Tygart Media

Tag: Local Government

  • North Mason School Levy Leading in Early Returns — Results Not Yet Certified

    North Mason School Levy Leading in Early Returns — Results Not Yet Certified

    After two consecutive defeats and more than a year of painful budget cuts, the North Mason School District’s levy is leading in early returns — but results are not yet certified.

    According to the Mason County Auditor’s Office, the April 28 special election produced 2,130 yes votes (53.50%) and 1,851 no votes (46.50%) in combined Mason and Kitsap county totals as of election night. The Mason County Auditor’s website notes that ballot processing continues through May 7, 2026. These are preliminary results. Final certified totals are available at results.vote.wa.gov.

    Superintendent Kristine Michael responded cautiously. “We are very pleased and encouraged by these preliminary results, and we will be monitoring closely as ballots continue to be counted and certified,” Michael told local media on election night. “If this outcome holds, it reflects the trust this community is placing in our schools and our students.”

    The district lowered its ask substantially heading into this vote. The April levy requests $18.9 million over four years at a rate of $1.01 per $1,000 of assessed property value — down from the $1.28 rate attached to the two 2025 proposals that both failed. Before the election, the district also made $1.3 million in additional cuts and eliminated two administrative positions as a concession to community feedback.

    The levy funds programs that state basic education dollars don’t cover: safety officers, school nurses, counselors, athletics, music, Advanced Placement courses, custodians, and curriculum materials. North Mason has been operating without levy funding in 2026 following back-to-back 2025 failures, which forced the district to cut roughly $4.5 million from its budget.

    Even if the levy is certified, funds won’t arrive until April 2027 at the earliest — meaning the programs already cut will not be immediately restored. “Those funds would allow us to avoid making additional reductions, but because we are operating with only a partial year of levy revenue even in a passage scenario, we would not be in a position to restore programs or positions already reduced,” Michael said in a prior statement.

    The school board is composed of Arla Shephard Bull, Leanna Krotzer, Erik Youngberg, Nicole González Timmons, and Nicholas Thomas, with Superintendent Dr. Kristine Michael leading the district from its Belfair campus at 250 E. Campus Drive, Belfair, WA 98528, (360) 277-2300.

    This story will be updated when results are certified by the Mason County Auditor. Track live results at results.vote.wa.gov.

    Related Coverage on the April 28 Levy Result

  • Fiber Reaches the Three Fingers and Shelton Eyes $6M Road Overhaul: Mason County Infrastructure Update — April 2026

    Fiber Reaches the Three Fingers and Shelton Eyes $6M Road Overhaul: Mason County Infrastructure Update — April 2026

    For residents tucked into the Three Fingers area of Mason County — one of the harder-to-reach corners of the county’s broadband map — the wait is over. Mason County Public Utility District No. 3 has reached the April 2026 completion deadline for its Three Fingers Fiber Project, a five-year effort funded in part by a federal USDA ReConnect grant that has connected more than 250 homes and businesses to symmetrical gigabit fiber internet.

    The milestone caps a project that began in early 2020 when PUD 3 was awarded the ReConnect grant. Construction faced early delays tied to COVID-19 and federal procurement processes, but the mainline distribution network was completed well ahead of the April 2026 federal deadline. Over the final months, crews worked neighborhood by neighborhood connecting individual homes and businesses that had applied for service — a process PUD 3 calls its “Fiberhood” model.

    What the Connection Means for Residents

    The Three Fingers buildout brings the total number of homes and businesses connected to PUD 3’s open-access fiber network to more than 3,000 across Mason County, including areas that previously had no broadband options whatsoever. The open-access design is key: rather than locking customers into one provider, PUD 3 owns the physical fiber infrastructure while a roster of local internet retailers competes to deliver service over it. Customers can choose from multiple providers offering unlimited, symmetrical 1,000/1,000 Mbps gigabit internet, HDTV, and phone service — and switch between them without any new wiring.

    For families in the Three Fingers community, that means the same fiber speeds available in urban centers, delivered to homes that until recently had to make do with slow or unreliable connections. Remote workers, students doing homework, and small home-based businesses all stand to benefit directly.

    Residents who have not yet applied for a connection are encouraged to contact PUD 3’s Telecom Team. An Engineering Designer will review the construction needed to reach the home and walk through next steps. The application fee waiver extended through May 31, 2026, for the neighboring Cloquallum Communities Fiberhood may also still be in effect — residents in that area should check pud3.org for current terms.

    Shelton Eyes $6 Million Overhaul of Olympic Highway North — But Bikes Come First

    On the southern end of the county, Shelton is moving — slowly but deliberately — toward the most significant road reconstruction project in nearly four decades. Olympic Highway North, which runs from C Street to Wallace Kneeland Boulevard, has not been paved in 37 years. The pavement is fractured and cracked, and the City of Shelton is now asking the public to weigh in on what the rebuilt road should look like.

    About 50 residents turned out to a community meeting at the Shelton Civic Center on March 10 to hear consultant Transpo Group present four design options. Each option addresses the deteriorating roadway differently, with varying configurations for travel lanes, parking, and — notably — bike lanes. A $3.7 million grant from the Washington State Transportation Improvement Board comes with a condition: the final design must include dedicated bicycle lanes. That requirement is shaping the conversation and has generated discussion among residents about how best to balance competing uses on the corridor.

    The total project cost is estimated at up to $6 million, with the Transportation Improvement Board grant covering the majority of that figure alongside additional city and grant funding. Transpo Group is expected to finalize the design this coming winter, with the project going out for bid in spring 2027 and construction potentially beginning in summer 2027.

    For now, the city is continuing to gather public feedback on the four design options. Residents who want to weigh in can visit sheltonwa.gov for more information on the Olympic Highway North project. The road serves as a key corridor for residents commuting between the northern neighborhoods of Shelton and downtown, and the reconstruction is expected to improve safety, drainage, and accessibility when it eventually gets underway.

    What to Watch

    On the broadband front, PUD 3’s Cloquallum Communities Fiberhood — Phase 2 of which launched in February 2026 covering the Wivell Road, Loertscher Road, and Cloquallum neighborhoods — has a project completion deadline of October 2026. Residents in those areas who have not yet applied should do so before application windows close.

    For Olympic Highway North, the next public milestone will be the release of the final design, expected winter 2026–2027. Shelton residents with strong feelings about bike lanes, parking, or lane configuration should engage with the city now, while options are still on the table.

    Related Coverage

    In-depth reporting on these stories:

    Related Coverage

    In-depth reporting on these stories:

  • The FF(X) Frigate Contract Is Real: What the $282.9M Ingalls Award Means for Naval Station Everett’s Homeport Bid

    The FF(X) Frigate Contract Is Real: What the $282.9M Ingalls Award Means for Naval Station Everett’s Homeport Bid

    For five months, the FF(X) frigate existed primarily as an announcement: the Navy’s replacement for the cancelled Constellation-class program, based on Ingalls’ National Security Cutter hull, with Everett still hoping to win the homeport designation. On April 28, 2026, it became a contract. The Navy awarded HII’s Ingalls Shipbuilding a $282.9 million lead yard support contract — and the first $80.6 million activates immediately, authorizing Ingalls to start cutting and shaping steel. Here is what the Everett community needs to understand about what just changed, and what the homeport campaign looks like from here.

