Friday, October 2, 2026
The Olympia City Council is set to vote on a new public safety sales tax that would increase the city’s total sales tax rate to 9.9% and generate an estimated $3 million annually for public safety initiatives.
The proposed ordinance is one of the items on the consent calendar scheduled for approval by the council at a special meeting on Monday, Nov. 10.
The proposed ordinance would implement a 0.1% councilmanic public safety sales and use tax authorized under Washington House Bill 2015, which became effective on July 27.
HB 2015 established two new funding pathways for cities and counties to support public safety initiatives: a three-year, $100 million grant program for hiring, retaining and training police officers and co-responders, and it authorized a 0.1% local sales and use tax for broader public safety and criminal justice purposes.
Although the grant program and the sales tax established under HB 2015 are separate funding mechanisms, both require jurisdictions to meet specific policy and training standards to qualify.
A city may adopt the 0.1% sales tax without applying for or receiving grant funds, but it must still comply with the same standards outlined for the grant program.
To be eligible for grant funding, a city must have either received funds or authorized at least one of three public sales taxes — two existing options and the new tax created under HB 2015.
According to a staff report, Olympia meets the eligibility criteria for the grant program and the new sales tax. The city currently imposes both the Criminal Justice Sales Tax and the Public Safety Sales Tax.
Finance Director Mike Githens estimates the 0.1% tax increase would generate approximately $3 million per year in a full fiscal year. The additional revenue would be dedicated to enhancing Olympia’s public safety infrastructure, including staffing, training and community-based response programs.
The city council was briefed on HB 2015 in August and September. City Manager Jay Burney presented updated budget assumptions showing the potential impact of the proposed tax increase.
Following the presentation, the city council directed staff to proceed with the implementation of the Public Safety Sales Tax authorized under HB 2015.
Following the presentation, the city council directed staff to proceed with the implementation of the Public Safety Sales Tax authorized under HB 2015.
City staff noted in their analysis that sales taxes are considered regressive because they apply uniformly to most necessary household expenditures, potentially placing a higher burden on lower-income households who spend a larger portion of their income on purchases.
12 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
KatAshe
As much as no one likes paying taxes, please note, we don’t pay income taxes. There are cities outside Washington state with sales taxes over 12%, and there are cities, counties and states with higher property taxes.
Friday, November 7, 2025 Report this
Honestyandrealityguy
I just feel they are spending like "drunken sailors". We can't do this in our households. We have to budget and make important decisions on what to buy and what you may have to give up. At some point, if taxes are just raised and raised, the tax could be in excess of 100%. Common sense. Budgets.
And in lieu of income taxes, the state has "business and occupations" taxes which are much higher than income taxes are in other states. And the state somehow spends all of that too.
Friday, November 7, 2025 Report this
USA_Ronin
Income taxes are being proposed for Washington State right now. These thieves are trying to make it sound reasonable because they only want to "tax the rich". Define "rich". Anyway, I'm not a Marxist.
Tax! Tax! Tax! That's all these thieves know.
No more taxes!
Friday, November 7, 2025 Report this
TheVirtualOne
This article doesn’t fully disclose cost and other issues surrounding this proposed sales tax increase. The tax is described as a “public safety tax”, but the city has very broad leeway on how the funds are used. They can be used to hire police, but can also be used for fire, alternative services, homeless response, and more. This is also a money grab on two different points: 1) HB 2015 authorized the city to add this new tax, and 2) they are pursuing three year public safety state grants. Have you ever seen a government body pass up the opportunity to add a new tax or receive a grant when given the option?
I do not have confidence the City of Olympia will utilize these new funds to fight crime. With so much leeway on how the money is spent, history has shown they are likely to throw more dollars into the bottomless homeless or alternative services pit. That has to stop. If we've learned nothing, it's that this homeless government industrial complex has created a monstrosity that is solving nothing, and yet costs more as each year passes.
The grants being pursued here are also short term and will end in three years, so they are back end loaded. With the city already strapped with tens of millions in budget shortages due to overspending, this only sets them up for future shortfalls, kicking the can down the road. Take grant money now, hire more people, grants goes away, ask for more money to keep temporary grant funded positions.
Further, an increased sales tax is regressive in that it has a greater impacts lower income people. Washington cities have some of the highest sales taxes in the country. In addition, on the heels of this years $9 billion state tax increase, this is just a continuation of the tax and spend mentality delegated from the state to the city via House Bill 2015.
Friday, November 7, 2025 Report this
36098501
Many things go full circle in Olympia politics.
Several Council Members, along with a number of people who spoke at the last Council meeting, have directly contributed to the high level of taxation they now publicly lament in public meetings and in the pages of JOLT and The Olympian.
