August 16, 2023 Dena Jensen

[Editor’s Note: The original blog post contained only two emails sent to and from myself and Jed Holmes on August 16, 2023. Below the copies of those emails included in this post, I have provided an update with two additional emails between myself and Mr. Holmes from August 17, 2023]

The following statement by Jed Holmes, Community Outreach Facilitatory for the Whatcom County Executive’s office, is something we have been missing regarding the 2023 Whatcom County ballot measure sales tax related to a new jail and other Justice Project projects that we will be voting on in November:

“The revenue scenario and allocation plan presented here should not be confused with a spending plan. Actual revenues received, recommendations of the advisory bodies contemplated in the ordinance, and decisions of future County Councils will ultimately determine how revenues from the new sales and use tax are spent.”

On Sunday I wrote an email to the Whatcom County Incarceration Prevention and Reduction Task Force to try to confirm that, ”more than 50% of the new levy will go towards MH/BH treatment facilities and community programs like reentry and housing.” The Whatcom County Executive had asserted this in a Zoom chat this weekend, and I first wrote to the Incarceration Prevention and Reduction Task Force (IPRTF) to see if I could get a response.

On Monday, I received a reply from Jill Nixon who handles the emails for the IPRTF, and it was her sense that my email should also be forwarded (which she did) to Whatcom County Council Members, since they are in charge of the ordinance and any updates on the implementation plan. I wrote back, thanking her, and told her one reason I’d written the Task Force, which was to find out if there was perhaps information in the Implementation Plan that they approved, of which I was not aware, or if members have recently been provided with information from any other government agencies within the County that had established that more than 50% of the 2023 ballot measure tax will be going towards Mental/Behavioral Health treatment programs and other community programs.

On Tuesday, I received a response from Cathy Halka, who is the legislative analyst for the County Council, who pointed out to me the Anticipated Expenditure Allocations chart, and the Funding Available and Needed by Project Expense chart in the Justice Project Implementation Plan, neither of which, to what I can tell, confirm any amounts or percentages that are guaranteed related to non-jail projects.  Additionally, she copied the email thread with her response to a few other legislative folks and Jed Holmes besides the Council and IPRTF.

I wrote back, copied everyone she had copied, thanked her, and said that I’d appreciate a response from anyone who had been copied on Halka’s email and that other than the emails from Nixon and Halka, I had not heard back from anyone.

Then this afternoon, I received a response from Mr. Holmes, in which was the section I quoted earlier in this blog post. In addition, among other things, Holmes also included an explanation of the Anticipated Expenditure Allocations Chart included in the Justice Project Implementation Plan on page 60. Below is his August 16, 2023, 3:22 p.m. email to me, as well as my 5:15 p.m. response to that email today:

On Wednesday, August 16, 2023, 03:22:28 PM PDT, Jed Holmes <jholmes@co.whatcom.wa.us> wrote:

Good afternoon, Dena.

I would refer you to Sections 4 and 5 of the ordinance authorizing the ballot proposition.

Section 4 commits the revenues allocated to the County and City of Bellingham (~87% of all revenue collected) to “any expense consistent with the Implementation Plan, as adopted or as may be amended consistent with Sections 3 and 7, or future implementation plans adopted by the Whatcom County Council.”

Section 5 states that after the initial 4-6 years “a minimum of 50% of the ongoing county-wide Public Health, Safety, and Justice sales and use tax revenue will be used for projects as prioritized in the Justice Project Implementation Plan, such as the construction and operation of behavioral health facilities serving populations outside of the County jail, expansion of incarceration reduction programs, increasing access to community-based behavioral health and substance use disorder treatment services, re-entry programs, supportive housing, diversion programs, and accountability measures that monitor progress and inform future planning.”

After the initial period, the debt service costs will be fixed, potentially in the range of $6-7 million annually. However, revenues from the tax will grow over time. If revenues grow at an average of 4% over time, the new tax would generate $17.5 million in 2030 and $25.9 million in 2040. With the debt service costs remaining unchanged at $6-7 million, the amount dedicated to Implementation Plan programs and projects will grow from $8-9 million in 2030 to $16-17 million in 2040.

