Island County adopts $164.7 million 2026 budget after contentious debate, 2-1

Island County commissioners adopted the countyand Diking District No. 4 2026 budgets (Resolution C55-25) on Dec. 1 by a 2-to-1 vote following presentations by Budget Director Susan Geiger and extended public and commissioner discussion.

Geiger said the proposed all-funds budget totals $164,700,000, a figure that is unusually large in part because the county is combining REIT 2 into REIT 1 and transferring an estimated $13.5 million from REIT 2 to REIT 1, which increases reported fund balance and transfers by about $27 million in appropriations. She described the budget as balanced after the boardthrough its decisions and the inclusion of new revenue sourcesaddressed earlier shortfalls.

Geiger highlighted that the county includes recognition in 2026 of three quarters of the newly passed law-and-justice tax (estimated at $1,400,000 included in current expense), that property and sales taxes account for roughly 31% of the budget, and that salaries and benefits represent a large portion of current-expense costs (34% of total budget and nearly three-quarters of current expense). She also noted anticipated cost pressures such as higher insurance premiums, medical insurance increases and uncertainty in grant-funded programs.

Staffing changes presented in the budget included adjustments to several frozen positions from 2025, the addition of selected positions (an investigator in the prosecuting attorney's office and an IT systems administrator for the sheriff's office), and midyear hires in the clerk's office and courts. Geiger said some positions were traded among departments and some reductions were made through attrition.

During debate Commissioner Johnson expressed strong concerns that the new sales tax and REET transfers were being used to supplant current-expense funding and to add positions rather than preserve contingency capacity for expected future cost increases. "For that reason, I will be voting no on this tax. I will also be voting no on the budget," Johnson said. She pressed that the board had effectively used most of its capacity and left only a small margin for unexpected cost increases.

Other commissioners defended the budget as necessary to meet rising law-and-justice costs and to responsibly use available fund balance and new revenue to avoid deeper cuts. One commissioner noted the county's interest revenue projections and the need to monitor grant-funded programs as uncertainties that may require future budget amendments.

The board moved and seconded Resolution C55-25 and adopted the budget by a 2-to-1 vote. Commissioners also separately approved three property-tax levies tied to the budget cycle: Resolution C56-25 (current-expense levy) passed unanimously (1% over last year within statutory caps), Resolution C57-25 (roads levy, 2.7% including banked capacity) passed unanimously, and Resolution C58-25 (conservation futures levy) passed 2 to 1 after discussion about strategic acquisition priorities.

Geiger and commissioners said staff will continue monitoring revenue and grant developments and may return with budget amendments if necessary. The board adjourned the special meeting and scheduled a regular meeting for the following day.