    What the Contract Actually Covers

    The April 28 contract is a lead yard support award — the pre-construction phase work that front-loads design refinement and material preparation before formal ship construction begins. Under its terms, Ingalls is authorized to begin cutting and shaping raw materials for the main structural foundation of the first FF(X) frigate, secure key materials, and finalize design details ahead of full construction authorization.

    Of the initial $80.6 million tranche, approximately 73% — roughly $58.8 million — comes from Navy fiscal year 2026 shipbuilding and conversion appropriations. The remaining 27%, about $21.8 million, is funded through Navy research and development accounts. The full contract runs through April 2028.

    “We are excited to partner with the Navy to bring these preproduction steps under contract to accelerate delivery of the frigates that our warfighters need,” said Brian Blanchette, president of Ingalls Shipbuilding, in the company’s April 28 announcement. The contract was not competed — Ingalls built the Legend-class National Security Cutter on which the FF(X) is based, giving them a direct award under the Navy’s stated rationale.

    The FF(X) Program: Where It Came From

    Former Navy Secretary John Phelan cancelled the Constellation-class frigate program in late 2025 after years of cost growth, schedule delays, and design instability at the lead shipbuilder, Fincantieri Marinette Marine. The Constellation program had been planned for up to 20 frigates and was supposed to be the Navy’s primary small surface combatant for the coming decades.

    In December 2025, then-Secretary Phelan announced the Navy would instead pursue a new frigate — the FF(X) — based on Ingalls’ Legend-class National Security Cutter, a ship already in production and with a known cost and schedule baseline. The first FF(X) is targeted to deliver to the Navy by June 2030.

    The April 28 contract is the first major programmatic action since that December announcement. Steel is now being prepared. The FF(X) is no longer a policy decision — it’s a shipbuilding program.

    What This Means for Naval Station Everett’s Homeport Bid

    When the Constellation program was cancelled, NAVSTA Everett lost its 2021 homeport designation. That designation had named Everett as the homeport for the initial 12 Constellation-class frigates — a commitment worth an estimated $340 million in annual economic activity according to the Economic Alliance Snohomish County.

    The cancellation didn’t kill Everett’s claim — it reset the competition. Snohomish County officials, the Everett delegation, and Rep. Rick Larsen’s office have been actively lobbying the Navy to designate NAVSTA Everett as the FF(X) homeport. The arguments for Everett are strong: an existing frigate-capable pier, an established Navy community with schools, housing, and support infrastructure, and a congressional delegation that has consistently funded Pacific Fleet force structure.

    What the April 28 contract does is start the clock in a new way. With steel being cut and a June 2030 delivery target, the Navy will need to make a homeport decision well before the first ship is commissioned. That decision-making process is now accelerating whether or not an official announcement has been made.

    The full background on NAVSTA Everett’s homeport campaign is covered in this site’s earlier reporting: The FF(X) Frigate and Naval Station Everett: The Complete 2026 Guide and The Snohomish County $340M Frigate Fight.

    The Strategic Picture: Why Everett Still Has the Strongest Case

    Naval Station Everett is home to the Navy’s only Pacific Northwest deepwater homeport. It currently homeports USS Carl Vinson (aircraft carrier), USS Abraham Lincoln (aircraft carrier in rotation), surface combatants, and support vessels. The base has existing frigate pier infrastructure, a Fleet and Family Support Center, commissary, schools, and housing — the full military community infrastructure that a frigate crew requires.

    NAVSTA Everett also benefits from its position within the broader Pacific Fleet posture. The Indo-Pacific is the primary strategic theater for the next generation of U.S. naval forces, and Puget Sound is the Pacific Fleet’s primary West Coast hub. A new frigate class based on a ship already operating in Pacific Fleet service fits naturally into that framework.

    None of that guarantees the homeport — the Navy’s internal process will weigh operational requirements, infrastructure costs, and force structure planning. But the April 28 contract means Everett’s advocates now have a specific, contracted program to point to when making their case to the Pentagon.

    Timeline and What to Watch

    • April 28, 2026: $282.9M Ingalls lead yard support contract awarded
    • Through April 2028: Pre-construction activities, material securing, design finalization
    • June 2030 target: First FF(X) delivery to the Navy
    • Before 2030: Homeport decision expected — no official date announced

    Frequently Asked Questions

    What is the FF(X) frigate?
    The FF(X) is the U.S. Navy’s new small surface combatant, replacing the cancelled Constellation-class. It is based on the Ingalls-built Legend-class National Security Cutter. The lead ship is targeted for delivery by June 2030.

    What did the April 28, 2026 contract authorize?
    A $282.9 million lead yard support contract. The first $80.6 million activates immediately, authorizing Ingalls to begin cutting and shaping steel for the main structural foundation and finalizing design details. The contract runs through April 2028.

    Was Naval Station Everett designated as the FF(X) homeport?
    Not yet. NAVSTA Everett was the designated homeport for the cancelled Constellation-class. The FF(X) homeport has not been decided. Snohomish County and NAVSTA Everett are actively lobbying for that designation.

    What is the economic value of the homeport bid?
    Snohomish County officials have cited approximately $340 million in annual economic impact from NAVSTA Everett’s current operations. A frigate homeport designation would add to that baseline.

    When will the Navy decide where to homeport the FF(X)?
    No official timeline. The first ship delivers in June 2030, so a decision will likely come before that date.

    How many FF(X) frigates will be built?
    No final production number has been announced. The program’s size will be determined through the shipbuilding budget process.

    Who is building the FF(X)?
    HII’s Ingalls Shipbuilding in Pascagoula, Mississippi. The contract was a direct award, not competed, because Ingalls built the National Security Cutter on which the FF(X) is based.

  • North Mason Homeowners: What the Third Levy Defeat Means for Your Property and Your Community

    North Mason Homeowners: What the Third Levy Defeat Means for Your Property and Your Community

    If you own property in North Mason — in Belfair, Allyn, Tahuya, Union, or anywhere else in the district boundaries — Tuesday’s levy result affects both your tax bill and the value of what you own.

    The North Mason School District’s April 28 replacement levy is trailing in initial counts: 46.2% yes against 53.8% no, per the Mason County Auditor’s Office. That’s a third consecutive defeat — February 2025, November 2025, and now April 2026 — for a district that has been warning about program cuts with increasing urgency at each cycle.

    The Tax Question

    The April 28 levy asked for $18.9 million over four years at approximately $1.01 per $1,000 of assessed property value. On a home assessed at $400,000 in North Mason, that’s roughly $404 per year — about $33.67 per month.

    If the levy fails, you don’t pay that amount. That’s the short-term math many no votes were making.

    The longer-term math is more complicated. Research on school quality and real estate values is consistent: communities with strong, funded school programs sustain higher property values. Districts where programs are cut — especially visible programs like athletics and music — often see changes in who chooses to live there, how long families stay, and what buyers are willing to pay. In a market like North Mason’s, where the SR-3 corridor is seeing commercial investment and the PUD electrical infrastructure is being upgraded for growth, school quality is a factor in the community’s trajectory.

    What Fails if the Levy Fails

    The district is required to adopt a balanced budget. Without levy revenue, programs that are not state-funded must be cut. The explicitly at-risk list: middle and high school athletics, music programs, elective and Advanced Placement courses, school security officers, and after-school programming.