When extrapolated across three decades, the total amount of money going to the new jail likely will be significantly less than the total amount going toward other Implementation Plan projects, the types of which are enumerated in Section 5 (see above). Given the framework provided by the ordinance and if current financial assumptions are correct, close to 60% of the ballot measure sales tax revenues will go towards such things as “mental health/behavioral health treatment facilities and community programs like reentry and housing.”

A visual expression of this projection is provided on page 60 of the Implementation Plan. The labels “County Implementation Plan Contributions” and “City Implementation Plan Contributions” refer to County and City of Bellingham contributions to projects apart from the new jail in the Implementation Plan, namely, the types of projects listed in Section 5 of the ordinance.

The revenue scenario and allocation plan presented here should not be confused with a spending plan. Actual revenues received, recommendations of the advisory bodies contemplated in the ordinance, and decisions of future County Councils will ultimately determine how revenues from the new sales and use tax are spent.

I hope this information is helpful. Please let me know if anything requires clarification.

Regards,

Jed

---

Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2023, 05:15:09 PM PDT

Subject: Re: Question related to what percentage of 2024 ballot measure sales tax will be reserved for Justice

Project projects other than the jail

Dear Mr. Holmes:

Thank you for your email response today with all of those details. It was valuable to have an explanation about the financial projections related to the 2023 ballot measure tax revenue. 

It was likewise valuable to read your statement that, “The revenue scenario and allocation plan presented here should not be confused with a spending plan. Actual revenues received, recommendations of the advisory bodies contemplated in the ordinance, and decisions of future County Councils will ultimately determine how revenues from the new sales and use tax are spent.”

Since we do not yet know the size or cost of the jail that will be constructed over the next 4-6 years at this point, or whether officials will make a decision, for example, to create a mirror-image of this jail sometime during the next 30 years as Undersheriff Chadwick had proposed back in March of this year during an Incarceration Prevention and Reduction Task Force meeting, I can see how under the circumstance you explained, there cannot be certainty at this point that even half of the ballot measure tax revenue would be going to non-jail projects. 

I cannot find a place in Section 4 of the ordinance where it offers any specifics related to if the approximately 87% of city and county allocated revenues amount – which you pointed out – would be committed by the cities or Whatcom County to jail or to non-jail projects. It is my understanding that at some point there will be an agreement between Whatcom County and the 7 cities that spells such specifics out, but I am not aware of an agreement having been made yet, which leaves additional uncertainty at this point. Based on the Executive stating that more than 50% of the new levy will go towards MH/BH treatment facilities and community programs like reentry and housing, I had been curious if there had been an agreement already reached between Whatcom County and the cities. From your response, I assume it has not. Please let me know if I am assuming incorrectly.

Your email indicates to me that the statement the Executive wrote over the weekend is not currently something that can be called a fact. Even someone saying there will be a 50/50 split of the revenues between jail and non-jail projects, at this point according to what you wrote, the ordinance, and the Implementation Plan, does not seem to be able to be ascertained as factual. 

The only thing I can find that I can understand as factual related to a specific amount of the tax revenue going to Justice Project projects, is the ordinance statement that, “The Executive shall endeavor to develop an agreement that:…Allows for cost-effective terms of bonding for the construction of the jail and behavioral health facilities by including a sharing of the first four to six years of sales tax revenue to reduce the bond size. In subsequent years, a minimum of 50% of the ongoing county-wide Public Health, Safety, and Justice sales and use tax revenue will be used for projects as prioritized in the Justice Project Implementation Plan, such as the construction and operation of behavioral health facilities serving populations outside of the County jail, expansion of incarceration reduction programs, increasing access to community-based behavioral health and substance use disorder treatment services, re -entry programs, supportive housing, diversion programs, and accountability measures that monitor progress and inform future planning,”

I know that in Justice Project presentations to government officials which I have heard, those working on the project have seemed to emphasize the importance of only sharing factual material related to the project. I don’t object to officials explaining any likely or hopeful scenario they anticipate for the sales tax revenues, as long as they make it clear it is something they anticipate and also make clear that definite uncertainty exists for as long as it does, which – in contrast to other statements I have heard officials make – is what you did in your email. So thank you.

Also, thank you again for your response and the information with which you provided me, and if I have not portrayed something accurately in this email, please let me know.

