Tenino mayor warns of insolvency, asks council to explore sheriff contract to cut policing costs

Tenino’s mayor told the City Council on March 10 that the city inherited a deep fiscal crisis and urged immediate action to prevent a payroll shortfall that could arrive as soon as this year.

“We inherited a financial crisis. We have diagnosed it honestly. We have a plan to fix it and we are executing that plan,” the mayor said as he opened a 50‑page budget recovery presentation. He told the council the city had drawn down water and sewer funds to cover general fund overspending, leaving roughly $148,000 in beginning balances that cannot be treated as recurring revenue.

Why it matters: The mayor said Tenino is carrying about $1.6 million in interfund debt and has essentially zero reserves, a combination that makes the city vulnerable to a single unanticipated expense. Under the mayor’s calculations, recurring revenue after subtracting one‑time items is about $1.67 million, leaving little margin for rising fixed costs.

Key details: The mayor walked through line items he called largely fixed — including roughly $160,000 budgeted for debt interest this year, an estimated $180,000 in insurance for general‑fund items and about $152,000 for IT and software contracts. He said current payroll and associated expenses in early March were roughly $212,000, and that “the cost of delaying any decisions is approximately $29,000 just in the police contract,” increasing the near‑term fiscal strain.

To reduce recurring costs, the mayor asked the council to explore a contract with the Thirstston County Sheriff’s Office. He cited an earlier estimate that a sheriff contract could save the city about $347,000 annually, but stressed the number depended on negotiated service levels and specific contractual terms.

“We have to confirm the budget cut numbers to make sure they’re accurate. We need an accurate quote from the Thirstston County Sheriff’s Office with expected services and service levels,” the mayor said, adding he had scheduled a meeting with the sheriff to discuss coverage and costs.

Other proposals and constraints: The presentation recommended selling surplus properties (including a leased food‑bank building) to build a capital reserve, revisiting a 2023 rate study for water and sewer, and considering a one‑tenth‑of‑one‑percent local public safety sales tax authorized by state law (House Bill 2015) that might raise about $45,000 a year. The mayor cautioned that one‑time proceeds should not be used to pay ongoing expenses.

Next steps: The council authorized the mayor to hold preliminary fact‑finding discussions with the sheriff’s office to gather detailed cost and coverage models. Council members asked for explicit service parameters to be requested — for example, a locally assigned deputy or substation use, minimum patrol coverage, and expected response times — before any decision is made.

The council did not adopt any changes to policy or the police budget at the March 10 meeting; the mayor and council signaled they will return with sheriff‑provided figures and a plan for community engagement before acting.