    The district has already made $1.3 million in internal cuts — including eliminating two administrative positions — to demonstrate fiscal discipline before asking voters again. That means there is no remaining administrative buffer to absorb another defeat. The cuts, if they come, will be visible and program-level.

    The Certification Timeline

    Election night results are not final. The Mason County Auditor will count remaining ballots over the coming weeks before certifying the outcome. If the levy is ultimately certified as defeated, the district board will need to authorize cuts before the 2026–27 school year budget is adopted — a process that will happen this summer.

    North Mason property owners who want to track results can follow the Mason County Auditor at masoncountywa.gov and the district at northmasonschools.org.

    For the full election results story and program impact details, read the Belfair Bugle’s levy coverage. For context on property values in the broader North Mason market, see Belfair real estate in 2026.

    Frequently Asked Questions for North Mason Property Owners

    What was the property tax cost of the North Mason April 2026 levy?

    Approximately $1.01 per $1,000 of assessed property value per year — roughly $404/year on a $400,000 home, or about $33.67/month.

    Does a failed school levy affect property values in North Mason?

    Research consistently shows school program quality affects residential desirability and property values over time. Visible program cuts — particularly to athletics, music, and AP courses — can influence which families choose to buy in a community and for how long they stay.

    Will property taxes go down if the levy fails?

    The levy would have added approximately $1.01/$1,000 assessed value to your bill. If it fails, that specific addition is not collected. However, other property tax levies and district assessments are not affected by this vote.

    Can North Mason pass another levy if this one fails?

    Yes, but Washington state law restricts timing and frequency of levy elections. The board would need to evaluate legal windows for a future measure. Three consecutive defeats make the political path harder, though not impossible.

  • North Mason Levy Trailing Again: Third Defeat Would Trigger Program Cuts for 2026–27 School Year

    North Mason Levy Trailing Again: Third Defeat Would Trigger Program Cuts for 2026–27 School Year

    The votes have been counted, and the news is hard: North Mason School District’s April 28 replacement levy is trailing in initial ballot results from the Mason County Auditor’s Office — 46.2% in favor with 1,566 yes votes against 1,814 no votes. If the margin holds through certification, it will be the district’s third consecutive levy defeat, following failures in February 2025 and November 2025.

    For Belfair families, North Mason parents, and anyone who cares about what happens inside North Mason High School and the district’s middle schools, the stakes are not abstract. District leadership has been explicit: programs funded by the levy — athletics, music, electives, Advanced Placement courses, security officers, and after-school programming — are on the chopping block for the 2026–27 school year if the levy fails to pass.

    What This Levy Was Asking

    The April 28 measure sought $18.9 million over four years, covering the 2027–2030 collection period, at an estimated rate of $1.01 per $1,000 of assessed property value. That figure was $3.4 million less than the November 2025 proposal — a deliberate reduction after community members said the prior ask was too large.

    The district entered 2026 already operating without levy revenue. Following last year’s two defeats, administrators announced $1.3 million in budget reductions, including the elimination of two administrative positions — moves intended to demonstrate fiscal accountability before asking voters again.

    What Fails When a Levy Fails in North Mason

    Washington state funds basic education. Levies fund the rest — the programs that make school feel like more than warehousing kids. In North Mason, the levy-dependent program list includes:

    • Middle and high school athletics (the Bulldogs program)
    • Music programs at all levels
    • Elective courses and Advanced Placement offerings at North Mason High School
    • School security officers
    • After-school programming

    These are not luxury extras. For many students at North Mason High, athletics and electives are the primary reason they show up engaged every day. For families weighing whether to remain in or relocate to North Mason, the strength of the school program is part of the calculus — especially families connected to PSNS and Bangor Naval Base who have housing options across Kitsap County.

    Three Consecutive Defeats: The Pattern

    February 2025: levy defeated. November 2025: levy defeated with a larger ask. April 2026: levy trailing again with a reduced ask. Each cycle has involved the same community tension — recognition that programs matter, resistance to the tax impact.

    The April 28 measure was the smallest ask of the three. The district had already cut $1.3 million internally. The rate of $1.01 per $1,000 assessed value was positioned as a compromise. And it’s still trailing.

    What this tells district leadership — and what it should tell the community — is that this isn’t primarily a messaging problem or an ask-size problem. It is a trust and prioritization problem that requires a different kind of community conversation than any levy campaign has yet produced.

    What Happens Next

    Results are not final. Certification takes several weeks as remaining ballots are processed and verified by the Mason County Auditor’s Office. The initial count reflects ballots received through election night; additional votes will continue to be tabulated.

    If the levy is certified as defeated, the North Mason School District Board of Directors will face decisions about the 2026–27 school year budget before the fall semester begins. Program cuts would take effect at the start of next school year. The district is required to adopt a balanced budget, meaning cuts are not optional if levy funding doesn’t materialize.

    The district could return to voters with another measure, but Washington state law limits the timing and frequency of levy elections. The path forward is narrow.

    For updates, follow North Mason School District directly at northmasonschools.org and on Facebook at North Mason School District. The Mason County Auditor’s Office posts updated results at masoncountywa.gov.

    For context on the Belfair community’s broader development and housing picture — factors that shape who votes and who stays in North Mason — see our coverage of Belfair real estate in 2026 and how military families at PSNS weigh North Mason housing.

    Frequently Asked Questions

    Did the North Mason levy fail on April 28, 2026?

    The levy is trailing in initial counts — 46.2% yes (1,566 votes) to 53.8% no (1,814 votes) — but the result is not yet certified. The Mason County Auditor will continue tabulating remaining ballots over the coming weeks before certifying the outcome.

    What programs would be cut if the North Mason levy fails?

    The district has identified middle and high school athletics, music programs, elective and Advanced Placement courses, school security officers, and after-school programming as levy-dependent and subject to cuts in the 2026–27 school year.

    How many times has North Mason’s levy failed?

    Three times in consecutive elections: February 2025, November 2025, and now appearing to fail on April 28, 2026. Each election featured a different ask amount.

    How much was the April 2026 North Mason levy?

    $18.9 million over four years (2027–2030) at approximately $1.01 per $1,000 of assessed property value — $3.4 million less than the failed November 2025 proposal.

    When will the North Mason levy results be certified?

    The Mason County Auditor’s Office will certify election results within several weeks of election night as all remaining ballots are counted. Track updates at masoncountywa.gov/auditor/elections.

    Can North Mason run another levy if this one fails?

    Yes, but Washington state law limits levy election timing and frequency. The district would need to evaluate what date and format a future measure could take. There is no automatic next vote — it requires a board decision and legal review of available election windows.

  • Understanding Your Mason County PUD 1 Electric Bill in 2026 — What Changed and Why

    Understanding Your Mason County PUD 1 Electric Bill in 2026 — What Changed and Why

    If you are a Mason County PUD No. 1 customer and your April electric bill looked a little higher than usual, you are not imagining it. New rates took effect April 1, 2026 — and while the increase is real, the district worked to keep it smaller than it was originally authorized to charge.