Sincerely,

Dena Jensen

Birch Bay, WA

---

My email was sent to the following addresses:

To: Cathy Halka <chalka@co.whatcom.wa.us>; Jed Holmes <jholmes@co.whatcom.wa.us>

Cc: Dana Brown-Davis <dbrown@co.whatcom.wa.us>; Jenna Gernand <jgernand@co.whatcom.wa.us>; Jill Nixon <jnixon@co.whatcom.wa.us>; Kayla Schott-Bresler <kschottb@co.whatcom.wa.us>; Council <council@co.whatcom.wa.us>; IPRTaskForce <iprtaskforce@co.whatcom.wa.us>

---

📌Update on truth-telling about money for the jail📌 Thursday, 8/17/23

In a new email from today, Mr. Holmes asserts that “Forward-looking statements should not be confused with factual statements.” I actually agree with that. But I think that officials need to communicate in ways that do not cause that confusion. 

Mr. Holmes seems to think that our County Executive stating that “more than 50% of the new levy will go towards MH/BH treatment facilities and community programs like reentry and housing,” sounds like a forward-looking statement. I think it sounds like a statement of fact that is inaccurate. 

Here are the two emails from today, the first from Holmes to me, responding to my email from yesterday, followed by my response to that email:

On Thursday, August 17, 2023, 09:50:43 AM PDT, Jed Holmes <jholmes@co.whatcom.wa.us> wrote:

Good morning, Dena.

Forward-looking statements should not be confused with factual statements. Factual statements can only be made about past events and not about the future. However, I think the public expects that forward-looking statements from our elected leaders be consistent with established facts.

Executive Sidhu’s statement is consistent with the facts we have today. These facts include the ordinance and Implementation Plan supported by the County Council, the supporting resolution passed by Bellingham City Council, and letters from the mayors of Whatcom County cities, as well as past and current sales tax revenue trends. These documents provide a clear roadmap and policy direction to spend most of the new tax revenues on solutions meant to keep people healthy and out of jail. Conversely, any assertion that less than half of the money would go to non-jail projects and services would be inconsistent with these facts.

For better or worse, uncertainty is part and parcel of governance in a democratic society. The elected leadership of our County and cities have expressed confidence in the commitments and direction provided in the ordinance and Implementation Plan. Now voters will have an opportunity to provide their assessment.

Regards,

Jed

*******************

Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2023, 12:48:49 PM PDT
Subject: Re: Question related to what percentage of 2024 ballot measure sales tax will be reserved for Justice Project projects other than the jail

Dear Mr. Holmes:

Thank you for your email.

According to the ordinance, there will be a sharing of the first four to six years of sales tax revenue to reduce the bond size for the construction of the jail and behavioral health facilities. This means that during this period there will be no bond measure tax funds available for other Justice Project projects. After that period only a minimum of 50% of funds are committed to going to non-jail projects. Meanwhile, there is a formula included in the ordinance for generating jail expansion, while there is no formula included in the ordinance for generating any type of health and well-being service or treatment expansions within the jail. So, along with the fact that we do not yet know how much the jail will cost, I find this all to be a factual basis for the potential that less than 50% of the total tax going to non-jail Justice Project projects. 

Related to forward thinking, during the June 26, 2023 Whatcom County Council Special meeting, Executive Sidhu asserted to Council Members that we cannot predict the future and indicated it could not be known if we would need the money for the purpose for which some Council Members sought to include the minimum commitment of 50% of tax revenues going to Justice Project non-jail projects. He voiced support for more flexibility instead. Since the choice was between the funds going to jail projects or non-jail projects, if the commitment of a minimum of 50% revenue to Justice Project non-jail projects had not been included in the ordinance, then the greater flexibility would have left more revenue available specifically for jail projects.

I continue to voice support of officials talking about what they genuinely hope to accomplish and what they envision for our community. But I do not support officials making any statements that sound like statements of fact, i.e. “more than 50% of the new levy will go towards MH/BH treatment facilities and community programs like reentry and housing,” when it is not a fact.  

I continue to encourage all officials promoting policies, legislation, and approaches to community members to strive to always make it clear when they are voicing an opinion or hope, and when they are making statements of fact.  

Sincerely,
Dena Jensen
Birch Bay, WA