They have conveniently forgotten their own role in shaping Olympia’s high cost of housing and in steadily increasing taxes over the past two or three decades.
Not long ago, some of these people helped orchestrate one of the most regressive tax measures in Olympia history—one that imposed new tax burdens on basic essentials such as electricity, water, natural gas, and sewer services. As is often the case in Olympia, the weight of these taxes fell hardest on those least able to afford them.
The 2004 3% Utility Tax is just one example.
Members of Olympia’s political circle form a tightly knit cabal, largely shielded from outside feedback. They have become so insular that they feel comfortable traveling to other communities and conferences across the country to educate other cities on how to tax their citizens more—even while representing Olympia in their official capacity.
https://www.slideserve.com/neviah/olympia-s-parks-and-sidewalks-tax-leaving-butt-prints-in-the-sands-of-time
Saturday, November 8, 2025 Report this
jimlazar
I do not support the public safety tax. The sales tax is the most regressive tax of all.
As I testified to the City Council, they should move forward with a levy lid lift, restoring the massive cuts to property taxes that have occurred under Initiative 747. Before 747, property taxes could rise with inflation, so the City would have funding for police, fire, parks, and other important public services. The property tax is relatively progressive in comparison to the sales tax, because richer people live in more expensive houses.
That initiative passed statewide, but lost in Olympia.
The problem is that the legislature has given the City Council the authority to raise the sales tax, but has not amended I-747 to allow property taxes to keep up with inflation.
Yes, I have advocated for some taxed (the voted utility tax for parks and sidewalks, for example.
But I have also opposed other taxes -- most recently working to defeat the ill-conceived Regional Fire Authority proposal, which would have taxed homes based on the square root of the square feet. That's right, you heard the formula. It means that a mansion would pay only a fraction more than a cottage, even though fire protection is a benefit based on the value of the house. Had the Cities of Olympia and Tumwater simply opted for a property tax approach, based on value, there would have been little organized opposition.
At KatAshe points out, we don't pay a city or state income tax here. People in other places do. What we get instead is a tax system rated #2 in regressivity in the nation.
Saturday, November 8, 2025 Report this
JustinStang
While I believe that sales tax increases are a regressive tax that ends up disproportionately affecting lower income and vulnerable populations, I also see that the city of Olympia is facing financial constraints that require difficult decisions. Unfortunately, the $100 million grant from WA State appears tied to the City implementing this. This is a short-term band-aid and more thorough thought and consideration are needed to address this issue long-term in a way that best considers affordability for residents. That said, spending and the finer details of the city budget need to be examined for financial sustainability. While I don't love the regressive nature of the system, it's the one we currently have and, therefore, must work within.
One recurring theme throughout the City Council campaign was that many city residents are concerned with speeding cars and traffic enforcement. If OPD can use these funds to fully staff and maintain a full time traffic safety enforcement officer, then that is progress. If the city can dedicate OPD resources to the TCSO narcotics task force, then that will help too. As others mentioned, accountability and ensuring these funds remain dedicated to impactful measures is always key.
Saturday, November 8, 2025 Report this
KarenM
The Parks and Sidewalks tax measure that is described in the link in the 98501 comment had solid community support. And, since a large portion of the utility tax is paid by business, it spread the burden out beyond households. The community asked for this and they voted for it.
A parks plan was developed with public input and people realized that we don't have enough land for parks for future needs. And we had many other parks needs that were unmet. The city did a survey that showed that people wanted more parks and they also wanted more sidewalks installed where we didn't have them.
Before the Council put the measure on the ballot, a community group had formed to ask that the tax measure be put on the ballot. When the community voted, it passed by a large margin. I am proud of that effort and everyone who worked on it. Today we have a long list of park properties that otherwise may not have been developed. Many more people can walk safely on sidewalks where there were none.
Since the passage of that tax measure the city has purchased over 25 parcels for parks including several neighborhood parks. And many of those have been developed and are cherished spaces by the community. Where ever you live in Olympia, you are near a park or trail.
17 acres of West Bay waterfront: Multiple segments of the Karen Fraser Woodland Trail; Parts of Isthmus and Heritage Park; Kaiser Woods; LBA Woods: West Bay Woods; Yelm Highway Park; Rebecca Howard Park
New sidewalks have been built in all areas of the city along streets where there was no safe walkway. Here is a list of many of those projects:
Division Street NW from Walnut Road to Conger Avenue
Bigelow Avenue NE from Puget Street to Central Street
San Francisco Avenue NE from East Bay Drive to Bethel Street
Brawne Avenue NW from Rogers Street to West Bay Drive
Bush Avenue NW from Birch Street to Division Street
Boulevard Road SE from 22nd Avenue to Log Cabin Road
Decatur Street SW from 9th Avenue to 14th Avenue
Henderson Boulevard SE from Watershed Park to Carlyon Avenue
Miller Avenue NE from Fir Street to Friendly Grove Road
West Bay Drive NW from Schneider Hill Road to Garfield Avenue
22nd Avenue SE from Cain Road to Boulevard Road
Fern Street SW from 9th Avenue to 14th Avenue
26th Avenue NE from Gull Harbor Road to Bethel Street
My advocacy about city budgets is often about honoring the commitments that have been made through voted measures. When we do decide to tax ourselves, the council needs to respect that choice and use the funds as directed by the voters.
