On the agenda: Puget Sound Clean Air meeting — Data Center (Mar 26)

NOTE: The public can join this meeting via Zoom at:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84256168034
Meeting ID: 842 5616 8034
Call-in: 833 548 0282 US Toll Free
The meeting can also be attended in person at the
agency’s office at 1904 3rd Avenue, Suite 105, Seattle.
If you have trouble accessing this, please email
[email protected]

The Agency will make reasonable accommodations for
any person who needs assistance to participate in the
Board of Directors’ meeting, or to access our services. Our
meeting facilities are ADA accessible. Sign language
services, language translation and interpretation, and
communications materials in alternative formats can be
made available given sufficient notice by contacting the
Agency at 206-343-8800.

PDF 1

Thursday
March 26, 2026
8:45 a.m.

BOARD MEETING AGENDA

8:45 - 8:50

Call to order – Roll Call – Quorum Established – Land Acknowledgement:

8:50 - 8:55

I.

Petitions from the Public (90 seconds per speaker)

II.

Approval of Minutes

8:55 - 9:00

We would like to acknowledge that our Agency operates in four present-day
counties, which are the traditional lands of the Coast Salish people, past and
present. This acknowledgement does not take the place of authentic
relationships with indigenous communities in our jurisdiction and beyond but
serves as a first step in honoring the people whose land we work and reside
on.

February 26, 2026 Board Meeting*
9:00 - 9:05

III.

Personnel and Finance Matters
Approval of Vouchers*

IV.
9:05 - 9:15

9:15 – 9:25
9:25 – 9:45
9:45 – 10:05

New Business
A. Board Officer Elections*

V.

ACTION
ACTION

Unfinished Business
A. Resolution No. 1502 - Fiscal Year 2027 Financial
Policies Adoption*
B. FY27 Budget – Discussion of FY27 Per Capita
Apportionment Method and Rate*
C. Public Hearings on Compliance Fees*
C.I Amending Regulation I, Section 7.07 –
Operating Permit Fees*
C.II Amending Regulation I, Section 5.07 – Annual
Registration Fees*

10:05 – 10:35

D. CCAP Implementation: Next Steps*

10:35 – 11:05

E. Board Handbook – Review of Draft*

PDF 2

ACTION

ACTION

11:05 – 11:15

VI.

Staff Reports:
A. Staff Report*
B. Legislative Updates*
C. Notice of Construction Report*
D. Contract List*

*Document included in Board packet

PDF 3

PHONE & E-MAIL ROSTER FOR
REGULARLY ATTENDING BOARD MEMBERS
& PUGET SOUND CLEAN AIR AGENCY MANAGEMENT
REGULARLY ATTENDING BOARD MEMBERS
Christine Rolfes

Joe Bushnell

Phone: (360) 337-7080

Phone: (253) 591-5447

E-mail: [email protected]

E-mail:

Ryan Dicks
Phone: 253.798.8603
E-mail: [email protected]

[email protected]
Megan Dunn

Michelle Caulfield

Katie Ketterer

Phone: (425) 388-3494

Phone: (206) 256-5158

Phone: (360) 473-5334

E-mail: [email protected]

E-mail:

E-mail: [email protected]

[email protected]
Emily Pinckney

Jennifer Gregerson

Phone: (253) 403-2991

Phone: (425) 257-7164

E-mail: [email protected]

E-mail: [email protected]
PUGET SOUND CLEAN AIR AGENCY DIRECTORS

Christine Cooley, Executive Director

Jennifer Dold, General Counsel

Kathy Strange, Air Quality Programs Director

Phone: (206) 689-4004

Phone: (206) 689-4015

Phone: (206) 689-4095

E-mail: [email protected]

E-mail: [email protected]

E-mail: [email protected]

Steve Van Slyke, Compliance Director
Phone: (206) 689-4052
E-mail: [email protected]
PUGET SOUND CLEAN AIR AGENCY MANAGERS
John Dawson, Engineering Manager

Jennifer Keene, Clean Air and Climate

Chris Kitchen, Inspection Manager

Phone: (206) 689-4060

Initiatives Manager

Phone: (206) 689-4034

E-mail: [email protected]

Phone: (206) 689-4017

E-mail: [email protected]

E-mail: [email protected]
Jack Broyles Jr., Finance/Purchasing

Phyllis, McElroy, Communications

Erik Saganić, Technical Analysis Manager

Manager

Manager

Phone: (206) 689-4003

Phone: (206) 689-4074

Phone: (206) 689-4077

E-mail: [email protected]

E-mail: [email protected]

E-mail: [email protected]

Megan Sweeney, HR & Org. Development

Andy Tudhope, Technology Manager

Betsy Wheelock, Compliance Systems and

Manager

Phone: (206) 689-4090

Administrative Services Manager

Phone: (206) 689-4041

E-mail: [email protected]

Phone: (206) 689-4080

E-mail: [email protected]

PDF 4

Email: [email protected]

PUGET SOUND CLEAN AIR AGENCY
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
February 26, 2026
Puget Sound Clean Air Agency
1904 3rd Avenue, Suite 105
Seattle, WA 98101
Note: This was a hybrid online and in-person meeting. All Agency Board members,
staff, and members of the public were present either by computer, phone, or at the
Agency’s office at 1904 3rd Avenue, Suite 105, Seattle, WA. The online meeting was
facilitated through the Zoom platform. The meeting access information was
published on the Agency’s web site as well as in the four major newspapers in the
Agency’s jurisdiction in order for the public to listen to and/or participate in the Board
meeting.
Board Members Present:
Megan Dunn, Councilmember, Snohomish County (arrived at 8:57 a.m.)
Katie Ketterer, representing Mayor Greg Wheeler, City of Bremerton
Christine Rolfes, Kitsap County Commissioner
Lylianna Allala, representing Mayor Katie Wilson, City of Seattle
Ryan Dicks, representing Ryan Mello, Pierce County Executive
Joe Bushnell, Councilmember, City of Tacoma
Jennifer Gregerson, representing Mayor Cassie Franklin, City of Everett
Emily Pinckney, representing the Public-At-Large
Board Members Absent:
King County
Board Member Ryan Dicks started the meeting at 8:45 a.m. and noted that there
would be a brief pause for Chair Bushnell to join.
Chair Bushnell joined the meeting at 8:49 a.m. and called the meeting to order.
The roll was called; a quorum was present.

1

PDF 5

Chair Bushnell gave the land acknowledgement.
I. PETITIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
Chair Bushnell opened the Petitions from the Public portion of the meeting and asked
if there was anyone present who wished to address the Board.
Casey Hussman Brandt, Executive Director of the People’s Memorial Association,
highlighted ongoing challenges with the licensing and approval of crematory
facilities, opining that the current process as untenable and contributing to what the
funeral industry is calling the “cremation crisis.” Death rates are increasing by
approximately 10% annually, creating a need for additional services to support a
growing elderly population, particularly the baby boomer generation. He noted that
the current licensing timeline, up to four years for a single crematory, is too long and
has deterred potential business expansions in the Puget Sound region due to
economic and regulatory constraints.
Chair Joe Bushnell closed the public petition portion of the meeting.
II. Approval of Minutes
Chair Bushnell asked for a motion to approve the minutes from the January 22, 2026
Board Meeting. There was no Board discussion.
Board Member Christine Rolfes made a motion to approve the minutes; Board
Member Katie Ketterer seconded; and the motion passed unanimously.
PERSONNEL AND FINANCE MATTERS
III. Approval of Vouchers
Chair Bushnell asked for a motion to approve the vouchers in the Board’s February
meeting materials.
Board Member Rolfes made a motion for approval of the vouchers; Board Ketterer
seconded; and the motion passed unanimously.

2

PDF 6

IV. NEW BUSINESS
IV. A. Department of Ecology ZEVergreen Policy Recommendations
Executive Director Cooley introduced Josh Grandbouche, Zero Emissions Vehicle
Specialist with Washington State Department of Ecology, to present on the
ZEVergreen program policy recommendations. His presentation included references
to the memo and presentation included in the Board meeting materials.
Before inviting questions, Chair Bushnell asked newly appointed Board Member
Lylianna Allala and Board Member Rolfes’ newly appointed alternate, Caitlin
Newman, to introduce themselves.
Chair Bushnell exited the meeting due to a prior commitment, and Board Member
Megan Dunn assumed responsibility for running the remainder of the meeting.
Board Member Katie Ketterer expressed appreciation that an information campaign
was included as part of the strategy. She noted that, in addition to disinformation,
there may be cultural resistance to electrification and asked if this has been
considered as part of the planned outreach efforts.
Mr. Grandbouche described a model used in Oregon in which individuals who have
adopted zero-emission vehicles serve as community ambassadors, particularly in
rural and agricultural communities, sharing their experiences and information. He
noted that this peer-to-peer approach can help address misinformation and
provide more accurate information so people can make informed decisions about
vehicles that meet their needs. He also highlighted common misconceptions, such
as concerns about cold weather performance, and explained that newer battery
technologies and heat pumps have significantly improved vehicle performance,
citing Norway’s high adoption of zero-emission vehicles as an example.
Board Member Emily Pinckney expressed enthusiasm for the report and the
engagement with diverse stakeholder groups, noting that the electric vehicle (EV)
space is still evolving. She raised questions about procurement challenges,
especially for medium and heavy-duty vehicles, citing examples of electric school
bus programs in Washington State where limited options and company closures left
some districts with non-operational buses. She highlighted successful examples, like
Beaverton School District’s largely BYD fleet, and noted that some operators, like MTR

3

PDF 7

Western, have sourced vehicles internationally due to gaps in U.S. technology. She
asked whether expanding international procurement is part of the strategy.
Mr. Grandbouche noted that medium and heavy duty vehicle costs in the U.S. are
rising compared with the EU, where prices for the same manufacturers are falling.
While battery costs are decreasing, he acknowledged the complexity of the issue
and said he does not have all the answers. He emphasized that participants have
expressed a need for access to a wider variety of vehicles available globally, and
while state options are limited, they are exploring possibilities. He also described
efforts to coordinate with other states on procurement goals for school buses,
aiming to leverage collective demand to influence manufacturers’ production plans.
He recognized that some restrictions remain under state control but noted that they
are considering all options.
Board Member Ryan Dicks noted that EV adoption has faced many challenges over
the past year and highlighted Pierce County’s efforts to expand EV infrastructure
across its cities and towns. He explained that even minimal state funding matches
can become barriers, citing Fircrest, which returned EV charger funding due to
project complexity. He suggested the state could simplify implementation by
contracting installation for multiple counties directly, rather than leaving local
governments to manage it. He also emphasized the cost-saving and environmental
benefits of EVs, sharing that his family successfully uses two EVs with only standard
wall outlets. He encouraged promoting these benefits and offered county support to
further the work.
Board Member Pinckney noted that upfront costs, especially for infrastructure, have
been a major challenge. Even with programs providing free electric buses and
charging, funding for construction was lacking. She highlighted difficulties with
financing infrastructure and emphasized the importance of relationships with
utilities, asking how utilities are being engaged given lead times of 18–24 months for
infrastructure installation.
Mr. Grandbouche responded that charging installation costs are a key concern, with
both challenges and potential strategies outlined in the report. He explained that
Ecology has limited experience working with utilities on transportation but is
engaging through the EV Council and discussions around the Electric Vehicle Supply
Equipment policy. Delays can stem from staffing and transformer issues, with
strategies like standardizing transformer design being considered. He also
mentioned reauthorizing fleet reporting to help utilities plan upgrades and
4

