EVERETT, AUG.7– Tuesday’s Election Night saw a majority of Snohomish County voters not approve the Port of Everett’s boundary expansion.
Currently, 67.17% of total voters have voted “no” to the boundary enlargement. There could be various reasons as to why this happened but mainly conflict with the Tulalip Tribes and the lack of transparency about where the extra tax money was going, as stated in the voter guide argument against the expansion by lawyer Ron Steingold and Snohomish resident Morgan Davis, could have swayed the voters to vote against the expansion.
“Despite the Port of Everett’s boundary enlargement measure not making it over the finish line, the Port of Everett remains committed to its important work as an economic driver for Snohomish County and beyond,” Kate Anderson, Marketing & Media Coordinator for the Port of Everett said.
The Port of Everett proposed to expand its boundaries to almost all of Snohomish County in Dec. 2023. If the measure had passed, property owners within the Port’s boundaries would pay 18.8 cents per $1,000 of property value. The Port expansion would have made Port resources available to Snohomish, Lake Stevens, Lynwood, Arlington, and Bothell, as well as the land owned by the Tulalip Tribe.
The Tulalip Tribes on June 22 stated that they felt the Port of Everett treated them unfairly in the outreach process. The Port met with the Tulalip Tribes in January to host an informational meeting, according to the statement, and the Tribes claimed the Port went to the Snohomish City Council falsely claiming the Tribe approved the measure.
“The Port is not treating us like the sovereign nation that we are. They have not invited us to the table to make decisions about our shared lands and waters. Nor have they outlined a clear way forward for Tulalip to be represented or included in future Port development, expansion, or management despite our clear legal rights in Port-occupied waterways,” Tulalip Chairwoman Teri Gobin said.
Morgan Davis, a retired Boeing employee, took the Port expansion initiative to court in May. He challenged the wordage on the ballot to include the words “taxing district.” He believed that it was an ethical lapse and that all residents should know that they were going to get taxed if the boundaries had expanded. A Snohomish County Superior Judge ruled against Davis.
“If the measure were to have passed, the Port would have reopened its Strategic Plan for a full public outreach process to determine future initiatives and projects to invest in within the enlarged district boundary,” Anderson said.
Tulalip Tribes previously encouraged voters to vote no on the expansion to support the Tulalip and Washington tribes in their goal for no “taxation without representation”.
While the tribes don’t have to pay taxes to the Port, the Port would “create a tax on members with certain land statuses and non-Tulalips who live on the Reservation,” Gobin said.
The Port has stated that they won’t tax or regulate the land and waters owned by the Tulalip Tribes if the Port expanded.
“This was the first time in our generation that residents across the County had the opportunity to vote on bringing the value and economic tools of the Port to the greater Snohomish County community. With this outcome, the Port still won’t be able to invest outside of its limited boundaries, but we will strive to ensure our advocacy and economic value continue to stretch beyond our district,” Anderson said.
The Port has stated that it is self-funded, so none of the tax dollars would go toward maintaining the Port or paying its staff. Instead, the money is reinvested back into the community to fund public access, environmental cleanups, and capital projects.
“The Port will continue to make strategic investments within its existing boundaries as resources allow with a focus on creating quality jobs, supporting trade and transportation, adding public access amenities, restoring and protecting the environment, and more,” Anderson said.