    What Changed on Your Bill

    The two line items that shifted for residential customers:

    • Basic monthly charge: $45.86 → $47.26 (an increase of $1.40/month)
    • Energy rate: $0.09670 → $0.09960 per kilowatt-hour

    The net effect on a typical residential bill is approximately 3.0%. On a household using 800 kWh per month — a reasonable average for a Mason County home — that works out to about $2.65 more per month, or roughly $32 over a full year. Households that run electric heat, well pumps, or other high-draw equipment will see more, proportionally.

    Why Did Rates Go Up?

    Mason County PUD 1 does not generate its own electricity. Like most public utility districts in Washington State, it purchases wholesale power from the Bonneville Power Administration — the federal agency that markets hydropower from dams on the Columbia River system. In 2026, BPA raised its power rate by 6% and its transmission rate by 11.7%. Those are the costs PUD 1 pays before it can deliver a single kilowatt-hour to your meter.

    Utilities that buy from BPA must pass at least some of those cost increases on to customers. What distinguishes Mason County PUD 1’s response is how it managed the local portion: the district’s board had authorized a larger increase, but staff secured a federal emergency management grant that offset a portion of the cost. The result was a 3.0% customer-facing increase rather than the full authorized amount. The difference doesn’t show up as a line item on your bill, but it’s there in what you’re not paying.

    Is PUD 1 Expensive Compared to Other Options?

    For Mason County residents, PUD 1’s rates remain on the more affordable end of Pacific Northwest electric utilities. Washington State’s mix of hydroelectric power — delivered through BPA — keeps rates across the region lower than the national average, and public utility districts like PUD 1 operate without the shareholder profit requirements of investor-owned utilities. The 3.0% increase reflects external cost pressure from BPA, not district expansion of overhead.

    The Water System Work You May Not Have Noticed

    While rate changes tend to get attention, PUD 1 also wrapped two significant infrastructure projects this spring. The Manzanita Water Storage Project — a $4.6 million construction effort — and the Arcadia Estates water system upgrade both reached completion around the April 14, 2026 board meeting. If you are in one of those rural service areas along the Hood Canal south shore, more reliable water service is the practical result.

    The district also submitted a $5.6 million Congressionally Directed Spending request for the next phase of rural water improvements. If funded, it would extend that infrastructure cycle without requiring a new rate action.

    Questions About Your PUD 1 Bill

    PUD 1 customer service can be reached at (360) 426-8255, or you can visit the district office at 21971 N. Highway 101, Shelton, WA 98584. If your bill looks significantly higher than the 3.0% increase would explain, it’s worth checking whether there has been a usage change at your property — a new appliance, a water heater cycling more in cold weather, or a seasonal shift in how your home is heated.

    Frequently Asked Questions

    When did PUD 1 rates increase in 2026?

    Mason County PUD No. 1 electric rates increased effective April 1, 2026. The basic monthly charge rose from $45.86 to $47.26, and the energy rate increased from $0.09670 to $0.09960 per kWh — an overall 3.0% increase on a typical residential bill.

    Why is the BPA rate increase higher than what I’m seeing on my PUD 1 bill?

    BPA raised its rates 6% (power) and 11.7% (transmission) for 2026, but PUD 1 offset some of the local impact by securing a federal emergency management grant. The result was a 3.0% customer-facing increase rather than the full amount the board had authorized. PUD 1 absorbed the difference through that grant funding.

    How much more will I pay per year?

    At 800 kWh per month, the increase is approximately $2.65/month or about $32/year. Higher-usage households will see more. A home using 1,200 kWh/month would see roughly $4 more per month, or about $48 annually.

    Does the water infrastructure work affect electric rates?

    No — PUD 1’s water system and electric system have separate rate structures. The Manzanita and Arcadia Estates water project completions are funded through water system capital budgets, not electric rates. The April 1 electric rate change is driven entirely by BPA wholesale power cost increases.

    How do I read my PUD 1 bill?

    Your PUD 1 bill shows a fixed basic charge (now $47.26/month) plus a variable energy charge based on kWh used (now $0.09960/kWh). Add the two together plus any applicable taxes or fees to get your total. If you are on a water system, that shows as a separate line. Contact PUD 1 at (360) 426-8255 if you have questions about specific charges.

    For the full story on PUD 1’s infrastructure projects and how the rate was kept below authorized levels, see Mason County PUD 1 Wraps Major Water Projects, New Rates Take Effect April 1. For Mason County property owners with questions about infrastructure and taxes, see Mason County Property Tax Deadline April 30, 2026: Payment Options and What Happens If You’re Late.

  • Mason County PUD 1 Rate Change and Water System Upgrades: What Property Owners Need to Know in 2026

    Mason County PUD 1 Rate Change and Water System Upgrades: What Property Owners Need to Know in 2026

    If you own property in Mason County that draws water or electricity from Public Utility District No. 1, spring 2026 brings two concrete developments: a major rural water infrastructure cycle closing out, and an electric rate increase that took effect April 1 — one that district staff managed to keep lower than originally authorized.

    Two Rural Water Systems Brought Up to Standard

    Mason County PUD No. 1 reported at its April 14, 2026 board meeting that the Manzanita Water Storage Project and the Arcadia Estates water system upgrade are both reaching completion. For property owners in and around those service areas — communities along the southern Hood Canal shoreline, Union, and rural Hoodsport — this represents the end of a multi-year capital investment cycle that directly affects property infrastructure reliability.

    The Manzanita project carried total construction funding of $4.6 million, with the storage tank contract of $3,745,725 awarded to Rognlin’s Inc. of Aberdeen in June 2025. Construction began in September 2025 and reached close-out reporting by the April board meeting. The Arcadia Estates system upgrade was completed in the same reporting window. These are not cosmetic improvements — they are foundational upgrades to the water storage and distribution systems that serve rural residential customers whose properties depend on PUD 1 service for potable water.

    For property owners, updated water infrastructure is a material factor in property condition and insurability. Aging rural water systems carry risk of service disruptions, pressure inconsistencies, and compliance issues. PUD 1’s investment in these systems reduces that risk profile for affected properties.

    PUD 1 has also submitted a $5.6 million Congressionally Directed Spending request — a federal appropriations mechanism — to fund the next phase of rural water system improvements. If awarded, it extends the district’s infrastructure investment without corresponding local rate increases, which is relevant to property owners watching the long-term cost trajectory of utility services in the county.

    April 1 Electric Rate Increase: 3.0% — Here’s the Math

    Effective April 1, 2026, the residential basic monthly charge increased from $45.86 to $47.26. The energy rate moved from $0.09670 to $0.09960 per kilowatt-hour. The net effect on a typical residential bill is approximately 3.0%.

    The cost driver is external: the Bonneville Power Administration raised its power rate by 6% and its transmission rate by 11.7% for 2026. PUD 1, like most public utility districts in Washington State, buys wholesale power from BPA and must pass through a portion of those increases. What’s notable is what PUD 1 held back — the district originally had board authorization for a larger increase, but secured a federal emergency management grant that allowed them to reduce the rate adjustment to 3.0% rather than implementing the full authorized amount.

    For property owners with rental units, vacation properties, or investment parcels in Mason County, the 3.0% increase is modest. On a property drawing 800 kWh per month, the monthly cost increase is approximately $2.65 — about $32 per year. Properties with higher draws (electric heat, water pumps, outbuildings) will see proportionally more, but the rate structure remains among the more affordable in the Puget Sound region.