Saturday, November 8, 2025 Report this
LindaD
Sales taxes are always regressive. Olympia likes to be progressive. Let’s be honest, city. The purpose here is to impose a heavier tax burden on the lower working class and the poor to hire more police to keep them in line so they don’t annoy the rest of us.
Sunday, November 9, 2025 Report this
Wesley
Here's hoping the full amount of revenue from this new tax is used to arrest and jail our vagrants.
Sunday, November 9, 2025 Report this
ClownPenis88
TAX on Safety ?! Thurston County judges commissioners don't even enforce any state laws on crime. More audits on waste ,fraud & abuse for next year. And more lawsuits towards the state
Tuesday, November 11, 2025 Report this
36098501
The previous comment was not a critique of how the tax money was spent. That would require an entirely different discussion.
The last point of the comment was intended to provide an example, from long ago, of how even small-town government can lose sight of all the people they represent in the quest to get the results they want.
There aren’t many people in the community that don’t want more nice parks or sidewalks.
The campaign 2004 to increase the Utility Tax rate by 3%, from 6% to 9%, was coordinated by Council Members, City Staff and allied political insiders using resources not available to the broad public. They positioned themselves to utilize and manipulate City functions in a manner that even casual observers would justly characterize as Machiavellian.
Words and phrases like “Get the money!”, “infiltrated”, “stacked”, “influence the process”,” convinced to be silent”, “We won!” tell the harsh reality of the “means” while revealing people and a campaign that treated some voters as opponents to outmaneuver, not community members to serve and represent.
The long list of completed projects reads less as ensuring good governance than a reflexive defense to the fair criticism of the tactics and methods used to secure an objective. The reaction is understandable.
A 57% election result does seem like a solid mandate, but it is surprisingly modest given there is near-universal support for parks and sidewalks. A well-resourced campaign, a sophisticated strategy led by political insiders faced no organized opposition and only cleared the 50% threshold by 1,500 votes.
Imposing regressive tax increases on non-discretionary utilities is not a sustainable or rational strategy for maintaining a diverse and equitable community. Thought leaders in public utility policy widely recognize this, resulting in many states and municipalities prohibiting taxes on basic utilities. The same idea applies to the exemption of taxes on essentials such as prescription medications, medical care, food and housing.
While the outcome was achieved through democratic means, it raises important questions about how majority decisions can disproportionately affect lower-income residents.
It is a questionable economic premise that taxing local businesses make a tax increase more acceptable. The link to local consumers may be less visible, but taxes still lead to higher prices. It is politically convenient because local businesses cannot vote. Employers do speak by choosing where to locate.
If there is a preference for the City to tax local employers, one would expect the City to have worked relentlessly over the decades to attract, nurture, and expand its employer base to build a diverse economic foundation to limit taxing local citizens. Yet, many would agree that this has not been the City’s practice.
In a 2016, Rotter’s Toyota, a local family business and once Olympia’s largest sales tax revenue source, said “We’ve been here for 26 years and nobody from the City has ever reached out to us. Not once.” “When we call, we have to go through layer, upon layer, upon layer of people.” Now, the dealership has moved to Tumwater and Olympia no longer receives several million dollars a year of sales tax revenue from a local family’s growing business.
The same neglect extends to mission-driven organizations in the community.
Habitat for Humanity and Homes First were having “challenges navigating City processes and municipal codes.". “We are trying to do it (Affordable Housing). We feel like there are a lot of barriers being put up in our way.". Projects utilizing free land, community volunteer labor and subsidized materials couldn’t pencil out after incorporating the costs required to work through the City’s permitting process.
If the City isn’t representing those in Olympia challenged by affordability, local employers, builders or mission-driven nonprofits then who is it representing? To outside observers, the process can appear guided more by current political whim than by thoughtful public need.
The 2004 Utility Tax rate increase is just one of many examples of gradual tax increases and increased bureaucracy that, over time, when all are layered together, make it harder for many in our community to afford living or doing business here.
The ends remain worthy. The means didn’t reflect the community’s values to serve all of Olympia – not just the majority.
Thursday, November 13, 2025 Report this