PDF 8

emphasized a multi-pronged approach, balancing utility-owned chargers versus
fleet or city/state ownership.
V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
V. A. Briefing – FY27 Budget Priorities, Per Capita, Financial Policies
Executive Director Cooley gave an introduction to the presentation and then
introduced Jack Broyles Jr., Finance Manager, to present on the FY27 Budget Priorities,
Per Capita, Financial Policies. His presentation included references to the memo and
presentation included in the Board meeting materials.
The budget priorities for the FY27 budget are: 1) Absorb state and federal funding
reductions while minimizing impact to our mission; 2) Fund the office space
transition; 3) Maintain reserves, and continue stability of fee programs through self
sufficiency; and 4) Continue leadership role for regional climate coordination.
Director Cooley shared some of the challenges facing the development of this
budget, notably a 65% reduction in normally stable state core grant funding.
There were no questions from the Board, and no further discussion.
V.B. Briefing – Compliance Fees Update – Air Operating fees (Reg. I, Section 7.07)
and Registration fees (Reg. I, Section 507)
Board Member Dunn introduced John Dawson, Engineering Manager, to present the
Briefing – Compliance Fees Update – Air Operating fees (Reg. I, Section 7.07) and
Registration fees (Reg. I, Section 507). His presentation made references to the
memo included in the Board meeting materials.
There were no questions from the Board, and no further discussion.
V. C. Governance Handbook Preview: Duties, Structure, and Agency Story
Executive Director Cooley presented to the Board on the Governance Handbook
Preview: Duties, Structure, and Agency Story. Her presentation made references to
the memo and presentation included in the Board meeting materials.
Board Member Dicks suggested inclusion of a distinction between the elected official
and the alternate roles and suggested clarifying any differences in the document.
5

PDF 9

Board Member Dunn suggested including information about the Open Public
Meetings Act (OPMA) and records compliance.
Executive Director Cooley thanked the Operations and Personnel Subcommittee for
their help and input on the Governance Handbook.
VII. Staff Reports
Executive Director Cooley referenced the Staff Report in the meeting materials.
Executive Director Cooley provided members with a Legislative update.
Board Member Newman asked when the financial audit is expected to be completed.
Executive Director Cooley responded that she is not sure when the audit would be
completed but an email would be sent to the Board once it is completed. She also
mentioned she would get Board Member Newman added to the distribution list.
With no further business, the Board meeting adjourned at 10:32 a.m.
I hereby certify this to be a true and correct record of the Minutes of the February 26,
2026 meeting of the Board of Directors of the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency.

Attest:
___________________

_______________________

Christine S. Cooley

Joe Bushnell

Executive Director

Chair, Board of Directors

6

PDF 10

DATE
TO
SUBJECT

March 19, 2026
Board of Directors
Puget Sound Clean Air Agency
Vouchers Submitted for Approval

Honorable Board Members:
The following vouchers were issued in the Blanket Voucher Approval document dated February
3, 2026:
• Vouchers 33746 through 33779 in the amount of $37,074.23 for Operating Expenses.
The following vouchers were issued in the Blanket Voucher Approval document dated February
10, 2026:
• Vouchers 33780 through 33824 in the amount of $224,467.94 for Operating Expenses.
The following vouchers were issued in the Blanket Voucher Approval document dated February
17, 2026:
• Vouchers 33825 through 33880 in the amount of $97,232.09 for Operating Expenses.
The following vouchers were issued in the Blanket Voucher Approval document dated February
24, 2026:
• Vouchers 33881 through 33918 in the amount of $241,897.87 for Operating Expenses.
Copies of the above listed vouchers are attached for your review. We request that the Board
review the vouchers listed above and approve such vouchers as submitted.
Respectfully submitted,

Christine S. Cooley
Executive Director
Attachment
sa
-1-

PDF 11

PDF 12

PDF 13

02/03/2026

PDF 14

PDF 15

PDF 16

PDF 17

PDF 18

PDF 19

PDF 20

02/17/2026

PDF 21

PDF 22

PDF 23

PDF 24

DATE
TO
SUBJECT

March 19, 2026
Board of Directors

Puget Sound Clean Air Agency
Election of Board Chair and Vice-Chair

Honorable Board Members:
The Bylaws of the Board of Directors provide that the Board will elect officers by March of each

year. Therefore, we suggest that the Board elect (by voice vote) its Board Chair and Vice-Chair
at the March Board meeting. We would be happy to answer any questions regarding the election

procedures you may have.

Respectfully submitted,

Christine Cooley
Executive Director
sa

PDF 25

DATE

March 19, 2026

TO

Board of Directors
Puget Sound Clean Air Agency

SUBJECT

Resolution No. 1502 – Adopting the FY27 Financial Policies

Honorable Board Members:
The purpose of this memo is to present for action the adoption of the FY27 Financial
Policies. In each budget cycle, management reviews the prior year’s financial policies
and makes recommendations for changes, if needed. We review the types and levels of
reserves, whether substantial risks are mitigated, and whether the stated uses of and
targets for reserves are appropriate. We are recommending revisions to the financial
policies that reflect current conditions and provide flexibility in developing a balanced
and sustainable budget for FY27.
In February, we reviewed with the Board the proposed changes to the FY27 Financial
Policies (provided at that time in proposed red-line edits). Attached to this memo is
Attachment A (Proposed FY27 Financial Policies), a clean version of the policies that
incorporates the changes recommended at the February board meeting.
These changes clarified fund use language for the FY27 Budget, updated language
regarding asset capitalization and asset listings, and clarified the financial reporting
frequency.
Attached for your consideration are Resolution No. 1502 with the Proposed FY27 Financial
Policies (in Attachment A). We recommend that the Board adopt this resolution for the
FY26 Financial Policies.
Respectfully submitted,

Christine Cooley
Executive Director
Attachment

-1-

PDF 26

RESOLUTION NO. 1502
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE PUGET SOUND CLEAN AIR AGENCY APPROVING THE
FISCAL YEAR 2027 FINANCIAL POLICIES OF THE PUGET SOUND CLEAN AIR AGENCY
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency (Agency) has
previously adopted Financial Policies for the Agency and such policies cover financial planning,
revenues, expenditures, use of funds, fund reserves, asset capitalization and inventory procedures,
and capital equipment and IT reserve accounts; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors desires to update the Financial Policies to reflect changes in
Agency circumstances and to reflect good financial management and practices; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors finds the attached Financial Policies reflect its direction to
the Agency regarding financial management and practices, and desires the Agency to follow such
policies; now, therefore:
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE PUGET SOUND CLEAN AIR AGENCY:
Section 1: The Board of Directors of the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency hereby approves and
adopts the attached FY27 Financial Policies of the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency.
PASSED AND APPROVED by the Board of Directors at a regular meeting of the Board on this
26th day of March 2026.
PUGET SOUND CLEAN AIR AGENCY
By ______________________________
Joe Bushnell
Chair, Board of Directors
Attest:
By __________________________________
Christine Cooley
Executive Director
Approved as to form:
By __________________________________
Jennifer Dold
Agency Counsel

-1-

PDF 27

Attachment A – FY27 Proposed Financial Policies
Fiscal Year 2027 – Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Financial Policies
I. Planning Policies
A. Balanced Budget
As required by RCW 70A.15.1590, on or before the fourth Monday in June of each year,
the Board of Directors adopts a budget for the following fiscal year (July 1 – June 30).
The budget is a balanced budget and contains adequate funding and provides
sufficient staff to carry out the provisions of all applicable resolutions and regulations
related to air pollution reduction, prevention and control.
The Board takes action to amend the budget when unanticipated funding is received
such as grants, or in the event of other significant unforeseen events that may affect
the budget.
B. Multi-Year Planning
Sound fiscal management and planning are important to the health of the agency.
To this end, the agency engages in multi-year planning each year to assess and
evaluate items such as the financial implications of current and proposed operating
and capital budgets, fund balance, financial policies, issues related to state and
federal funding, the agency’s vision and strategic plans, and other foreseeable
trends and issues that may affect the future of the agency. Strategic plans may
include vision statements, multi-year strategies and annual work plans. The
information developed during long-range planning is used in preparing the annual
budget.
C. Asset Inventory
To safeguard agency assets purchased with public funds and to ensure adequate
internal controls are maintained, the agency inventories and assesses the condition
of all major capital assets. Agency assets are used only for agency business
purposes. (See Appendix 1, Asset Capitalization and Inventory Procedures).
Asset inventory information is used to plan for the ongoing financial commitments
and future needs of the agency.
-1-

PDF 28

Attachment A – FY27 Proposed Financial Policies
II. Revenue Policies
A. Revenue Diversification
To the extent feasible, the agency maintains a diversified and stable revenue system
to improve its ability to handle fluctuations in any individual source of funding. The
agency does not rely solely on state and federal funds and consistently seeks
additional sources of revenue.
B. Per Capita and Fee Revenues
1. Per Capita (Proportion of Supplemental Income) - Cities, towns and counties
are required by state law to contribute annually to the agency’s operations. RCW
70A.15.1600 stipulates various methods for determining the proportion of
supplemental income of this per capita revenue. During the annual budget
process, the Board determines which apportionment method to use. In addition,
the Board annually reviews the amount of the per capita assessment, considering
such factors as the rate of inflation compared with the rates of population growth
and/or assessed valuation of property, the agency’s revenue needs for programs
and/or equipment that cannot be fully supported by other funds, whether or not
programs requiring funding are mandatory, and appropriate equitable factors.
For each annual budget, the budget amount of Per Capita revenues
(Supplemental Income) will be determined by combining 50% of the prior
calendar year per capita assessment amount along with 50% of the budget
calendar year amount.
2. Fee-Based Revenues - Revenues collected for a specific fee-based program
are retained within that program in the fund balance. Fees collected for one feebased program cannot be spent on a different program. Annual increases may
be adopted to ensure that each program remains self-supporting in current and
future years and that fee reserve fund balances are retained. Fees may also
include temporary surcharges to reflect technological advances or mandated
requirements for a specific program.
Fee-based programs are self-supporting and as required by law, the amount of
the fees may only cover the cost of administering the program. See RCW

-2-

PDF 29

Attachment A – FY27 Proposed Financial Policies
70A.15.2200(registration fees), 70A.15.2210 (notice of construction fees), and
70A.15.2270 (operating permit fees).
C. Use of Funds
1. Use of One-Time and Unpredictable Revenues - To the extent feasible, the
agency uses one-time revenues for one-time expenditures and unpredictable
revenues for a specific purpose and not to fund ongoing programs or operations.
2. Federal Section 103 Funds - These funds are provided by EPA to pay for a
specific project. Currently, the Federal Section 103 grant pays for the costs
contained in the agency’s annual contract with the Department of Ecology for
PM2.5 monitoring.
3. Federal Section 105 Funds (Base Grant) - These funds support activities
required by EPA through the grant agreement for the federal priorities that are not
supported by fees. This includes protecting human health by reducing emissions
of PM2.5, ozone, and other criteria and toxic air pollutants; and characterizing the
health consequences of air pollution, collecting data that has the greatest benefit
for public health, and increasing the public understanding of the health effects
and costs of pollution.
4. Other Grants (Special Project or Sub-Recipient) - When the agency receives
grant funds for specific projects, staff time and operational expenses necessary
to administer the grants are normally charged against the grants. Often times,
these special project grants do not adequately cover staff time and operational
expenses.
5. State Wood Stove Funds - The state wood stove funds are required to be spent
on wood stove education and enforcement. The education program may include
raising awareness of impaired air quality burn bans, the effects of wood stove
emissions on health and air quality, methods of achieving better efficiency and
emission performance from wood stoves, which wood stoves are approved by
Ecology, or the benefits of replacing inefficient wood stoves with new stoves. The
enforcement program may include air quality monitoring, developing air quality
forecast products, and enforcement of impaired air quality burn bans.