    What PUD 1 Serves — and What It Doesn’t

    Property owners in Mason County sometimes confuse the three PUDs operating in the county. PUD No. 1 provides electric service to customers across Mason County and also operates rural water systems in specific communities — Shelton, Hoodsport, Union, and areas along the Hood Canal south shore. It is not the same district as PUD No. 3, which serves different territory and recently made news for its fiber internet buildout.

    If your property is on a PUD 1 water system and you are uncertain whether the Manzanita or Arcadia Estates project areas are adjacent to your parcel, the district’s customer service line can confirm service area boundaries. PUD 1 is located at 21971 N. Highway 101, Shelton, WA 98584. The main contact number is (360) 426-8255.

    Frequently Asked Questions — PUD 1 for Mason County Property Owners

    What is the new PUD 1 residential electric rate as of April 1, 2026?

    The basic monthly charge is now $47.26 (up from $45.86) and the energy rate is $0.09960 per kWh (up from $0.09670). The overall increase on a typical residential bill is 3.0%, less than the originally authorized amount because the district secured a federal grant to offset the increase.

    Did PUD 1 complete the Manzanita water project?

    Yes. The Manzanita Water Storage Project reached close-out reporting at the April 14, 2026 PUD 1 board meeting. Total construction funding was $4.6 million, with the primary contract awarded to Rognlin’s Inc. of Aberdeen. The Arcadia Estates water system upgrade was also completed in the same reporting cycle.

    Why did my PUD 1 electric bill go up if PUD 1 is a public utility?

    PUD 1 purchases wholesale power from the Bonneville Power Administration, which serves most Pacific Northwest public utilities. BPA raised its power rate 6% and transmission rate 11.7% for 2026, forcing PUD 1 to pass through a portion of that increase. The district reduced its own rate adjustment to 3.0% by securing a federal emergency management grant.

    Does the $5.6 million federal funding request affect my PUD 1 rates?

    If awarded, the $5.6 million Congressionally Directed Spending request would fund additional rural water system improvements without requiring a corresponding rate increase. It is a pending federal appropriations request, not yet approved, but it represents PUD 1’s strategy for continuing infrastructure investment while managing customer rate impacts.

    How do I contact Mason County PUD 1 about my service area or property?

    PUD 1 customer service is reachable at (360) 426-8255. The district office is at 21971 N. Highway 101, Shelton, WA 98584. Board meetings are public and held monthly — the April 14, 2026 meeting is when the Manzanita and Arcadia project completions were formally reported.

    For the full Mason County PUD 1 story including the rate change details and how PUD 1 reduced the increase below authorized levels, see Mason County PUD 1 Wraps Major Water Projects, New Rates Take Effect April 1. For context on Mason County’s broader infrastructure landscape, see Mason County Government: April 2026 Updates.

  • Buying a Home Near Water in Everett in 2026: What the Critical Areas Update Changes for Anyone Looking at a Lot Near a Wetland, Stream, or Bluff

    Buying a Home Near Water in Everett in 2026: What the Critical Areas Update Changes for Anyone Looking at a Lot Near a Wetland, Stream, or Bluff

    Featured Snippet

    **What should I check before buying an Everett home near a wetland, stream, or bluff in 2026?**

    Before closing on any Everett property near water, a slope, or a wildlife corridor, check the parcel’s critical area overlays on the City of Everett GIS map. The Critical Areas Regulations (Chapter 19.37) are being updated under Washington’s Growth Management Act — the City Council held a public hearing April 15, 2026 and a vote is targeted in the coming weeks. The February 13, 2026 second review draft updates wetland buffer widths, stream classifications, geologic hazard setbacks, and the technical studies any future addition or remodel will require. Critical area overlays affect buildable area, accessory dwelling unit eligibility, fence and outbuilding placement, and occasionally insurance and resale.

    If you’re house-hunting in Everett in 2026 — especially in north Everett, the Bayside corridor, around Howarth Park, near Forest Park, on Rucker Hill, the bluff blocks, or anywhere along a creek or ravine — there is one piece of city code you should understand before making an offer.

    It’s called the Critical Areas Regulations, Chapter 19.37 of the Everett Municipal Code. It’s being updated right now. And the February 13, 2026 second review draft changes some of the technical assumptions a buyer should make about a near-water lot.

    This is the buyer’s read.

    Why It Matters at the Offer Stage

    Critical area overlays govern what can be built on, added to, or modified on a parcel. They don’t just affect a hypothetical future development; they affect concrete decisions a current owner will face:

    • Whether you can add a detached garage or accessory dwelling unit
    • Where you can place a fence relative to a wetland edge
    • What’s required to expand the existing footprint
    • What happens if the existing house needs significant repair or rebuild
    • Whether the lot can be subdivided
    • What documentation is required to remove or replace trees inside a buffer

    A house that looks like it has plenty of yard for an ADU may have most of that yard inside a stream buffer. A backyard with a view of a ravine may include a geologic hazard slope that limits where any new structure can go.

    The new code makes these answers more important to know before close, not after.

    What’s Being Updated and When

    Everett’s last comprehensive Critical Areas Regulations update was 2007. Washington’s Growth Management Act required cities to update by December 31, 2025. Everett published a first review draft on October 31, 2025 and a second review draft on February 13, 2026.

    • April 15, 2026 — City Council public hearing on the update
    • Council vote targeted in the coming weeks
    • The ordinance applies to new development, additions, and disturbance after adoption

    If you close before the vote, the property is yours under the existing 2007-vintage rules. Any future addition, ADU, or significant remodel — though — will likely face the new rules.

    The Five Critical Area Categories — Where Everett’s Buyers Encounter Them

    • Wetlands — Anywhere along Howarth Park’s perimeter, Pigeon Creek’s lowland reaches, the wetlands at Forest Park’s edges, and many low-lying parcels around the city
    • Streams — Pigeon Creek and its tributaries, the Snohomish River edge, and many small unnamed reaches
    • Frequently flooded areas — The regulatory floodplain along the Snohomish River and parts of low Bayside
    • Geologically hazardous areas — The Everett bluff, Rucker Hill’s slopes, the bluff blocks throughout the city, and ravine sides
    • Critical aquifer recharge areas — Less commonly visible, but check the GIS map

    The Buyer’s Checklist

    Before you make an offer on a near-water or near-slope lot:

    1. Pull the parcel’s overlay map

    Use the City of Everett GIS portal to look up the address. The portal layers critical area overlays on top of the parcel boundary, so you can see at a glance which categories apply.

    2. Read the parcel’s history

    Permits, geotechnical reports, wetland delineations, and habitat assessments commissioned by prior owners may be on file with the city. If they exist, your due diligence period is the time to review them.

    3. Verify what existing structures are legally established

    A house grandfathered under earlier code is fine to occupy. A detached structure built without permit, or built inside a buffer that didn’t exist when it was constructed, may not be. Title and permit records resolve this.

    4. Map your future plans against the overlay

    If you bought thinking you’d add an ADU, ask: where on the lot would the ADU sit relative to the wetland buffer, stream buffer, or slope setback under the new rules? The answer determines whether the plan is feasible.

