The Mason County Board of Commissioners voted Nov. 25 to enter a memorandum of understanding with the city of Bremerton to evaluate whether Bremerton can provide sanitary sewer service to a portion of the Puget Sound Industrial Center.

Loretta Swanson, Mason County Public Works, described the draft MOU and said the revisions before the board require a preliminary engineering and financial evaluation to quantify capital, financial and operational impacts for both parties. Swanson said the MOU sets a 180-day goal for completing the evaluation and gives the county up to 90 days after the study to decide in writing whether to provide service. She also said staff had discussed using a Commerce grant to pay for study work, though she reported Bremerton had expressed concern about using that grant for the evaluation.

The item drew several public speakers and extended discussion from commissioners. Rick Anderson, a Lakeland Village developer, asked whether sewer service to Kitsap County areas would be offered to his properties in Allen and pressed for clarity on who would benefit and whether grants would be used. Randy Lewis, a resident and advisory committee member, urged commissioners not to commit the county to anything beyond a taxpayer-focused financial study. Ned Lieber, city engineer for Bremerton, explained that grant funding typically requires an interlocal agreement and that an evaluation is a prerequisite to design and to executing an ILA.

Commissioner debate centered on Belfair’s current licensed treatment capacity, the county’s spray-field limit and long-term growth projections. One commissioner noted Belfair’s current licensed capacity rests at 125,000 gallons (with current use around 82,000 gallons) and that expansion would require permitting and potentially new spray-field capacity; the MOU language clarifies that expansion or licensing changes are separate steps and not assumed in the study. Concerns were raised that using Mason County utility capacity to serve development outside the county could shift sales and property-tax revenues to another jurisdiction.

Other commissioners argued a partner willing to share infrastructure costs could ease the burden on county taxpayers and help the county handle expected regional growth tied to naval shipyard and industrial expansion. Several commissioners said they supported approving the MOU as a study agreement — not a service commitment — while reserving the right to deny service after the results are known.

After discussion, commissioners moved, seconded and approved the MOU by voice vote. The board directed staff to move forward with the evaluation steps described in the MOU and to return findings to the commission for a written decision within the agreed timeline.

The MOU does not itself authorize design, construction, utility rate changes or capacity expansion; it establishes a framework for study and decision-making. Commissioners and members of the public said the next steps will be the engineering and financial evaluation described by staff.