Posted on November 11, 2024
Thurston County has agreed to help pay for increased dredging in West Bay if the Deschutes Estuary is restored.
The county commission voted 3-1 to approve an interlocal agreement for that purpose, citing wider community benefits.
The vote occurred after a two-week delay and despite opposition from a few vocal opponents who questioned why the county would commit to spending more than $7.6 million through 2050 to help manage sediment in West Bay waters in the heart of Olympia that are frequented by recreational boaters.
Sediment in those waters will need to be dredged in the decades to come once the estuary is restored, according to the agreement with the Washington state Department of Enterprise Services and several local jurisdictions.
The state intends to restore the estuary by removing the 5th Avenue dam at the mouth of the Deschutes River. Mock-ups of the area show a more natural scene with a new 5th Avenue bridge in Olympia.
WHAT CONCERNS ARE THERE? Barry Halverson, a Thurston County resident, has repeatedly voiced his opposition to the agreement at county meetings. At an Oct. 15 meeting, he said this agreement does not serve the best interests of unincorporated Thurston County taxpayers.
“Why should county taxpayers pay to access areas to private marinas and yacht clubs, arguably the richest people amongst us?” Halverson said. “This is wrong and I think you know it.”
Halverson said he supports the estuary project, but he does not believe the county should be paying for dredging. He called for the state to take on the burden because Capitol Lake and the estuary project is their responsibility.
At an Oct. 29 meeting, Halverson reiterated his opposition and said the county does not have the means to meet this obligation.
“Here’s an idea: this ILA is a non-essential activity,” Halverson said. “You have no legal obligation to this ILA and you cannot afford it.”
Still, most of the county commissioners voted to approve the agreement despite some lingering legal and financial uncertainty.
Commissioner Gary Edwards, who is leaving the County Board in January, was the only commissioner who opposed the agreement. Though he’s not against the estuary project, Edwards said the county has not yet figured out how to pay for their contribution.
“I think we should make sure we get it right before we move forward with something. …” Edwards said. “This has been going on for years and I think it can continue to go on, but we should get it right.”
HOW DID THE MAJORITY JUSTIFY THEIR VOTES?
Commissioner Carolina Mejia said this project will benefit the environmental health of the whole county as well as local businesses.
“A restored estuary with public access will draw eco-tourism, recreational fisheries, bird watchers and outdoor enthusiasts to the area, boosting the economy of Thurston County,” Mejia said.
She said the project is of significance culturally, important to local tribes, and it will further the county’s climate goals. Lastly, she said the agreement “fosters a spirit of unity and shared purpose” that should serve as a foundation for tackling future issues.
“Most importantly, a formal interlocal agreement provides an opportunity for Thurston County to advocate for regional collaboration and equitable distribution of resources,” Mejia said.
Commissioner Emily Clouse said she heard constituent concerns about how the county will pay for dredging. However, she still supports the agreement, primarily due to its cultural significance to the Squaxin Island Tribe.
“I just don’t feel like, in good conscious, I could hold something back that’s been going on for such a long time, based on a funding mechanism that’s our responsibility to figure out. …” Clouse said.
She said the county has several years to determine how to pay, and the agreement includes a clause to back out if necessary.
Commissioner Tye Menser said the agreement is part of a strategically designed process that includes leveraging local dollars to get hundreds of millions of dollars from the state and potentially other sources.
“I think this is a very carefully designed effort to bring money into this community to solve a problem at a fairly modest price tag,” Menser said.
Menser also said the county commission has a responsibility to serve residents across the county, not just in unincorporated areas.
Commissioner Wayne Fournier was absent the day of the vote. When reached for comment, Fournier said he supported the ILA.
“My biggest pro in favor of this is this is an economic development project,” Fournier said. “This is a big construction project that’s going to create a lot of jobs and it’s going to bring in hundreds of millions of dollars into Thurston County.”
HOW IS THIS ALL BEING PAID FOR?
Under the agreement, the state DES, City of Olympia, LOTT Clean Water Alliance, Port of Olympia, City of Tumwater and Thurston County are all expected to contribute money for “increased sediment management” resulting from the estuary.
Most of those parties will be expected to contribute an equal 15.4% to the total, except for the City of Olympia which has a 23.1% allocation under the agreement.
Payments are expected to begin in 2027 and rise 4.5% each year, but only if the state goes forward with the project.
Private marinas are expected to contribute a total of $15.5 million through the ILA term for baseline sediment management and no money for increased sediment management.
The Squaxin Island Tribe is also party to the agreement, but they are not expected to contribute financially to sediment management.
“Dredging will be done once the criteria for the dredge event is met and only when it is determined that is necessary to prevent significant adverse impacts to the surrounding marinas,” County Manager Leonard Hernandez said.
The county commission took longer than leaders from other local jurisdictions to approve the interlocal agreement so they could get answers to legal and logistical questions, including whether they had the authority to use money collected from stormwater utility rates on property taxes for their contribution.
The morning of the vote Hernandez told the commission that their legal counsel advised that using the stormwater fund was allowable, but the county was still checking with the state Auditor’s Office to “make sure all our bases are covered.”
Hernandez said the stormwater fund has two parts, one for capital projects and another for operations and maintenance.
He warned the board the agreement may cause the latter component to run out of money quicker than expected.
“So, because the ILA payment increases over time, when we add that into the operation and maintenance component fund, it just causes that fund to go into the red sooner, which would necessitate either dialing down the contribution to capital projects or increasing fees to cover some of those costs.”
Karen Weiss, assistant director of Thurston County Public Works, told the commission the county brings in just under $7 million in stormwater fees annually. About $1.85 million are specifically earmarked for the capital projects fund.