-3-

PDF 30

Attachment A – FY27 Proposed Financial Policies
6. State Grant (Core) - The highest priority for these funds is to implement state
requirements not covered by fees, the federal Section 105 grant or other funds.
The seven broad activities covered under the State Grant include: Enforcement,
Non-Fee Permitting, Monitoring, Public Education and Enforcement, Planning and
Development, Technical and Business Assistance, and Administration.
7. Local Supplemental Income (Per Capita) - The highest priority for these funds
is to address local and state priorities not fundedby other sources.. This includes,
but is not limited to, elements of the agency strategic plan, emissions reductions
projects, environmental justice, climate protection, and policy development. It
may also be used for one-time expenses related to moving office locations.
D. Civil Penalty Revenues
As a result of its compliance activities, the agency receives civil penalty revenues. To
ensure the agency is not perceived as assessing civil penalties to support its
operations, revenue from civil penalties collected goes directly to a separate fund to
be used in accordance with Section III B. of this policy. In preparing budgets, the
agency does not include an amount of projected civil penalty revenue for the next
fiscal year, but does include expenditures of civil penalty revenues, in accordance
with this policy, previously received.
E. Interest Income Revenues
Unless otherwise provided in this section, the agency allocates earned interest
income revenues to all funds every month based on the cash in each fund at the end
of the month, with the exception of certain grant funds due to audit restrictions.
III. Expenditure Policies
A. Operating/Capital Expenditures
The agency periodically compares actual expenditures to budget and decides upon
any actions needed to bring the budget into balance. To this end, periodic financial
statements are prepared for and reviewed by agency management, and periodic
financial information is provided to the Board of Directors.

-4-

PDF 31

Attachment A – FY27 Proposed Financial Policies
B. Civil Penalties
Revenue from civil penalties collected may be expended only for the purposes
described in this policy. These purposes include support for:
•

establishing and maintaining strategic partnerships;

•

promotional and outreach activities (to include communication tools, services
and materials) that support our vision;

•

efforts to address inequities in air pollution exposure;

•

air quality characterization (including community-focused monitoring) or
improvement projects;

•

voluntary and incentive-based programs that produce quantifiable climate,
toxics or criteria pollutant benefits;

•

atypical or unusual legal expenses; and

•

one-time, non-salary related expenses related to moving office locations.

Such projects are budgeted annually based on the agency's objectives and the
availability of previously collected funds. The agency may also use a portion of a
specific civil penalty to reimburse a fee-based program where there are
extraordinary costs associated with a particular enforcement action. Also, the
agency may negotiate non-financial civil penalty settlements, such as requiring inkind support or direct education and outreach activities as Supplemental
Environmental Projects.
C. Debt Issuance
As authorized by RCW 70A.15.1580, the agency may levy additional taxes in excess of
the constitutional and/or statutory tax limitations for any authorized purpose.
IV. Fund Balance Policies
A. Fund Reserves
The agency maintains a prudent level of financial resources to strive to protect
against the need to reduce service levels or raise fees due to temporary revenue
shortfalls, unforeseen one-time expenditures, or cash flow needs. Funds that have
been set aside for future or special use are set aside in the designated fund’s
balance. This includes the Clean Air Act Fund Reserve, the Capital Equipment,
Software Applications and IT Services Fund Reserve, the General Fund Reserve, the
-5-

PDF 32

Attachment A – FY27 Proposed Financial Policies
Unemployment Reserve, and the General Legal Fund Reserve. These fund reserves
are reviewed each year as part of the budget process.
1.

Compliance Funds Targeted Fund Balances - Each fee-based program has a

separate targeted fund balance and these fund balances are reviewed on an
annual basis. For the Asbestos and Notice of Construction programs, the
targeted fund balance should be approximately 50% of the annual cost of the
program. For the Registration and Operating Permit programs, the targeted fund
balance should be approximately 25% of the annual cost of the program.
2. Capital Equipment, Software Applications, and IT Services Reserve - To the
extent practical, the agency budgets for routine capital equipment, software, and
IT services needs each year through current revenues rather than use of funds in
reserve. However, the agency maintains a capital equipment, software
applications and IT services reserve fund (see Appendix 2) to minimize
fluctuations due to large or unanticipated purchases and because the agency
does not have the ability to borrow funds from other entities.
A plan for reimbursement of the funds must be submitted in the immediate
subsequent fiscal year budget process following withdrawal of the fund reserve.
The Board may adjust fund balance limits during the Agency’s annual budget
process. Surplus income from the sale of assets is transferred to the reserve
unless the equipment was funded with grant or fee funds with certain restrictions.

3. General Fund Reserve – This reserve is established for non-fee program
related items such as unanticipated items in the budget fiscal year, emergency
funding for deferred maintenance, insurance deductibles in the event of a major
loss, bridge funding for inter-grant periods, and as an additional offset for intermonth negative cash balances. The targeted balance for this reserve is 10% of
the general fund revenues (composed of per capita revenues, the federal core
grant and the state core grant). If necessary, this reserve is funded or replenished
from (unrestricted) funds resulting from better-than-planned budget
performance (see section II.E.). The Board must approve withdrawals from the
general fund reserve, as part of the annual budget or through a budget
amendment. The approval must include a plan for reimbursing the reserve if the
reserve is below the 10% target.
-6-

PDF 33

Attachment A – FY27 Proposed Financial Policies
4. Unemployment Reserve – The agency operates on a reimbursement basis with
the Employment Securities Department (ESD) rather than paying quarterly
unemployment taxes. The agency has minimal control over the timing, duration
and amount of unemployment charges. The purpose of this reserve is to provide
for unemployment expenditures. The amount of this reserve will be assessed as
needed and funded accordingly.
5. General Legal Fund Reserve – This reserve is established for the purpose of
meeting atypical or unusual legal expenses that are not included in the planned,
ongoing legal expenses for a normal fiscal year budget. These types of expenses
may include (but are not limited to) litigation, litigation support and/or
investigatory needs that could not be planned or predicted but are related to the
authority, mission and/or operations of the agency. The circumstances which
may lead to the use of this reserve often involve time sensitive decisions which
have deadlines which require expedited actions. The amount and source of
funding for this reserve will be determined during each budget adoption cycle.
6. Civil Penalty Fund - The revenue collected from civil penalties goes directly to
the Civil Penalty Fund to be used in accordance with Section III B. of this policy. In
preparing annual budgets, the agency only includes expenditures of civil penalty
revenues previously received. The balances in this fund may be used to offset
periodic negative inter-month cash balances created by grant-related
receivable balances.

-7-

PDF 34

Attachment A – FY27 Proposed Financial Policies
Appendix 1 – Asset capitalization and inventory procedures
Categories of Assets, Risk Ratings, Frequency of Physical Inventory, Capitalization
Amount.
Category

Transportation

Risk (loss) Rating

Capitalization

Frequency of

Amount

Physical Inventory

High

$5,000

1 year

High

$5,000

1 year

Medium

$5,000

2 years

Low

$5,000

2 years

Equipment
Computer
Equipment

Site/Shop
Equipment
Lab Equipment

Capitalization of Assets
The Agency follows the Federal Common Rule of property management
requirements for the acquisition, management and disposition of capitalized assets.
Currently, the threshold amount is $5,000. Assets purchased with federal funds but
costing less than $5,000 will be tagged, inventoried and tracked but will not be listed
on the Agency’s financial statements as capital assets.
Inventory System
The Finance Department maintains an inventory system that includes tagging,
inventorying and tracking agency equipment, capitalized assets and “small and
attractive” assets. Data tracked includes the asset purchase date, amount or
-8-

PDF 35

Attachment A – FY27 Proposed Financial Policies
current valuation, manufacturer description, asset identification number,
department assignment, asset location, physical inventory date, and future surplus
disposition.
Physical Inventory of Assets – Capitalized and Non-Capitalized
The Manager of Finance and Purchasing schedules a physical inventory of
department assets with each department manager. This inventory is based on risk
ratings, the value of the item and probability of theft and/or misuse. Each
department completes a physical inventory of the department assets by the end of
the fiscal year.
Tagging of Assets
Assets are identified with a permanent tag that provides accurate agency and
category identification. Assets purchased with federal funding are also identified
with a permanent tag and an additional reference in the Asset Tracking System to
indicate title to the equipment. The Finance Department keeps asset tags and
assigns a tag to each department after each purchase.
Sale or Surplus of Assets
The Board of Directors must approve, by resolution, a list of capitalized assets
(defined as agency property that has a purchase price of $5,000 or more per item)
scheduled for sale, surplus and disposal. Disposal of property not meeting this
threshold is managed in accordance with Agency policy regarding Disposition of
Agency Property. That policy addresses sale for fair market value, donations, and
environmental factors for disposal. Appendix 2 – Capital Equipment, Software
Applications, and IT Services Reserve
Purpose
We strive to meet our routine capital equipment needs each year from current
revenues. To minimize fluctuations in the need for revenues due to large or
unanticipated capital purchases, and because the Agency does not have the ability
to borrow funds from other entities, a capital equipment reserve fund is included in

-9-

PDF 36

Attachment A – FY27 Proposed Financial Policies
our finance management system. The purpose of this policy is to describe how this
reserve fund is derived and used.
The Agency maintains a reserve fund that helps fund the following types of
purchases:
•

Vehicles

•

Air Monitoring/Scientific Equipment and applications

•

Computer Systems and applications

•

Office Machines and Tenant Improvements

•

Specialized Information Technology Consulting Services

Principles
General
•

The reserve target should reflect a prudent amount of funds necessary to pay
for the intended use. The target is $150,000 and can be used for the purposes
outlined in the previous section.

•

The Board may adjust fund balance limits during the Agency’s annual budget
process.

•

•

Expenditures from the Capital Equipment Reserve are normally made to:
o

Fund large non-routine capital or applications expenditures

o

Meet high priority needs not envisioned during the budget process

The reserve is not funded by federal or state grant dollars.

Withdrawals
•

The Board must approve withdrawals that exceed $50,000 from the reserve
fund, as part of the annual budget or through a budget amendment.

•

The Executive Director may approve withdrawals from the reserve fund in the
amount of $ 50,000 or less.

•

When funds are withdrawn from the reserve fund in any amount the
responsible manager must provide a written schedule for reimbursing the
fund and identify the source of the funds for the reimbursement.

- 10 -

PDF 37

DATE

March 19, 2026

TO

Board of Directors
Puget Sound Clean Air Agency

SUBJECT

Briefing – FY27 Budget and Projections and Per Capita
Discussion

Honorable Board Members:
The purpose of this memo is to brief the Board on our initial high-level financial

projections for the FY27 budget and discuss the per capita apportionment method and
rate proposals. This is in preparation for Board action to adopt the 2026 per capita
method and rate in the April Board meeting.

