By Marianne Lincoln

I testified in Olympia today in front of the Local Government Committee. I also had a chance before the meeting to chat with one of the bill sponsors, Senator Conway.

I sent Senators Conway and Nobles a copy of my testimony with suggestions and details about an incorporation campaign that may need consideration during a process generated by the County rather than the people of a community.

Make no mistake, this bill is about Pierce County and the huge area of unincorporated urban growth they created and cannot afford. People in these areas want sidewalks, streetlights, more traffic signals, crosswalks, more police, and less crime. County governments are not funded in state law to supply these things. Cities are. The fact that Frederickson, Spanaway, South Hill, Parkland, Summit, and Midland have not incorporated is causing a great deal of the budget woes. Pierce County is funding a city the size of Tacoma and want to get out from under it.

I could drop another incorporation for Spanaway tomorrow. I still have all that material. But then I would need signature gatherers. I have trouble waking these days. Due to the proximity to the military base, voters are a patchwork around here. One is six houses has a registered voter.

Truth be told, if I had not been stopped by COVID in our last attempt and we had succeeded, Spanaway would NOT have that tiny home village. (Yes, I wash my hands on this one. I tried.) If you don’t take charge of your own community, people in other parts of the county do it to you. You saw it last year with that project. We saw it with the dump in Graham.

I did not support or oppose the legislation today. I pointed out its missing pieces. I hope their programs analysts pay attention and add the necessary detail to this bill.

Here is my testimony:

Marianne Lincoln
Voter in the 29^th LD

Testimony regarding SB 6181 – on incorporation of urban areas by County fiat.   1-22-2026

* * * * * * * * TVW link https://tvw.org/video/senate-local-government-2026011330/

For your reference, I have probably been the most recent petitioner for incorporation in Pierce County. My most recent effort was linked in the News Tribune article regarding this bill and today’s hearing.

Considerations. There is a myriad of things to consider when designing an incorporation proposal within a community. I want you to be aware, this bill is missing many of those details and is not ready to become law as it is currently written. Thank you for this opportunity to make suggestions to improve this legislation to allow certain Counties to file an incorporation petition without gathering signatures.

Voter Signatures. Granted, signatures can be one of the hardest parts, because it is difficult to recruit people willing and able to take the time, to go door to door day after day. If you manage to find a place to set up a table, you may not get local voters, particularly in Pierce County. Stores and events often attract people from other cities and counties or local military who are registered in other states. The area is riddled with a patchwork of houses with non-voters, aliens, or military registered in other states.

Boundaries. Boundaries are an even greater concern. In this bill, there is no local process for considering what boundaries of the city should be proposed or a focus group to do so. You cannot arbitrarily base the boundaries of a community on population or even county land use zones. The boundaries for an incorporation need to be a delicate mix of tax revenue generating businesses, and a quantity of population that can be supported by that revenue. In addition, there needs to be a sense of community within those boundaries. You cannot take a portion of the Franklin Pierce School District and throw in a small slice of the Bethel School District. Sense of community is highly connected to school boundaries. That is why those boundaries are so difficult to change. Cultural communities also exist in some areas that should be considered to include in their entirety if possible.

Independence from taxation and regulation. Many people in the unincorporated County are happy to be unincorporated because they believe it makes their taxes lower. They fear that cities will make their tax burdens higher. Even though in most cases it is proved to not be true, election campaigns will seize on that fear.  The fear of new regulations to control activities and home-based enterprises, will also be used to cause election failures.

Threats of non-viability. Recent studies done on incorporations of Parkland, Spanaway and Frederickson and South Hill focused on tax revenue and necessary city services. Neither hit the level where they were considered viable according to the studies. However, there was a gaping hole in both studies. That hole was grant revenue. Almost all cities apply for grants from the State or Federal governments and other sources for various city needs. Both those studies, when common grant award monies were added to revenue, were absolutely viable. I spent considerable time discussing these details with local city managers to establish that fact. The press failed to cover this point.

Repetition. There is no clause here for repeating an incorporation election if the vote fails to reach sufficiency to pass. State law restricts whether you can rerun an incorporation election depending on the percentage of voters who approve tor fail he measure. Will you have to wait two years or ten to try again? This should be included.

City population vs. startup funds. What size is the ideal size for a new city? Is there such a thing as too big to start up? New cities need to get bank loans to front the money to pay wages before they start seeing the tax revenue come in a year or two later. If the city is too large it might be hard to get the loans. If the city is too small, it might not generate enough revenue. Lakewood found this more difficult than the smaller University Place during start up.

Who is this community? Identity. Which boundaries contain people that will really work together as a community? Are there underlying issues, cultures, histories that tie people together? Are there old animosities that would prevent them from being a community? South Pierce County has more of these underlying issues than many may think, in spite of the growing numbers of newcomers. Spanaway and Elk Plain have several generations of families that were moved from Fort Lewis farms and families that have roots in the Hudson Bay Company British and Indian marriages. Those historical events created long term implications on community identity.

Lack of adequate Infrastructure. South Pierce County’s urban growth area is not popular with cities for annexation. It isn’t just the voters, but the looming infrastructure investment needs that scare them away. Pierce County would surely love to see these areas incorporate so they no longer have to foot the bills of supporting urban infrastructure needs. Tacoma has never moved on annexation because of the huge infrastructure needs in Parkland and Spanaway. Why would the people of those communities want to leave the larger tax base of the county to over the gap left by developments that ignored the rules saying infrastructure should be put in place as developments are built? The unbuilt infrastructure, bus routes, trains, sidewalks, street lights, deputies, etc. that are lacking is enormous.

There are more details that need to be injected into this legislation. As it currently stands, it is far from ready to be passed into law. I urge you to consider my experienced suggestions to improve the details in this bill before passage

#

(Oh dear, I came in from the cold and my nose was running… uffda)