mason County Commissioners hereby declares the month of November a time to salute and honor the service and sacrifices of
our men and women in uniform transitioning from active service;and,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that in observance of Operation Green Light, the Mason County Board of County
Commissioners encourages its citizens in patriotic tradition to recognize the importance of honoring all those who made
immeasurable sacrifices to preserve freedom by displaying green lights in a window of their place of business or residence from
November 61h through November 121h,2023.
Signed this 3 1"day of October,2023.
Sharon Trask, Randy Neatherlin, Kevin Shutty,
Chair Vice-Chair Commissioner