FY26 –FY27 Budget Discussion and Projections

Beginning Fund Balance
Revenues:
Federal and State Grants
Per Capita Revenues
Fee Program Revenues
Other Revenues
Total Revenues
Personnel Expenses
Grant Pass-through payments
Operating Expenses
Total Expenses
Net Surplus (Deficit)
Fund Balance (fiscal year-end):

FY25
Actuals

FY26
Estimate

FY27
Projection

FY28
Projection

FY29
Projection

12,079,110

14,124,279

13,436,853

10,562,112

7,703,110

$ 2,881,567

2,005,905

$ 1,630,905

$ 1,610,105

4,303,986

$

4,422,550

4,398,298

4,530,247

4,666,154

6,982,884

6,891,890

7,134,674

7,288,880

7,446,515

910,694

1,018,047

200,000

200,000

200,000

15,079,131

15,350,151

13,738,877

13,650,032

13,922,775

10,123,827

11,802,129

12,943,500

13,441,498

13,958,666

752,343

1,078,255

963,000

503,000

800,000

2,157,792

3,157,193

2,707,118

2,564,536

2,968,920

13,033,962
$ 2,045,169
14,124,279

$

3,017,664

$

16,037,577

16,613,618

16,509,035

17,727,586

(687,426)

$ (2,874,741)

$ (2,859,003)

$ (3,804,811)

13,436,853

10,562,112

7,703,110

3,898,298

The above table summarizes our preliminary projections as we maintain our key Agency

functions along with a balanced budget and stable out-year financial projections. Costof-living (COLA) increases (2.6% to 2.9%) in FY26 were less than anticipated in out-year
projections last year. We will continue to refine our FY27 assumptions, particularly for
federal and state funds that may be substantially reduced.

PDF 38

During the FY26 budget development last year, the Board elected to hold per-capita
charges steady at $0.97. In the last few budget years, the Agency has discussed the

gradual use of our per capita carryover (previous years’ budget savings) along with
gradual increases in the per capita rate to be able to absorb higher personnel and other
operating costs. This gradualism approach would help avoid large, proposed jumps in
the per capita rate, and would not deplete the total carryover in one year.
Based on the changes described above, we propose no increase to the per capita rate
and to use the per capita carryover for the FY27 budget and projections.

Following a similar approach to last year’s budget development, the FY27 budget
involves the following steps:
1.

Use of certain reserves such as the General Fund Reserve, and Per Capita

carryover to help bridge shortfalls in FY26-27.
We propose using several reserves to fund mostly one-time expenditures such as

professional service contracts and workplans, in addition to drawing down the per
capita carryover. Additionally, recent requested changes in financial policies will
allow one-time use of per-capita carryforward for non-labor related relocation
expenses as we look forward to our new office space.

2. Active search for additional grant funds or partners to help offset program costs.
We are continuing to leverage grant funding from various sources that are
continuing at the federal and state level, and identifying alternative sources of
funding for specific program areas.

3. Gradual increases in per capita rates.
Following through on the plan that we set before the Board in the 2023, we have built
a proposal with gradual increases in the per capita rate. Recalling that the per
capita rate had been flat at $.83 From FY19 to FY22, the Board adopted a 4-cent

increase for 2023 and a 6-cent increase for FY24. Finally, an increase of 4 cents for
FY25 was proposed and adopted. No per-capita rate increase was requested in FY
26 and the agency is not proposing an increase in per-capita rate for FY 27.

Per Capita (Supplemental Income) and Apportionment Method
The Washington State Clean Air Act, at RCW 70A.15.1610 (formerly RCW 70.94.093),
requires that the Board of Directors of the Agency:
1.

Shall select a method of determining the apportionment of supplemental income
based on one of the following: 1) the population method (Method 1), which

allocates the per capita fees to each jurisdiction based on their respective

PDF 39

populations; 2) the assessed value method (Method 2), which allocates the per
capita fees to each jurisdiction based on their respective total assessed property
values; or 3) the 50:50 method (Method 3), which blends the population and
assessed value methods in allocating the per capita fees to jurisdictions; and,

2. Shall certify by the fourth Monday in June of each year the share of the Agency’s
supplemental income budget that shall be paid in the next calendar year by each
city and county located in the Agency's jurisdictional area.

The total supplemental income is based on the estimated four-county population of
4,564,300 (April 2025 Washington Office of Financial Management report), a proposed

rate of 97 cents per capita and assessed values from 2025 (for the 2026 tax-year) from
each of the four counties assessor’s offices.
Attachment A compares the actual 2026 per capita assessment (under the adopted

50:50 method and 97 cents) to the proposed 2027 per capita assessment at 97 cents
using the 50/50 method. The attachment also shows what the assessments would be
for CY 2027 using the population and assessed value methods as well. The proposed
supplemental income would for CY 2027 is nearly flat when compared to CY 2026

charges (a decline of 0.55%). Variations in jurisdiction’s annual per capita assessment
are due to changes in each jurisdiction’s population and assessed property value
relative to the total four-county changes.

We will be asking the Board to take action on adopting the proposed 2027 per capita
apportionment method and rate in the April Board meeting.
If you have questions, please contact me at [email protected] or 206-689-4004

or Jack Broyles at [email protected] or 206-689-4036.
Respectfully submitted,

Christine Cooley

Executive Director

PDF 40

Change
from CY 26

ATTACHMENT A
CY 2026 @ $0.97
Population

Jurisdiction
Algona
Arlington
Auburn
Bainbridge Island
Beaux Arts
Bellevue
Black Diamond
Bonney Lake
Bothell
Bremerton
Brier
Buckley
Burien
Carbonado
Carnation
Clyde Hill
Covington
Darrington
Des Moines
Dupont
Duvall
Eatonville
Edgewood
Edmonds
Enumclaw
Everett
Federal Way
Fife
Fircrest
Gig Harbor
Gold Bar
Granite Falls
Hunts Point
Index
Issaquah
Kenmore
Kent
King County
Kirkland

PDF 41

3,335
22,980
88,950
25,330
315
155,000
7,195
23,320
69,875
45,390
6,600
5,740
53,000
755
2,250
3,100
22,000
1,515
33,400
10,180
8,780
2,905
14,080
43,420
13,350
114,800
102,500
11,320
7,230
13,090
2,310
4,775
460
160
41,500
24,350
140,400
249,575
96,710

Assessed
Property
Value

1,032,558,530
5,478,941,593
19,588,747,126
13,605,348,220
306,785,288
94,828,749,051
2,395,635,321
5,192,002,779
18,868,302,622
6,296,291,106
2,237,434,536
1,180,797,430
11,356,463,823
113,521,335
667,815,336
4,556,500,487
4,662,927,915
283,928,718
6,904,063,147
2,663,836,683
2,686,276,855
465,832,520
3,514,616,244
15,996,864,784
2,882,928,004
27,847,087,386
18,177,153,603
4,439,394,394
1,487,570,867
1,487,570,867
369,804,400
892,924,763
1,936,500,750
46,186,599
17,575,356,148
8,071,672,104
34,801,187,386
79,124,366,714
47,725,489,284

50/50
Method
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

3,215
20,185
74,375
34,732
659
231,630
7,442
19,876
54,661
32,402
6,892
4,732
44,442
553
2,193
9,021
18,363
1,203
27,590
9,332
8,690
2,177
12,627
47,452
11,231
101,622
79,703
12,815
5,961
14,755
1,730
3,789
3,418
154
49,125
25,127
125,512
251,590
125,645

CY 2027 Proposed @$0.97
Population
3,235
22,388
87,610
24,764
301
153,260
7,212
22,747
50,207
44,513
6,431
5,611
51,720
728
2,250
3,002
21,495
1,474
32,534
9,884
8,546
2,842
13,696
42,205
12,998
111,259
99,813
10,961
7,023
12,717
2,280
4,632
441
165
40,313
23,784
135,897
242,718
94,915

Assessed
Property
Value

1,091,800,585
5,659,517,282
19,957,716,193
13,752,970,564
304,906,875
100,140,581,225
2,654,962,601
5,382,465,388
20,559,561,009
6,394,975,759
2,381,347,929
1,297,774,444
11,453,937,761
121,810,081
785,706,654
4,752,105,378
4,934,009,916
279,895,058
7,028,333,993
2,793,887,853
2,950,909,914
487,492,751
3,621,140,833
16,952,634,382
3,074,531,993
29,193,486,460
18,729,007,046
4,510,488,411
1,522,927,232
5,233,178,505
395,259,410
937,144,238
2,210,931,263
49,926,132
18,664,510,329
9,254,044,862
35,820,110,576
84,594,646,762
52,757,245,479

Population
Method
3,235
22,388
87,610
24,764
301
153,260
7,212
22,747
50,207
44,513
6,431
5,611
51,720
728
2,250
3,002
21,495
1,474
32,534
9,884
8,546
2,842
13,696
42,205
12,998
111,259
99,813
10,961
7,023
12,717
2,280
4,632
441
165
40,313
23,784
135,897
242,718
94,915

Assessed
Value
Method

3,348
17,356
61,206
42,177
935
307,108
8,142
16,507
63,051
19,612
7,303
3,980
35,127
374
2,410
14,574
15,131
858
21,554
8,568
9,050
1,495
11,105
51,990
9,429
89,530
57,437
13,833
4,670
16,049
1,212
2,874
6,780
153
57,240
28,380
109,852
259,432
161,794

50/50 Method

50/50 Method
3,292
19,872
74,408
33,471
618
230,184
7,677
19,627
56,629
32,063
6,867
4,796
43,424
551
2,330
8,788
18,313
1,166
27,044
9,226
8,798
2,169
12,401
47,098
11,214
100,395
78,625
12,397
5,847
14,383
1,746
3,753
3,611
159
48,777
26,082
122,875
251,077
128,355

$ Change
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

77
(313)
33
(1,261)
(41)
(1,446)
235
(249)
1,968
(339)
(25)
64
(1,018)
(2)
137
(233)
(50)
(37)
(546)
(106)
108
(8)
(226)
(354)
(17)
(1,227)
(1,078)
(418)
(114)
(372)
16
(36)
193
5
(348)
955
(2,637)
(513)
2,710

% Change
2.40%
-1.55%
0.04%
-3.63%
-6.22%
-0.62%
3.16%
-1.25%
3.60%
-1.05%
-0.36%
1.35%
-2.29%
-0.36%
6.25%
-2.58%
-0.27%
-3.08%
-1.98%
-1.14%
1.24%
-0.37%
-1.79%
-0.75%
-0.15%
-1.21%
-1.35%
-3.26%
-1.91%
-2.52%
0.92%
-0.95%
5.65%
3.25%
-0.71%
3.80%
-2.10%
-0.20%
2.16%

Change
from CY 26

ATTACHMENT A
CY 2026 @ $0.97
Population

Jurisdiction
Kitsap County
Lake Forest Park
Lake Stevens
Lakewood
Lynnwood
Maple Valley
Marysville
Medina
Mercer Island
Mill Creek
Milton
Monroe
Mountlake Terrace
Mukilteo
Newcastle
Normandy Park
North Bend
Orting
Pacific
Pierce County
Port Orchard
Poulsbo
Puyallup
Redmond
Renton
Roy
Ruston
Sammamish
Sea Tac
Seattle
Shoreline
Skykomish
Snohomish
Snohomish County
Snoqualmie
South Prairie
Stanwood
Steilacoom
Sultan
Sumner