    5. Get a credentialed consultant if the lot is complicated

    For lots with multiple overlays or for lots where the buyer plans significant future work, a wetland or geotechnical consultant during due diligence is well-spent money. They can read the overlays the way the city’s planning staff will.

    6. Ask the listing agent direct questions

    “What overlays touch this parcel?” “What is the buffer width on the wetland or stream?” “What permits has the city issued on this address?” These are reasonable questions during diligence and the answers belong in writing.

    What Changes Specifically Under the New Rules That Buyers Should Know

    • Wetland buffers can be wider under the February 13 draft for some wetland categories. A lot whose old-code buildable area looked generous may have less buildable area under the new rules.
    • Stream classifications can shift, changing the buffer regime on a parcel. A creek that was Category B yesterday may be reclassified, with a different buffer.
    • Mitigation sequencing tightens. Buyers planning future builds should expect a longer documentation path before approval.
    • Geotechnical study expectations are updated. A 2018 geotechnical report on a sloped parcel may no longer satisfy current expectations for a new application.
    • Habitat assessments are scoped more rigorously. Parcels in Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas face additional study burdens.

    The Resale and Insurance Angle

    Some buyers ask whether critical area overlays affect resale or homeowner insurance:

    • Resale. Overlays don’t prevent resale, but they’re a disclosure item. Future buyers will pull the same overlay map. Lots with developable buildable areas that have shrunk under the new rules will price reflective of that.
    • Insurance. Frequently flooded areas (the regulatory floodplain) are a flood insurance question — separate from critical area buffer rules but on the same maps. Lenders may require flood insurance on parcels inside the floodplain. Geologic hazard area designation does not directly affect homeowner insurance pricing in most cases, but a known landslide-prone slope can show up in carrier underwriting.

    When the Critical Areas Update Doesn’t Affect Your Decision

    Plenty of Everett homes are not in a critical area overlay at all. The new rules don’t affect them. The check-the-overlay-map step is what tells you whether to read further. Most Everett buyers will close on parcels with clean overlays and never think about Chapter 19.37 again.

    For the buyers who don’t — the ones looking at the lot with the creek, the wetland, the slope, or the ravine — the 2026 update is part of the homework.

    Frequently Asked Questions

    Q: How do I check whether an Everett property is in a critical area overlay?

    A: Use the City of Everett’s GIS map. Search the parcel’s address; the map layers critical area overlays for wetlands, streams, frequently flooded areas, geologically hazardous areas, and critical aquifer recharge areas.

    Q: Do the Critical Areas Regulations affect closing on a property?

    A: The regulations don’t prevent closing. They affect what you can do with the property after close — additions, ADUs, fences, outbuildings, and substantial alterations. They are part of due diligence, not a closing barrier.

    Q: If I close before the council vote, do the old rules apply forever?

    A: The old rules apply to applications submitted while they’re in force. After adoption, new applications for additions, ADUs, or significant remodels are reviewed under the new rules. Existing legally established structures generally remain.

    Q: Are wetland buffers wider under the February 13 2026 draft?

    A: For some wetland categories, yes — the draft updates tables 37.2 and 37.3 based on Best Available Science. Specific buffer width changes depend on wetland category and rating.

    Q: Do critical area overlays affect homeowner insurance?

    A: Frequently flooded areas (the regulatory floodplain) are a flood insurance question, and lenders may require flood insurance on parcels inside it. Geologic hazard area designation doesn’t directly affect most homeowner insurance pricing, but documented landslide-prone slopes may show up in underwriting.

    Q: Should I get a wetland or geotechnical consultant during due diligence?

    A: For complicated parcels — multiple overlays, future ADU plans, sloped lots — yes. Consultants can read the overlays the way the city’s planning staff will and tell you what your future buildable area actually is.

    Q: Where can I read the actual February 13 2026 draft?

    A: The City of Everett’s planning portal publishes the draft ordinance text and supporting maps. The ordinance itself is the authoritative reference.

    Q: What’s the most common surprise for Everett buyers in critical area parcels?

    A: That the lot’s buildable area, after applying buffer widths, is materially smaller than the parcel boundary suggests — and that ADU plans, in particular, often run into stream or wetland buffers that weren’t visible from the listing photos.


  • What Everett’s Critical Areas Update Means If You Own Land Near a Wetland, Stream, or Bluff: A 2026 Property Owner’s and Builder’s Guide

    What Everett’s Critical Areas Update Means If You Own Land Near a Wetland, Stream, or Bluff: A 2026 Property Owner’s and Builder’s Guide

    Featured Snippet

    **What does Everett’s 2026 Critical Areas Regulations update mean for property owners and builders?**

    If your parcel touches a wetland, stream, frequently flooded area, geologically hazardous slope/bluff, or critical aquifer recharge area, the February 13, 2026 second review draft of Chapter 19.37 changes the buffer width, mitigation sequence, and technical-study requirements you have to meet before disturbing the feature. Wetland buffer tables 37.2 and 37.3 are updated; some categories carry wider buffers than the 2007 rules. Stream classifications are revised. Geotechnical and habitat study expectations are tightened. The City Council held a public hearing on April 15, 2026 and is targeting a vote in the coming weeks.

    If you own a lot, an in-fill site, or a development parcel in Everett that touches any of the city’s critical areas, the regulations updating right now will determine what you can build, where you can put it, and how much site work it will take to get there.

    This is the property owner and builder read of Chapter 19.37’s 2026 update — the practical consequences, before the council vote.

    Step One — Find Out If Your Parcel Has a Critical Area Overlay

    Before you read the ordinance text, check your specific parcel against the city’s GIS overlays. The five categories the rules cover:

    • Wetlands — Howarth, Pigeon Creek, Forest Park edges, low-lying parcels in many corridors
    • Streams — named (Pigeon Creek, Snohomish River edge) and unnamed reaches throughout the city
    • Frequently flooded areas — the regulatory floodplain, including parts of the Snohomish River corridor
    • Geologically hazardous areas — bluff faces, landslide-prone slopes, erosion zones, seismic hazard areas
    • Critical aquifer recharge areas — zones over drinking-water aquifers

    Many parcels carry more than one overlay. A lot above the Snohomish River may sit inside a frequently flooded area at the base, a wetland in the riparian zone, and a geologic hazard area on the bluff. Each overlay applies independently. Where they conflict, the more restrictive rule prevails.

    What Changes in the Wetland Tables

    Tables 37.2 and 37.3 — the wetland buffer width tables — are updated in the February 13, 2026 draft to reflect Best Available Science. The practical translation:

    • Buffer widths shift by wetland category. A Category I wetland (highest functional value) carries a different buffer than a Category IV. The draft recalibrates several of those category-buffer pairings.
    • Some buffers widen. For affected parcels, the developable area inside the parcel boundary shrinks proportionally.
    • Mitigation may now be required where it wasn’t. A site that previously qualified for a buffer reduction or averaging may face a different review under the updated standards.

    Owners with parcels containing a wetland edge should expect the buildable footprint analysis from a 2018 site plan to be different than what the new code produces. The size of the difference depends on the wetland category, the rating, and the parcel geometry.

    What Changes for Streams

    The draft revises stream classifications and the corresponding buffer widths. For owners whose parcels front, back, or contain a stream:

    • Stream classifications can shift. Reclassification under the new draft can move a parcel from one buffer regime to another.
    • Buffer widths recalibrate. The directional change varies by stream type.
    • Wildlife habitat overlays may expand on some corridors. The Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas designation pulls in additional protections.

