EVERETT—Snohomish County voters overwhelmingly turned down a ballot measure to expand the existing boundary of the Port District. As of August 7, the ballot measure has only garnered 39.76% support.
On March 12, 2024, the Snohomish County Council unanimously approved a motion to place the petition by the Port of Everett for boundary enlargement on the August 2024 primary ballot.
Council action follows a historic first by the Port of Everett Commission, which on December 19, 2023, unanimously passed Resolution No. 1220 directing Port staff to submit a proposition of enlarging the boundary of the existing Port District to include most of Snohomish County to the County Council for voter consideration.
Below is a statement from the Port to residents regarding the latest vote:
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.
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.
Over the past 106 years, the Port has invested billions into the local economy and supports more than 40,000 jobs in the region today. 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.
We look forward to continuing to work with our community partners, including the Tulalip Tribes, the business community, and municipal partners to continue to add economic value and jobs throughout our region.
ABOUT PORT BOUNDARY EXPANSION BALLOT MEASURE
As an economic driver and job creator in the region, the Port of Everett is always looking into ways that the tools and resources unique to ports can create new opportunity and add value to the communities it serves. The caveat? Ports are limited in their ability to operate or invest in projects outside their district boundary lines.
While many large port districts in Washington state are county-wide — including all other ports in the state that operate international seaports — the Port of Everett is not. Currently, Port boundaries cover most of Everett, portions of Mukilteo, and small parts of Marysville and unincorporated Snohomish County — a total of about 110,000 residents. To put this into perspective, with nearly 830,000 residents and growing, only about 15% of the County has access to certain port tools and investments. This significantly restricts how the Port of Everett can help advance economic and community priorities across Snohomish County, which is one of the fastest growing counties in the state.
The topic of Everett Port boundary expansion is not a new one. It has come up many times over the course of the Port’s nearly 106 years of service, as the current Port District and greater Snohomish County area have experienced significant growth and evolving economic needs over the past century. However, this is the first time it is coming up for a vote.
During the Port of Everett’s Strategic Plan outreach in 2018/2019, the Port sought public feedback to help set a roadmap for the next decade of Port initiatives (2020-2030). During public engagement intended to inform the Port’s 2020 Strategic Plan, the Port heard general interest in expanding Port District boundaries, linked to a desire to see the Port’s strategic investments and infrastructure improvements stretch into other parts of Snohomish County.
Given the Port’s current limitations to support economic and community priorities outside of its current boundary line, combined with the significant economic challenges and opportunities facing the County today and initial community interest, the Port Commission tasked staff with formally exploring potential boundary expansion. It became a Strategic Action Item of the Port’s 2020 Strategic Plan, which was adopted by the Commission in December 2019.
A recently completed exploratory effort on Port boundaries included conducting a formal assessment of the economic value and legal implications of expanding Port District boundaries, and a formal call for input by community leaders, residents and businesses in the area to gauge interest in Port tools and resources being offered to more areas of the County where they are not currently accessible.
Given the Port’s geographic and financial limitations, the challenges and opportunities before us, and the general interest heard during recent outreach on the topic, the Port Commission believed it was time to send it to the ballot.
One Response
The proposal to expand the boundaries of the Port of Everett was not and cannot be justified based on a lot of generalities regarding economic and financial benefits to the rest of Snohomish County. As such it, can only be seen and evaluated as nothing more than a land and cash grab. There’s only one conclusion that residents of the county can reach: the motivation is the increase in taxing authority by the Port of Everett to every resident to get more cash for port commissioners’ pet projects. Unlike the Port of Seattle, which runs Seattle-Tacoma Int’l Airport, the Port of Everett has no airport under its authority. Neither Paine Field (Snohomish County Airport) nor Arlington Municipal Airport, the 2 largest airports in the county, are owned or otherwise controlled by the Port of Everett (maybe that’s part of the port’s plan: to take control of one or both airports).
I am and will remain unalterably opposed to the expansion of the Port of Everett district boundaries unless there are specific benefits identified, goals for infrastructure that are under the purview of a port district that can be identified for communities throughout the county. Vague generalities about economic benefits for all is no justification for the increased taxing authority for the PoEv.