PDF 42

Assessed
Property
Value

184,070 37,663,669,579
13,680
4,991,268,350
41,540
9,235,821,305
64,620 11,841,847,658
41,500 10,745,727,293
29,320
7,267,481,636
74,390 15,256,413,340
2,920
7,186,465,968
25,830 21,258,506,355
21,630
6,424,303,943
8,755
2,006,413,845
21,630
4,855,392,959
20,830
5,254,348,356
24,260
7,629,614,225
13,750
5,978,859,716
6,855
2,784,664,654
8,260
3,109,050,421
9,125
1,435,362,788
7,310
1,432,636,639
447,645 90,817,022,011
18,300
3,611,661,259
13,010
3,611,661,259
43,410 10,390,386,705
80,040 39,898,582,479
108,800 29,388,436,104
815
114,731,517
1,065
445,290,480
68,410 32,110,191,249
32,710
9,010,502,648
797,700 299,963,009,621
61,910 16,566,448,768
165
57,974,400
10,350
2,687,672,263
376,700 96,037,996,913
14,520
5,064,106,605
625
80,629,816
8,865
1,771,980,967
6,845
1,608,487,144
7,160
1,289,559,066
11,040
5,615,870,940

50/50
Method
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

151,414
14,870
35,385
50,878
37,857
26,211
61,250
13,273
47,601
21,090
7,445
18,113
20,435
23,059
16,533
7,919
9,136
6,794
5,811
366,944
14,834
11,591
38,197
104,647
101,255
585
1,251
86,157
30,731
881,786
57,359
176
9,454
341,150
15,397
436
7,223
5,974
5,600
14,620

CY 2027 Proposed @$0.97
Population
179,557
13,289
40,915
62,730
41,264
28,460
73,371
2,828
25,075
20,981
8,531
20,331
23,901
20,952
13,464
6,649
8,332
8,851
7,062
437,228
18,682
12,717
42,418
79,909
106,409
795
1,043
66,426
32,000
792,102
61,828
160
10,185
367,877
14,114
606
8,682
6,654
7,183
10,748

Assessed
Property
Value

38,345,506,499
5,414,902,008
9,717,825,321
12,191,828,790
11,556,993,141
7,503,879,110
16,093,049,858
8,094,334,686
22,998,862,716
6,740,035,873
2,253,989,686
5,088,002,568
5,452,155,743
8,254,546,081
6,452,421,651
2,710,850,372
3,495,389,836
1,478,753,544
1,515,145,451
95,406,767,875
3,844,615,473
3,228,720,897
10,891,982,192
42,642,069,730
30,685,148,900
124,162,822
463,376,207
35,773,072,240
9,173,661,996
308,777,816,989
17,675,581,052
70,050,779
2,853,429,570
102,888,997,491
5,543,260,019
84,496,772
1,882,695,224
1,675,292,656
1,376,265,939
5,780,873,231

Population
Method
179,557
13,289
40,915
62,730
41,264
28,460
73,371
2,828
25,075
20,981
8,531
20,331
23,901
20,952
13,464
6,649
8,332
8,851
7,062
437,228
18,682
12,717
42,418
79,909
106,409
795
1,043
66,426
32,000
792,102
61,828
160
10,185
367,877
14,114
606
8,682
6,654
7,183
10,748

Assessed
Value
Method

117,597
16,606
29,802
37,389
35,443
23,013
49,354
24,823
70,532
20,670
6,912
15,604
16,720
25,315
19,788
8,314
10,720
4,535
4,646
292,590
11,791
9,902
33,403
130,773
94,104
381
1,421
109,708
28,133
946,949
54,207
215
8,751
315,536
17,000
259
5,774
5,138
4,221
17,729

50/50 Method

50/50 Method
148,577
14,948
35,359
50,060
38,354
25,737
61,363
13,826
47,804
20,826
7,722
17,968
20,311
23,134
16,626
7,482
9,526
6,693
5,855
364,909
15,237
11,310
37,911
105,341
100,257
588
1,232
88,067
30,067
869,526
58,018
188
9,468
341,707
15,557
433
7,228
5,896
5,702
14,239

$ Change
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

(2,837)
78
(26)
(818)
497
(474)
113
553
203
(264)
277
(145)
(124)
75
93
(437)
390
(101)
44
(2,035)
403
(281)
(286)
694
(998)
3
(19)
1,910
(664)
(12,260)
659
12
14
557
160
(3)
5
(78)
102
(381)

% Change
-1.87%
0.52%
-0.07%
-1.61%
1.31%
-1.81%
0.18%
4.17%
0.43%
-1.25%
3.72%
-0.80%
-0.61%
0.33%
0.56%
-5.52%
4.27%
-1.49%
0.76%
-0.55%
2.72%
-2.42%
-0.75%
0.66%
-0.99%
0.51%
-1.52%
2.22%
-2.16%
-1.39%
1.15%
6.82%
0.15%
0.16%
1.04%
-0.69%
0.07%
-1.31%
1.82%
-2.61%

Change
from CY 26

ATTACHMENT A
CY 2026 @ $0.97
Population

Jurisdiction
Tacoma
Tukwila
University Place
Wilkeson
Woodinville
Woodway
Yarrow Point

PDF 43

225,100
22,930
35,970
500
13,900
1,345
1,135

Assessed
Property
Value

44,791,567,761
9,950,560,640
7,209,905,156
81,703,746
7,024,376,056
1,094,020,553
2,250,588,906

50/50
Method
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

183,074
27,538
29,341
377
18,331
2,457
4,264

CY 2027 Proposed @$0.97
Population
221,548
22,271
35,056
480
13,638
1,305
1,096

Assessed
Property
Value

45,892,358,091
10,091,689,007
7,535,179,170
85,752,489
7,973,885,239
1,185,897,384
2,519,355,320

Population
Method
221,548
22,271
35,056
480
13,638
1,305
1,096

Assessed
Value
Method

140,741
30,949
23,109
263
24,454
3,637
7,726

50/50 Method

50/50 Method
181,145
26,610
29,083
372
19,046
2,471
4,411

$ Change
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

(1,929)
(928)
(258)
(5)
715
14
147

% Change
-1.05%
-3.37%
-0.88%
-1.33%
3.90%
0.57%
3.45%

Fiscal Year 2027 Projections & Per Capita Discussion
Board Meeting
March 26, 2026

PDF 44

Today’s Agenda:
1) Review of FY 25 “final” numbers
2) Estimate of FY 26 end of year
numbers
3) Discussion of FY 27 – FY 29
projections
4)CY 27 Per-Capita discussion
5) Public Hearing – Compliance
fee proposals
6) Adoption of FY 27 financial
policy revisions

PDF 45

Review of Budget Briefing Memo data
Beginning Fund Balance
Revenues:
Federal and State Grants
Per Capita Revenues
Fee Program Revenues
Other Revenues
Total Revenues
Personnel Expenses
Grant Pass-through payments
Operating Expenses
Total Expenses
Net Surplus (Deficit)
Fund Balance (fiscal year-end):

Fiscal Year 2027 Projections & Per Capita Discussion
March 26, 2026

PDF 46

FY25
Actuals

FY26
Estimate

FY27
Projection

FY28
Projection

FY29
Projection

12,079,110

14,124,279

13,436,853

10,562,112

7,703,110

2,005,905

$ 1,630,905

$ 1,610,105

$ 2,881,567

$

3,017,664

$

4,303,986

4,422,550

4,398,298

4,530,247

4,666,154

6,982,884

6,891,890

7,134,674

7,288,880

7,446,515

910,694

1,018,047

200,000

200,000

200,000

15,079,131

15,350,151

13,738,877

13,650,032

13,922,775

10,123,827

11,802,129

12,943,500

13,441,498

13,958,666

752,343

1,078,255

963,000

503,000

800,000

2,157,792

3,157,193

2,707,118

2,564,536

2,968,920

13,033,962

16,037,577

16,613,618

16,509,035

17,727,586

(687,426)

$ (2,874,741)

$ (2,859,003)

$ (3,804,811)

13,436,853

10,562,112

7,703,110

3,898,298

$ 2,045,169
14,124,279

$

Federal Grants Used in Budget Projections
2025 Actual 2026 Budget
Federal Grants:
105 Grant - Federal Core (EPA/Ecology)
Sec 103 Grant - PM 2.5 (EPA/Ecology)
TREE Community Monitoring Grant (EPA)
Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (EPA)
Diesel to Electric Yard Truck Replacement DERA
Local Partner Inflation Reduction Act Air Monitoring
Subtotal - Federal Grants

Fiscal Year 2027 Projections & Per Capita Discussion
March 26, 2026

PDF 47

912,641 $

912,641

-

2026
Estimate

2027
Budget

2028
Projection

2029
Projection

2030
Projection

903,705 $

903,705 $

903,705 $

903,705

91,900

903,706 $
91,900

91,900

91,900

91,900

91,900

325,417

130,000

102,680

-

-

-

-

283,370

319,156

315,100

195,500

-

-

-

13,433

744,800

597,600

454,000

-

-

-

65,796

247,000

138,878

137,000

-

-

-

1,600,657

2,445,497

2,149,864

1,782,105

995,605

995,605

995,605

State Grants Used in Budget Projections
2025 Actual 2026 Budget
State Grants:
State Core (Ecology)
Sec 103 Grant - PM 2.5 (EPA/Ecology)-State
State Proviso - Ultrafine Monitoring (state funds)
State Proviso - Local Health Dept Coordination
Woodstove Repl/Removal (Ecol)
WoodStove Educ & Enforcement Grant (Ecology)
eCHE Crgo Hdlg Equipment (DERA/EPA) Ecol-00042- ST
Subtotal - State Grants

Fiscal Year 2027 Projections & Per Capita Discussion
March 26, 2026

PDF 48

2026
Estimate

2027
Budget

2028
2029
2030
Projection Projection Projection

608,428

608,428

465,000

-

232,500

232,500

232,500

20,593

20,800

20,800

20,800

20,800

-

-

44,821

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

47,338
473,248

200,000

300,000

222,000

30,000

30,000

30,000

86,482

86,000

82,000

82,145

82,145

82,145

82,145

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1,280,910

915,228

867,800

324,945

365,445

344,645

344,645

What is Per Capita?
This funding is required under the
Washington Clean Air Act and it is to be
used for expenses not covered by fees or
grants.
Must be used in accordance with the
apportionment methods detailed in RCW
70A.15.1610 and adopted along with our
budget.
Fiscal Year 2027 Projections & Per Capita Discussion
March 26, 2026

PDF 49

Fiscal Year 2027
Per Capita Discussion
• Washington State Clean Air Act, at
RCW 70A.15.1610
• Per Capita apportionment methods
• Revisit past proposed increases
• FY 2027 Proposed Per Capita Rate
• Financial Projections
• Questions

Fiscal Year 2027 Projections & Per Capita Discussion
March 26, 2026

PDF 50

Washington State Clean Air Act, RCW
70A.15.1610
Washington State Clean Air Act, RCW 70A.15.1610 requires the
Board of Directors to:
• Select a method of determining the apportionment of
supplemental income from one of the following: the
population method, the assessed value method, or the
50:50 method
• Certify by the 4th Monday in June of each year the amount
to paid by each city and county in the next year.