    The planning commission’s February 17, 2026 hearing recorded that stream provisions were among the most-discussed elements of the draft. Owners with stream-adjacent parcels should check the specific stream’s classification under the new draft against the old code.

    What Changes for Geologic Hazard Parcels

    Buffer and setback rules for landslide-prone slopes and bluff edges are recalibrated. The Everett bluff is the most visible example, but the city has many smaller landslide-classified slopes inland.

    For owners building on or near a slope:

    • Geotechnical study expectations are updated — qualifications, scope, content
    • Setback distances may shift — both from the slope crest and from the toe
    • Erosion and seismic hazard overlays apply independently of the landslide rules

    Practical implication: any project at the design stage that relied on a 2018 geotechnical report should expect the report’s setback and stabilization assumptions to be reviewed against the new standard.

    What Changes for Mitigation Sequencing

    The draft tightens the standard sequence applicants follow when a critical area impact is unavoidable:

    1. Avoid — design the project to avoid the impact

    2. Minimize — if avoidance isn’t feasible, minimize the extent

    3. Mitigate — if minimization isn’t sufficient, mitigate the residual impact

    State law requires this sequence. The draft reinforces and clarifies how Everett applies it. The practical effect: a site plan that could previously skip directly to mitigation must now demonstrate avoidance and minimization first. That changes the documentation burden and the design iteration timeline.

    Technical Study Requirements — The New Documentation Burden

    For applicants, the most operationally consequential change is often the updated qualifications, scope, and content expectations for:

    • Wetland delineations
    • Stream studies
    • Geotechnical reports
    • Habitat assessments
    • Hydrogeological assessments (for aquifer recharge parcels)

    Practical translation: engage credentialed consultants earlier in the design process than the old rules required. Wetland delineations are field-season-dependent (most reliable late spring through early fall in Everett); geotechnical work has its own schedule; habitat assessments may require surveys in specific windows.

    For owners targeting a 2026 or 2027 permit submittal, that schedule matters more under the new rules than the old.

    What Owners Can Do Before the Council Vote

    • Pull your parcel’s overlays now from the city’s GIS map. This is free and doesn’t commit you to anything.
    • Compare the existing rules against the February 13 draft for the categories that touch your parcel. The ordinance text is the authoritative reference.
    • Engage a consultant early if you’re planning to build, add, or sell. Wetland delineations and geotechnical reports take weeks; starting before the vote gets ahead of any application backlog.
    • Submit comment to the council if you have technical objections to specific provisions. The April 15, 2026 hearing was the formal moment, but written comment continues to be accepted on the record before the vote.
    • Plan for the documentation gap. If your project plan was built against 2007-vintage rules, expect to redo at least some of the supporting studies.

    Vesting and Existing Applications — The Critical Practical Question

    Property owners with active applications often ask: which version of the rules applies to my project?

    The general principle in Washington land use law is that complete applications submitted before a code change are vested under the rules in force at the time of submittal. However:

    • “Complete application” has a specific procedural definition the city uses
    • Pre-application meetings do not create vesting
    • Material changes to a vested application may trigger review under the new rules

    For owners with applications in progress, this is the single most important question to confirm with city planning staff before the council vote.

    Frequently Asked Questions

    Q: How do I find out if my Everett parcel has a critical area overlay?

    A: Check the City of Everett’s GIS map. It shows critical area overlays on individual parcels for all five categories — wetlands, streams, frequently flooded areas, geologically hazardous areas, and critical aquifer recharge areas.

    Q: Will the Critical Areas Regulations update affect my existing house?

    A: The regulations primarily govern new development, additions, and disturbance of critical areas. Existing legally established structures are typically grandfathered, though substantial alterations or expansions trigger review.

    Q: Are wetland buffers wider under the February 13 2026 draft than under the 2007 rules?

    A: For some wetland categories, yes. The draft updates tables 37.2 and 37.3 to reflect Best Available Science, which generally produces wider buffers for higher-functional-value wetlands. Specific buffer width changes depend on the wetland category and rating.

    Q: How do the changes affect mitigation sequencing for development?

    A: The draft tightens the avoid/minimize/mitigate sequence — meaning applicants must demonstrate avoidance and minimization steps more rigorously before mitigation is approved as the resolution path.

    Q: When does the Everett City Council vote on the Critical Areas Regulations update?

    A: The council held a public hearing on April 15, 2026 and is targeting a vote in the coming weeks. The exact date will be published on the council agenda.

    Q: Can I still submit comment to the council after the April 15 hearing?

    A: Written comment is generally accepted on the record up to the moment of the vote. The published council agenda for the vote will indicate any additional public comment opportunities.

    Q: What happens to my application if I submitted before the new rules pass?

    A: The general rule under Washington land use law is that complete applications submitted before a code change are vested under the rules in force at submittal. The specific application of vesting to your project should be confirmed with Everett planning staff before the council vote.

    Q: Do I need a wetland delineation or geotechnical report before the vote?

    A: If you are planning a project on a critical-area parcel, getting credentialed studies started early is a practical hedge — both because the studies have field-season constraints and because any post-adoption application backlog can extend timelines. Whether they’re required depends on the project scope and the parcel.


  • Everett’s Critical Areas Regulations Update: A Complete 2026 Guide to Wetland Buffers, Stream Setbacks, Landslide Rules, and the Path to a Council Vote

    Everett’s Critical Areas Regulations Update: A Complete 2026 Guide to Wetland Buffers, Stream Setbacks, Landslide Rules, and the Path to a Council Vote

    Featured Snippet

    **What is Everett’s Critical Areas Regulations update and when does the council vote?**

    Everett is updating Chapter 19.37 of the Everett Municipal Code — the section that governs how close anything new can be built to a wetland, stream, frequently flooded area, geologically hazardous area (landslide-prone slopes and bluffs), or critical aquifer recharge area. The update is required by Washington’s Growth Management Act, which had a December 31, 2025 deadline. The City Council held a public hearing on April 15, 2026. The current draft (the February 13, 2026 second review draft) updates wetland buffer width tables, stream classifications, mitigation sequencing, and the technical-study requirements that property owners and developers must meet on parcels that touch any of those features. A council vote is targeted for the coming weeks.

    If you’ve ever wondered why a vacant Everett lot has stayed vacant for years even when home prices were climbing, the answer is often hidden in a single section of city code: Chapter 19.37, the Critical Areas Regulations.

    That chapter — which protects wetlands, streams, frequently flooded areas, landslide-prone slopes, and important wildlife habitat — sets the buffer widths, building setbacks, mitigation requirements, and technical-study requirements every Everett property owner has to follow before disturbing those features. It is one of the most frequently misunderstood parts of the municipal code, because it cuts across so many properties. Lots near Howarth Park, Pigeon Creek, Forest Park, the Snohomish River edge, and the city’s many ravine-cut blocks all carry critical-area overlays.

    Everett’s update of those regulations is now closer to adoption than at any point in the multi-year process. This is the complete 2026 guide.

    What the City Is Required to Do — and Why

    Critical Areas Regulations updates are not optional. Under Washington’s Growth Management Act (GMA), every city in the state has to periodically review and update its critical-area rules to incorporate Best Available Science — the current scientific consensus on what actually protects sensitive habitat.