Fiscal Year 2027 Projections & Per Capita Discussion
March 26, 2026

PDF 51

Agency Recommendation:
50:50 Apportionment Method
• Population Method – allocates per capita fees to each jurisdiction based on their
respective populations (for FY 2027 this is based on data from the April 2025 State
Office of Financial Management reports).
• Assessed Value Method – allocates per capita fees to each jurisdiction based on
their respective total assessed property values (for FY 2027 this is based on
assessed value data for the 2026 tax year from respective county assessor offices).
• 50:50 Method – blends the population and assessed value methods in allocating
the per capita fees to jurisdictions

Fiscal Year 2027 Projections & Per Capita Discussion
March 26, 2026

PDF 52

County by County Applications
Population

COUNTY:

METHOD 1

KING COUNTY INCORPORATED
KING COUNTY UNINCORPORATED
KITSAP INCORPORATED
KITSAP UNINCORPORATED
PIERCE INCORPORATED
PIERCE UNINCORPORATED
SNOHOMISH INCORPORATED
SNOHOMISH UNINCORPORATED

$

2,096,632

$

TOTAL:

Fiscal Year 2027 Projections & Per Capita Discussion
March 26, 2026

PDF 53

Assesed Value

%

METHOD 2

50%/50%

%

METHOD 3

%

47.67% $ 2,562,746

58.27% $ 2,329,698

52.97%

242,718

5.52% $

259,432

5.90% $

251,077

5.71%

$

100,676

2.29% $

83,482

1.90% $

92,081

2.09%

$

179,557

4.08% $

117,597

2.67% $

148,577

3.38%

$

493,875

11.23% $

352,972

8.03% $

423,430

9.63%

$

437,228

9.94% $

292,590

6.65% $

364,909

8.30%

$

479,711

10.91% $

413,918

9.41% $

446,819

10.16%

$

367,877

8.36% $

315,536

7.17% $

341,707

7.77%

$

4,398,274

100.00% $ 4,398,298

100.00%

100.00% $ 4,398,273

Gradual Increases
• The per capita rate had been flat at 83 cents from FY19FY22
• The Board adopted a 4-cent increase for FY23 and
discussed a plan for future gradual increases
• The board adopted a 6-cent increase for FY24 with
discussion of a future 6-cent increase for FY25
• The board adopted a 4-cent increase for FY 25 – this
results in our current rate of $0.97
• No change in per capita rate was proposed for FY 26

Fiscal Year 2027 Projections & Per Capita Discussion
March 26, 2026

PDF 54

Agency Recommendation:
No Increase to Rate
•

For FY 27 Agency proposes keeping the Per Capita rate
the same at 97 cents.

•

The CY 27 Per Capita calculation resulted in revenues
that are materially consistent with CY 26 calculation.

•

Our normal billing is in January so we will only
recognize 50% of this revenue in FY 27.

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under
CC BY-NC

Fiscal Year 2027 Projections & Per Capita Discussion
March 26, 2026

PDF 55

Fiscal Year 2027 Per Capita Discussion
• Next Steps
• April - Per Capita Method and Rate &
Compliance Fee Adoption
• May - Draft Budget
• June - Budget Adoption
• Questions?
• Thank you!
Fiscal Year 2027 Projections & Per Capita Discussion
March 26, 2026

PDF 56

DATE
TO
SUBJECT

March 19, 2026
Board of Directors

Puget Sound Clean Air Agency
Public Hearings on Fee Adjustment Proposals

Honorable Members:
At the March Board meeting, the Board will conduct two public hearings on proposed fee
increases for the Agency’s Air Operating Permit (AOP) and Registration programs that are under
consideration for the upcoming budget cycle. Board action on the proposals will occur at the
April Board meeting. If approved, the increases would become effective on June 1, 2026, and
would be incorporated into the Agency’s FY 27 budget.

At the February Board meeting, staff provided an overview of potential fee increases for the Air
Operating Permit (AOP) and Registration programs that are under consideration for the

upcoming budget cycle. These are two of the four fee programs administered by the Agency’s
Compliance Division. At this time, no fee changes are proposed for the Asbestos program or the
Notice of Construction program. The proposals are discussed below.
1.

Air Operating Permit

There are approximately 29 facilities covered by the Agency’s AOP program. AOP fees include
three main components: (1) base fees that are paid annually and are in three tiers, based on

the complexity of the source type; (2) emissions fees ($/ton) that are based on actual
emissions of various pollutants during each calendar year; and (3) permit transaction fees that
are paid upon permit issuance or renewal.

The proposed increase in annual base fees for AOP facilities is 3.25%. No changes in the
emissions fees or permit transaction fees are proposed. Operating permit fees were last

changed in 2024. The Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the region has increased approximately 3%
over the previous year, and this fee adjustment is intended to keep pace with the CPI. The

persistence of high interest rates combined with possible changes in various federal
government policies point toward continued increases in the CPI in the coming year.

PDF 57

2.

Registration

There are approximately 3,000 active facilities covered by the Agency’s Registration program.
Registration fees include two main components: (1) base fees that are paid annually and are in
several categories, based on the complexity of the source type; (2) emissions fees ($/ton) that
are based on actual emissions of various pollutants during the calendar year, though most
registered sources emit at rates below the thresholds that require reporting of emissions.
Registration fees were last changed in 2025. The proposed increase in annual base fees for
registered sources is 3.25%, for the same reasons specified for AOP facilities, above.

Conclusion
The public comment periods for these proposed changes began on February 27 and end on
March 30. Agency staff sent postcards to all affected sources at the beginning of the comment
periods. The regular public notification processes were used, including newspaper notice,
website publication, and email listserve notifications to subscribers. The notice and proposed

regulatory language can be viewed at https://www.pscleanair.gov/221/Public-Hearings.
I look forward to your thoughts or questions.
Respectfully submitted,

Christine Cooley
Executive Director
smv/jpd

PDF 58

DATE
TO
SUBJECT

March 19, 2026
Board of Directors

Puget Sound Clean Air Agency
Comprehensive Climate Action Plan Implementation: Next Steps

Honorable Board Members:
At your March meeting, we will share an update on next steps to support implementation
of the Final Puget Sound Region Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP). We will share
a recap of feedback heard through CCAP development and at the CCAP Celebration
meeting, held on December 9th at the Museum of Flight, as well as a refined list of
questions that remain for ongoing research. This approach is in line with the rollout plan
presented to you during our December in-person meeting.
During the presentation, we will highlight existing models and examples for climate action
in the region and discuss specific next steps for the Agency to develop a proposal for
regional climate coordination to support CCAP implementation.
Questions we have for you on this topic (following the presentation) include:
1. Do you have examples of regional collaboration to share?
2. Who should be on our list of jurisdiction partners for outreach?
3. What additional forums or outreach events do you recommend we attend?
4. What additional questions or topics should we solicit feedback on?
We look forward to discussing this important topic with you all.
Respectfully submitted,

Christine Cooley
Executive Director

PDF 59

Puget Sound Region Comprehensive Climate
Action Plan (CCAP) Implementation: Next Steps
Board of Directors
March 26, 2026

PDF 60

Presentation Purpose
•

Provide updates on next steps to support CCAP
implementation
•

CCAP outreach and feedback to date

•

Questions needing ongoing research

•

Highlight existing models for regional
collaboration

•

Provide specific Agency next steps and timeline

•

Recap feedback heard from the Advisory Council

•

Questions for the Board

Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) Implementation: Next Steps
March 11, 2026

PDF 61

CCAP Purpose
“This plan was developed by leveraging the tremendous
opportunity for collaborative climate action that exists in
the Puget Sound region. Our counties share common
transportation systems, industrial sectors, and air quality
concerns. With these shared realities comes the power to
coordinate, scale, and accelerate climate mitigation
efforts in ways that are more effective and equitable than
if each community acted alone.”

- PSCAA Board of Directors
Final Comprehensive Climate Action Plan

Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) Implementation: Next Steps
March 26, 2026

PDF 62

The Next 300 Days
•

Pull new partners into implementing and
celebrating climate wins
•
•

•

Establish a governance structure for ongoing
regional collaboration
•

•

Regional Electric Vehicle (REV) Collaborative
Energize Program

Goal for consistency across 4 counties that maximizes
scale while promoting innovation and specialization

Grow the Communications Strategy
•

Frontline communities and other partners

Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) Implementation: Next Steps
March 26, 2026

PDF 63

CCAP Outreach
To inform CCAP development:
•

CPRG Steering Committee & Technical Workgroups
(2023-2025)
•

•

Community Workshops (2025)
•

•

Transportation, built environment, waste and consumption, equity,
workforce, utilities

Held in each county

Existing Forums (2023-2025)
•

K4C, ASCA, PSRC, jurisdiction meetings, others

To inform CCAP implementation:
•

CCAP Celebration & Next Steps Meeting (12/9/2025)

•

9Zero Climate Innovation Hub (2/24/2026)

Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) Implementation: Next Steps
March 26, 2026

PDF 64

Incorporating Feedback
Heard on the CCAP
Types of feedback heard:
•

Environmental justice feedback
•

•

Community feedback
•

•

Incorporated into the descriptions of strategies and
actions and implementation considerations

Incorporated into sector introductions and
implementation considerations

Technical feedback
•

Incorporated into the descriptions of strategies and
actions and sector descriptions

Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) Implementation: Next Steps
March 26, 2026

PDF 65

Feedback Heard at CCAP Celebration Meeting
Question 1. What are three ways a regional group can
continue momentum around the CCAP’s recommendations
over the next year?
• Identifying priorities and scalable solutions
• Identifying funding
• Enhancing coordination and capacity-building
• Communicating progress

Question 2. What barriers exist to implementing the CCAP’s
recommendations and how might we address them?
• Identifying roles and responsibilities
• Addressing funding gaps
• Communicating momentum
• Developing public-private partnerships

Question 3. How can we ensure overburdened and
frontline communities are actively involved at all stages of
planning?
• Use storytelling
• Engage trusted partners
• Provide compensation
• Engage youth
• Communicate expectations

Question 4. Would nominating a backbone organization be
helpful to guide regional efforts by cities and counties?
• Identify and support new regional climate programs
• Identify new funding and coordinate regional grant
applications
• Provide administrative support to bolster capacity
• Support implementation by sharing lessons learned
from successful programs (e.g., Energize, REV
Collaborative)

Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) Implementation: Next Steps
March 26, 2026

PDF 66

Questions Identified for Ongoing Input
Organization & Structure
•

What would be most useful to your jurisdiction to make progress on emissions
reductions?

•

What sort of organizational structure makes sense with varying implementation efforts?
•

•

•

•

Function
•

Would it be helpful for a regional group to:
•

Have legislative influence or direct ties to elected officials to ensure
buy-in?

What climate strategies, actions, or programs do you think are best implemented at
the regional (4-county) level? Which do you think should be implemented locally (i.e.,
at the city or county level)? What criteria can help distinguish between the two?

•

Apply for grants on behalf of the region?

•

Provide administrative support? If so, what kind?

Would a regional collaboration program convene one single group, or could there be
a need for multiple groups working collectively?

•

Highlight/communicate successes and share lessons learned?

•

Support outreach to frontline and overburdened communities? If so,
how?

How would jurisdictions access or utilize a regional coordination program in their climate
planning and implementation work?
•

What specific gaps or challenges does your jurisdiction face regarding pursuing
grants or implementing climate programs?

Other

•

What would be most useful to your jurisdiction to make progress on emissions
reductions?

•

•

What is different for smaller or less resourced jurisdictions vs. larger or more
resourced jurisdictions?

Who else should we speak to regarding developing a regional
coordination program for climate action?

How should a regional coordination program leverage the work already underway by
existing multi-jurisdiction bodies in the region (e.g., K4C, ASCA, PSRC, PSCAA) as well as
tribal governments, community-based organizations, foundations and think-tanks,
industry, conservation districts, school districts, academia, labor organizations, and
others?
•

When collaborating with other jurisdictions on a program or grant, what has worked
well? What could have worked better? What lessons can you share?

Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) Implementation: Next Steps
March 26, 2026

PDF 67

Agency Next Steps & Proposed Timeline

FebruaryMarch
2026

Ask questions to
make informed
decisions about
how best to
support regional
climate action

April-June
2026

Continue to
solicit input to
understand
needs and
opportunities
across the
region

JulyAugust
2026

Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) Implementation: Next Steps
March 26, 2026

PDF 68

Propose a
pathway to
support regional
climate efforts
and guide
further action

September
2026ongoing

Provide ongoing
coordination and
support for
regional climate
strategy
implementation

Examples of Existing Models for
Regional Collaboration
•

•

Sector-specific models:
•

Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment
(EVSE) Charging Infrastructure Plan

•

Energize Program

Geography-specific models:
•

King County-Cities Climate
Collaboration (K4C)

•

Alliance for Sustainable Climate
Action (ASCA) – Pierce County

•

Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC)
committees

Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) Implementation: Next Steps
March 26, 2026

PDF 69

Ongoing Research
•

Identifying additional models
for collaboration and regional
needs to inform Agency
proposal
•

Staff training on Systems Change

•

Monitoring K4C 2.0 proposal and
outcomes

Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) Implementation: Next Steps
March 26, 2026

PDF 70

Feedback Heard from
the Advisory Council
Questions posed
1. Do you have examples of
regional collaboration to
share?
2. Who should be on our list of
jurisdiction partners for
outreach?
3. What additional forums or
outreach events do you
recommend we attend?
4. What additional questions or
topics should we solicit
feedback on?

Input provided
• Overall support for a coordinating
body to help scale climate projects.
• Regional collaboration examples for
the Agency to consider - EnviroStars
Program
• Suggestions for jurisdiction partners
and forums outreach (e.g., Snohomish
County Tomorrow); specific forums for
different sectors; regional planners
forums [Commerce]; Climate Element
Planning

Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) Implementation: Next Steps
March 26, 2026

PDF 71

Questions for Board Members
To inform our proposal for regional
collaboration:
1.

Do you have examples of regional
collaboration to share?

2.

Who should be on our list of jurisdiction
partners for outreach?

3.

What additional forums or outreach events
do you recommend we attend?

4.

What additional questions or topics should
we solicit feedback on?

Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) Implementation: Next Steps
March 26, 2026

PDF 72

Questions?

Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) Implementation: Next Steps
March 26, 2026

PDF 73

DATE
TO
SUBJECT

March 19, 2026
Board of Directors and Advisory Council Members
Puget Sound Clean Air Agency

Final Draft of Governance Handbook for Review

Honorable Board Members,
You will be reviewing an initial draft of the Governance Handbook during your March
meeting. This will be emailed to you before your board meeting after the Board

Operations and Personnel subcommittee review the draft. Beginning in December

2025, Chair Bushnell has led the development of this Handbook as part of his intention

to deepen the Board’s shared understanding of the Agency, Board roles, and how the

Board can best support the Agency’s work ahead. Since then, feedback from the Board
as well as additional oversight from the Operations and Personnel Subcommittee has
shaped the content of this Handbook – first with the development of an annual work

plan, then a draft list of questions that new Board members may find useful, and now
a full draft of the Handbook.

This Handbook will be used during onboarding new board members and provide a

constant reference point for questions as they arise throughout a board member’s
term.

Your guidance on both the content and the process we use to institutionalize this

resource is appreciated. I am looking forward to continuing this conversation in order
to provide a useful resource for Board Members.
Respectfully submitted,

Christine S. Cooley
Executive Director

PDF 74

DATE

March 19, 2026

TO

Board of Directors
Puget Sound Clean Air Agency

SUBJECT

Staff Report

Honorable Board Members:
Below is a list of timely and important updates of progress towards the objectives in
our Strategic Plan, organized by objectives.

SECTION ONE – PROTECT AND IMPROVE AIR QUALITY AND PUBLIC HEALTH, REDUCE AIR
POLLUTION DISPARITIES, AND PROTECT OUR CLIMATE

Objective 1.1 – Meet and Surpass the Health-Based National Ambient Air Quality
Standards

Ongoing work remains on track.

Objective 1.2 – Measure, Analyze, and Communicate Air Quality Risk

Last month, we completed our final results workshops for

our EPA-funded Community Science Trailer for Researching
Environmental Equity (TREE) project. Our last phase is to

complete and submit a final report to EPA, making final

payments to our partners, and close out the grant.

The three-year project paired a trailer equipped with state-of-the-art air monitoring
equipment with community-led walking tours using handheld air sensors.

We translated our workshop materials and used interpreters during the sessions in
Spanish, Cantonese, and Mandarin. During these sessions, we shared summaries
and full results from the community-led monitoring efforts, including analyses

conducted by the University of Washington. Our results workshops were held at:
•
•

PDF 75

Seattle Central District: February 3, 2026
Seattle Chinatown–International District: February 12, 2026 (fully in Cantonese
and Mandarin)

•
•

Lakewood: February 19, 2026
Seattle Duwamish Valley: February 24, 2026

We will share our full results with you at a future Board meeting after we summarize
the feedback from the workshops.

Earlier this month, monitoring staff hosted an air quality community monitoring

workshop with Partners in Employment (PIE) in North SeaTac Park last week with

immigrant youth. The youth learned basics of air quality and then used hand-held

sensors to walk around the neighborhood, explore, and learn in real-time about what
can influence air quality.

Staff also co-hosted two community air quality monitoring workshops this month

with SoundBio Lab and youth from Big Picture High School in Burien, following the
same model used in our work with PIE.

Objective 1.3 – Reduce Inequities in Air Pollution and Effectively Engage on Air
Quality Topics

The community sponsorship program has provided a $7,500 sponsorship to Forth to
support the Forth Roadmap Conference in Seattle this year. The conference is the

premier electric transportation conference in the U.S. and provided access to insights
from around the world that can help attendees overcome EV challenges, discover
new trends and best practices in electric transportation, explore equity-driven
strategies, and learn about new products, technologies and companies.

Learn more about the Forth Roadmap Conference here: Forth Roadmap Conference
Objective 1.4 – Reduce Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions to Reduce Our Region’s
Contribution to Climate Change

Staff are moving forward with next steps for implementation
of the Puget Sound Region Comprehensive Climate Plan
(CCAP), and broader regional coordination on climate

action. This includes refining questions whose answers will

inform potential pathways for regional collaboration, as well as identifying partners

who are well positioned to provide answers to those questions. Staff will develop and

implement an outreach plan to solicit input from partners, and use the input

received to propose a pathway to effectively support regional climate efforts. We
look forward to sharing ongoing progress with you over the next several months.

PDF 76

Agency staff, with the support of a consulting team led by DKS Associates, also

continue to develop a regional electric vehicle charging infrastructure plan. Staff and
the consulting team are currently planning engagement with technical experts, as

well as city and county staff to help inform the plan design. Other audiences will be

engaged beginning in late spring. The consulting team continues technical analysis
and modeling work, which, alongside engagement results, will inform actionable

recommendations for the plan’s users. Visit PugetSoundREV.org to sign up for project
emails.

Objective 1.5 – Prevent, Reduce, and Control Emissions and Exposure from
Stationary Sources and Other Regulated Activities

We have experienced mild weather and favorable conditions during

recent winter heating seasons that has meant fewer heating season air

quality burn bans being called to manage particulate concentrations in
our neighborhoods. What has been continuing throughout that period

are various planned wood smoke patrols by our inspection staff. Those patrols are
looking for excessively smoky chimney smoke from residences. Our regulation
prohibits excess of emissions from solid fuel burning devices that exceed 20%

opacity (an observed smoke density) for more than 6 minutes in an hour. If an

excessively smoky chimney is observed, our inspectors typically observe the levels of
visible emission for an initial period. They will leave for a brief period and then return

to see if the excess emissions are still in progress. If so, a visible emission observation
procedure is completed and documented. If it exceeds the standard, a notice of

violation may be issued to the homeowner of record. We have several of these
cases documented each year and it provides a continuing awareness of the

requirements and provides a means of engagement to also provide educational
information on clean burning options.

Objective 1.6 – Reduce Harmful Wood Smoke Emissions and Exposure

The Wood Stove Recycling Program of Puget Sound (WSRP)
continues to reward homeowners throughout our four-

county jurisdiction who recycle their old, polluting wood

stoves. Since reopening in fall of 2025, over 660 households

have enrolled in the current program, and 356 old wood stoves have been recycled
and recycling rewards paid, resulting in cleaner air in our region.

We recently developed a Wood Stove Recycling Program promotional packet to
share with regional partners. Working with trusted partners in priority communities
disproportionately impacted by poorer air quality from wood smoke will increase

PDF 77

both awareness and access to the program and incentive, helping us better serve
our constituents.

Objective 1.7 – Reduce Harmful Diesel Pollution Emissions and Exposure

Agency staff continue to coordinate with project partners to complete
yard truck replacement projects under the Agency’s Diesel Emission

Reduction Act (DERA) grant. Five electric trucks are expected to come

online in 2026. Once the new electric trucks are in service, the old diesel
trucks will be scrapped, advancing the project’s goal of reducing diesel

emissions and improving air quality in overburdened communities. Agency staff

continue to collaborate with project partners to plan community and industry
engagement following project completion.

In anticipation of future grant opportunities, the Agency is working to build a pipeline
for additional diesel emission reduction projects. Please help spread the word about
our diesel program using the text provided in the “News Worth Sharing” section of
this report.

SECTION TWO – VALUES IN ACTION

Objective 2.1 – Attract, Develop, and Inspire Talented Staff That Reflect the
Diversity of the Region and Develop a Culture of Belonging

We are currently recruiting for our Compliance Director and Records Administrator
positions. And we are going into interviews for an Inspection Manager this month.
We will also be welcoming the first of two new Inspectors at the end of the month.
As we work to continue training and developing our team, we are bringing a

continuation of our Emotional Intelligence (EI) series to our Staff Retreat. This session
will focus on EI and Change Management to help support our preparation for the
Agency’s move.

Objective 2.2 – Develop and Sustain a Culture that Embeds Equity Principles in Our

Day-to-Day Work and Decisions
Ongoing work remains on track.

Objective 2.3 – Build and Maintain the Agency’s Long-Term Financial Strength and
Ensure Accountability

The State Auditor’s office completed fieldwork on March 6, 2026. The audit identified
no material misstatements and no instances of non-compliance with state law and

PDF 78

agency policy – an “unmodified” opinion. The state auditor’s office provided staff

and the Board of Directors with an “exit” packet of information for their use and will

be scheduling an exit conference with the Board and Executive Director at a mutually
convenient time.

Objective 2.4 – Develop and Implement Technology To Succeed

I.T. continues to focus on our cloud first objective and keeping the Agency’s network
and data secure.

Objective 2.5 – Model Environmental Stability
Ongoing work remains on track.
NEWS WORTH SHARING

Thinking about switching from diesel equipment to electric? The Puget Sound Clean

Air Agency is seeking partners in King, Kitsap, Pierce, or Snohomish Counties for diesel
emission reduction projects. Learn more and share your project ideas to update
your diesel equipment and bring cleaner air to our communities at:
www.pscleanair.gov/GrantOpportunities
Focus Topic Icon Key:

Diesel Emission
Reduction

Opportunities to
Reduce Emissions
and Exposures

Transparency &
Information
Sharing

Working with Tribal
Nations and Tribal
Organization

Community Science
& Education

2026 BOARD MEETING DATES

January 22

February 26
March 26
April 23
May 27

June 15
July 23

September 24 - Board-Advisory-Council Joint Hybrid Meeting
October 22

PDF 79

Compliance Engagement
& Assistance

November 19

Respectfully submitted,

Christine S. Cooley
Executive Director

PDF 80

DATE
TO
SUBJECT

March 19, 2026
Board of Directors
Puget Sound Clean Air Agency
Legislative Session Update

Honorable Board Members:
March 12th was the last scheduled day for the Washington State Legislature’s Legislative
Session. The Agency has continued weekly meetings our partners at the Department of
Ecology and Washington Asir Quality Managers Groups to coordinate on legislative
topics. I will update the board on our legislative activities based on the Agency legislative
priorities provided at the November 2025 Board meeting.