    Everett’s last comprehensive update was in 2007. The state’s deadline for the current periodic update was December 31, 2025. The city has been working toward this update for several cycles.

    The city published a first review draft on October 31, 2025 and a second review draft on February 13, 2026. The February 13 draft is the version under active council consideration.

    The council does not have the option of leaving the rules alone. The only choice is what version to adopt and on what schedule.

    The Five Categories of Critical Areas

    The Everett Municipal Code defines five categories of critical areas:

    • Wetlands — areas saturated long enough to support hydrophytic vegetation
    • Streams and other Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas — including riparian corridors and habitat for state-listed species
    • Frequently flooded areas — typically the regulatory floodplain
    • Geologically hazardous areas — landslide-prone slopes, erosion zones, and seismic hazard areas
    • Critical aquifer recharge areas — zones where surface activity affects groundwater used for drinking water

    Each category has its own buffer requirement and its own mitigation standard, and a single parcel can be touched by more than one. A property near a wetland on a steep slope is subject to both wetland and geologic-hazard rules, with the more restrictive prevailing.

    What’s Changing in the February 13 Draft

    The February 13 draft preserves the basic five-category framework but updates several technical components that determine how the rules apply on a given lot. Among the most consequential:

    Wetland Buffer Widths

    The draft updates Tables 37.2 and 37.3 — the wetland buffer width tables — to reflect current Best Available Science. In practice, that adjusts how many feet of undisturbed land must remain between a wetland edge and a building, fence, or hard surface.

    For some wetland categories, the draft buffers are wider than the rules currently in place. For property owners with parcels touching wetland edges, that translates into different developable area calculations than the 2007-vintage code allowed.

    Stream Buffer Standards

    The draft revises stream classifications and corresponding buffer widths. Stream buffers were one of the most-discussed elements at the planning commission’s February 17 hearing.

    Streams in Everett include named corridors (Pigeon Creek, the Snohomish River edge, smaller drainages within Forest Park and Howarth Park) and a number of unnamed reaches. The classification of a given stream determines its buffer width. Reclassification under the new draft can move a parcel from one buffer regime to another.

    Mitigation Sequencing

    The draft tightens the standard sequence applicants have to follow when an impact to a critical area is unavoidable. The standard sequence — avoid, minimize, mitigate — is the framework state law requires; the draft reinforces and clarifies how Everett applies it.

    Technical Study Requirements

    The draft updates the qualifications, scope, and content expectations for the wetland delineations, stream studies, geotechnical reports, and habitat assessments that applicants must submit. For property owners, that often means engaging credentialed consultants earlier in the design process than was practiced under the old rules.

    Geologic Hazard Areas

    Buffer and setback rules for landslide-prone slopes and bluff edges are recalibrated in the draft. The Everett bluff is the most visible example, but the city has many smaller landslide-classified slopes inland.

    The Public Process Underway

    The council has been working through the draft on a structured schedule:

    • October 31, 2025 — first review draft published
    • February 13, 2026 — second review draft published; the version now in front of the council
    • February 17, 2026 — planning commission hearing on the draft
    • April 15, 2026 — City Council public hearing on the proposed update
    • Council vote targeted in the coming weeks

    The April 15 public hearing was the formal moment for residents and developers to put their objections, support, or technical concerns into the record. The council is now working through the testimony before voting.

    Who Is Affected

    The set of properties touched by Chapter 19.37 is broader than most residents realize. Critical area overlays in Everett include:

    • Lots fronting or backing onto Pigeon Creek
    • Properties near Howarth Park’s wetland edges
    • The bluff and slope corridors in north and west Everett
    • Parcels along the Snohomish River edge, including the Bayside and Riverside corridors
    • Forest Park’s perimeter and the ravine-cut blocks adjacent to it
    • Any lot inside a geologic hazard overlay (frequently visible on the city’s GIS map)
    • Properties inside the regulatory floodplain
    • Lots inside a critical aquifer recharge area

    For homeowners doing additions, fences, or accessory dwellings, the rules apply. For developers proposing infill, the rules drive site design. For homebuyers evaluating a lot, the rules determine what the parcel actually allows.

    How Resident and Developer Concerns Tend to Diverge

    The two largest constituencies have predictably different stakes:

    • Residents near wetlands, streams, and bluffs generally support stronger buffer protections, citing flooding, slope failure, water quality, and habitat
    • Developers and property owners with affected parcels generally argue against wider buffers, citing reduced developable area and the difficulty of meeting the technical-study burden

    The April 15 hearing reflected both. The Council’s job is to adopt a version that meets the GMA’s Best Available Science requirement while balancing the city’s affordability and housing supply objectives — including the buildable land assumptions that underpin the city’s Comprehensive Plan.

    What Property Owners Can Do Before the Vote

    • Check your overlay. The city’s GIS map shows critical area overlays on individual parcels. Knowing what categories touch your property is the first step.
    • Track council agenda. The council vote will appear on a published agenda. Public comment is generally accepted up to the moment of the vote.
    • Read the February 13 draft directly. The actual ordinance text is the authoritative reference.
    • Engage a credentialed consultant if you are planning a build, addition, or sale. Wetland delineations and geotechnical reports take weeks; starting before the vote gets you ahead of any application backlog the new rules may produce.

    Frequently Asked Questions

    Q: When does the Everett City Council vote on the Critical Areas Regulations update?

    A: The council held a public hearing on April 15, 2026 and is targeting a vote in the coming weeks. The exact date will be posted on the published council agenda.

    Q: What is Chapter 19.37 of the Everett Municipal Code?

    A: Chapter 19.37 is Everett’s Critical Areas Regulations — the section governing development near wetlands, streams, frequently flooded areas, geologically hazardous areas (landslide-prone slopes), and critical aquifer recharge areas.

    Q: When was Everett’s last Critical Areas Regulations update?

    A: 2007. The current update is the periodic state-required refresh under Washington’s Growth Management Act. The state deadline was December 31, 2025.

    Q: What categories of critical areas does Everett regulate?

    A: Five: wetlands; streams and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas; frequently flooded areas; geologically hazardous areas (landslide, erosion, seismic); and critical aquifer recharge areas.

    Q: What is changing in the February 13, 2026 draft?

    A: The most consequential changes are updated wetland buffer width tables (37.2 and 37.3), revised stream classifications and buffer standards, tightened mitigation sequencing, updated technical-study requirements, and recalibrated buffer and setback rules for landslide-prone slopes and bluff edges.

    Q: Does the update apply to existing buildings?

    A: The Critical Areas Regulations primarily govern new development, additions, and disturbance of critical areas. Existing legally established structures are typically grandfathered, though substantial alterations or expansions trigger review.

    Q: Where can I read the actual draft ordinance?

    A: The City of Everett’s planning portal publishes the February 13, 2026 second review draft. The ordinance text and supporting maps are the authoritative reference.

    Q: What is “Best Available Science” in the context of this update?

    A: A standard required by Washington’s Growth Management Act. Cities must consider current peer-reviewed scientific consensus on habitat protection, water quality, flooding, and slope stability when adopting critical-area rules. The February 13 draft is Everett’s attempt to incorporate that standard for the first time since 2007.