Respectfully submitted,

Christine S. Cooley
Executive Director

PDF 81

PUGET SOUND CLEAN AIR AGENCY
Notices of Construction/Notifications February 2026
Approved

King
4

Kitsap
1

Pierce
1

Snohomish
2

Mobile
0

Total
8

Notices of Construction Approved February 1 through February 28, 2026
Approved
2/2/2026

NC#
12564

2/10/2026
2/12/2026

12619
12624

2/13/2026

12604

2/17/2026

12620

2/19/2026

12577

2/27/2026

12552

Firm Name
Boeing Commercial Airplane
Seattle
Dillanos Coffee Roasters, Inc
Advanced Autobody LLC

Location
Seattle

Equipment
Boiler

Sumner
Kent

Boeing Commercial Airplane
Group - Everett
Boeing Commercial Airplane
Group - Everett
Asphalt Equipment & Service
Company
US Navy Naval Undersea
Warfare Center

Everett
Everett

Coffee roaster
General Order ARO-1 (July 8,
2014)
Modification to existing spray
coating operation
Two laser cutters and engravers

Auburn

Spray booth

Keyport

Modification -thermal spray booth

Notifications Approved February 1 through February 28, 2026
Approved
2/11/2026

NC#
Firm Name
2004N
Lakeside Industries Inc #32

Location
Issaquah

Equipment
Portable hot mix asphalt plant

Notices of Construction Received February 1 through February 28, 2026
Received
2/2/2026
2/4/2026

NC#
12623
12626

Firm Name
Tanager Apartments
Costco Wholesale #110

Location
Seattle
Issaquah

Equipment
Soil remediation
Relocation of equipment

Notifications Received February 1 through February 28, 2026
Received
2/26/2026
2/27/2026

NC#
Firm Name
2007N North City Chevron
2006N PetroCard

Location
Shoreline
Bremerton

Page 1 of 1

PDF 82

Equipment
Vapor recovery
Vapor recovery

CONTRACT LIST FOR FY26
as of 03/18/26
NUMBER
2026-001
2026-002
2026-003
2026-005
2026-006
2026-008
2026-009
2026-010
2026-011
2026-012
2026-013
2026-015
2026-016
2026-018
2026-019
2026-020
2026-021
2026-022
2026-023
2026-024

PDF 83

VENDOR/RECIPIENT

DESCRIPTION/PROJECT

Titanium Legal Services, Inc (formerly APEX)
Legal messenger services
ABC Legal Services
Legal messenger services
Agilaire, LLC
EULA review for Agilaire Client
Department of Enterprise Services
Facilitation Fundamentals Staff Training
Department of Enterprise Services
Facilitation Fundamentals Staff Training
Reclaiming Us
2025 Q3 Equity Workshop Series
Kent School District
Kent Monitoring Site Lease
WSRP Program Approved Recycling Facility
Braven Auto & Metals, LLC
WSRP Program Approved Recycling Facility - Calbag
Calbag Metals Co.
WSRP Approved Recycling Facility - American Northwest
Recycling
American Northwest Recycling
WSRP Program-Approved Recycling Facility - Radius
Radius Recycling
Tacoma Cambodian Evangelical Church of the Christian & Tacoma South L Temp Site Enlargement for
Missionary Alliance
storage
D2 Creative
WSRP FY26 Digital Advertising
National Training Institute
Implicit Bias Training
Museum of Flight
Venue for CCAP in-person meeting
McCormick & Schmick's
Catering for CCAP in-person meeting
DKS Associates
Regional EVSE Plan
Software training and support for MIP
Clark Nuber
Venue for Lakewood TREE Project Results
Workshop
Clover Park Technical College
Kent Electrical Permit Correction Engineering Design Plan
Robison Engineering, LLC

START
DATE

EXPIRES

AMOUNT

FUND SOURCE

7/1/25
7/1/25
7/22/25
10/2/25
10/15/25
7/30/25
9/9/25
9/9/25
9/8/25

6/30/26
6/30/26
12/30/99
10/2/25
10/16/25
12/31/25
8/31/30
6/30/27
6/30/27

$3,000.00 Legal Department
$8,000.00 Legal Department
$0.00 n/a
$6,713.00 HR Training
$6,713.00 HR Training
$5,000.00 Equity Workshop Series
$24,000.00 PM2.5 grant
$0.00 n/a
$0.00 n/a

9/12/25
9/9/27

6/30/27
6/30/27

5/1/24
10/23/25
12/3/25
11/13/25
11/12/25
12/8/25
1/8/26

4/30/35
6/30/26
12/3/25
12/9/25
12/9/25
12/31/26
n/a

$26,400.00 Monitoring Rent
$45,000.00 Per Capita
$5,000.00 HR Training
$1,150.00 CPRG Grant
$2,097.55 CPRG Grant
$260,000.00 CPRG Grant
$16,500.00 PFED

1/16/26

2/19/26

$780.00 EPA TREE Grant

2/2/26

6/30/26

$0.00 n/a
$0.00 n/a

$2,427.70 Local Partner IRA grant Task 1

PROJECT MGR/
CONTACT
Charlotte Allen
Audrianna Garcia
Matt Harper
Sharon Helmsetter
Sharon Helmsetter
Sharon Helmsetter
Matt Harper
Gail Pethe
Gail Pethe
Gail Pethe
Gail Pethe
Matt Harper
Phyllis McElroy
Megan Sweeney
Sara Hetrick
Sara Hetrick
Erica Walters
Jack Broyles Jr.
Isha Khanna
Matt Harper

CONTRACT LIST FOR FY26
as of 03/18/26

NUMBER

VENDOR/RECIPIENT

DESCRIPTION/PROJECT

START DATE

EXPIRES

AMOUNT

FUND SOURCE

PROJECT MGR/
CONTACT

2025-001
2025-002
2025-003

Apex Legal Service
ABC Legal Service
Ring Central Inc.

Messenger Service
Messenger Service
Telephone System

07/01/24
07/01/24
07/08/24

06/30/25
06/30/25
09/15/26

$3,000
$8,000
$7,789

All Agency
All Agency
All Agency

Jennifer Dold
Jennifer Dold
Andy Tudhope

2025-004

Coyote Central

Temporary Lease for TREE trailer

12/01/24

02/28/25

$450

Duwamish River Community Hub
International Code Council
South Seattle College
Template
BNSF Railway
Lineage Logistics
Lynden Transport
Alaska Marine Lines
Westlaw/Thomas Reuters
National Training Institute
ORCAA, NWCAA, SRCAA, LRAPA, SWCAA, BCAA
Bobby Humes
Vault89 Strategies
TBD
The Rhizome Collaborative
Everett Community College
Kent City Parks, Recreation, & Community Services
Clover Park Technical College
Reclaiming Us
ECDLR Community Development, LLC
Bremerton Government Center

Tree Listening Session Venue
ICC - Gas Station Tester - Installer Certification Program
Air Monitoring Lease Temp for Tree Trailer
Participant Support Costs for Reimbursement for Electric Yard Trucks
Participant Support Costs for Reimbursement for Electric Yard Trucks
Participant Support Costs for Reimbursement for Electric Yard Trucks
Participant Support Costs for Reimbursement for Electric Yard Trucks
Participant Support Costs for Reimbursement for Electric Yard Trucks
Legal Research database services
Implicit Bias Training
NWAQC Shared Resources
Executive Coaching
HR Consulting
TBD
Communications Assets and Technical Solution
CPRG Community Workshope Venue
Air Monitoring Lease - Kent Site
CPRG Community Workshope Venue
Advisory Council Training & Equity Workshop Series
CPRG Community Workshope Venue
CPRG Community Workshop Venue - Kitsap

08/23/24
09/30/24
09/01/24
TBD
11/26/24
TBD
TBD
TBD
09/23/24
10/15/24
11/20/24
12/02/24
12/09/24
TBD
01/06/25
03/13/25
TBD
04/15/25
03/04/25
04/03/25
02/06/25

08/23/24
09/30/27
11/30/24
TBD
06/30/28
TBD
TBD
TBD
09/23/27
11/30/24
12/31/25
06/30/25
06/30/26
TBD
09/30/25
03/13/25
TBD
04/15/25
03/12/25
04/03/25
03/20/25

$245
N/A
$600
TBD
$580,000
TBD
TBD
TBD
$976/Month
$11,000
$30,000
$4,275
$30,000
TBD
$30,000
$445
TBD
$780
$6,000
$830
$397

Tree Grant
Tree Grant
N/A
Tree Grant
TBD
EPA Grant
TBD
TBD
TBD
All Agency
All Agency
DOH Grant
Per Capita
All Agency
TBD
DOH Grant
CPRG Grant
TBD
CPRG Grant
TBD
CPRG Grant
CPRG Grant

Matt Harper

2025-005
2025-006
2025-007
2025-008
2025-009
2025-010
2025-011
2025-012
2025-013
2025-014
2025-015
2025-016
2025-017
2025-018
2025-019
2025-020
2025-021
2025-022
2025-023
2025-024
2025-025

National Training Institute on Race and Equity (NTIRE)
King County Metro
Foster Garvey Legal Services
Pacific Office Automation
Bucklin Evens, Attorneys at Law
Ideamaria (Maria Grzanka)
Elevating Diversity, LLC
Computerized Maintenance Management System
King County Solid Waste Division
Cogent Communications

History of Race and Racism Training
ORCA Business Card Passport
Legal and Litigation Services
High Volume Print/Copy/Scan Lease
Real Estate Related Legal Services
Process Improvement Training
Equity Workshop Series
CMMS User License Agreement
Participant Support Costs for Reimbursement for Electric Yard Trucks
Co-Location Data Center

03/04/25
05/01/25
03/27/25
04/21/25
04/28/25
06/03/25
05/30/25
06/13/25
07/18/25
07/30/25

03/13/25
04/30/26
on-going
04/21/28
on-going
06/30/25
06/30/25
6/31/26
06/30/28
07/30/28

$5,000
$27,266
TBD
$66,600
TBD
$4,000.00
$5,000
$6,900
$4,350,000
72,000

HR Training
All Agency
Legal Reserve
POOLFD
Legal Attorney Budget
CACI - Training
HR Training
IT Services
EPA Grant
POOLFD

2025-026
2025-028
2025-029
2025-030
2025-033
2025-034
2025-035
2025-036
2025-037
2025-038

PDF 84

Isha Khanna
Aïssata Cissé
Isha Khanna
Mary Cho
Mary Cho
Mary Cho
Mary Cho
Mary Cho
Jennifer Dold
Megan Sweeney
Phyllis McEllroy
Megan Sweeney
Megan Sweeney
TBD
Phyllis McEllroy
Erica Walters
Matt Harper
Erica Walters
Megan Sweeney
Erica Walters
Erica Walters
Megan Sweeney
Megan Sweeney
Jennifer Dold
Andy Tudhope
Jennifer Dold
Sharon Helmsetter
Megan Sweeney
Matt Harper
Mary Cho
Andy Tudhope