PORT ANGELES — The city of Port Angeles will be collecting 1 percent more in property taxes next year than it did this year.
The City Council on Tuesday night voted to adopt an ordinance levying property tax collection for 2026 and to pass a resolution authorizing the 1 percent increase to the regular property tax levy.
“As a reminder, the levy can only be increased by 1 percent in its entirety and that’s per state law,” city Finance Director Sarina Carrizosa said. “That is not by individual property, but it’s important to know that that’s the entire levy amount is a 1 percent increase.”
For a home valued at $300,000 in 2025, this will amount to an increase of $10.83 for the full year or about 90 cents a month, she said.
“That’s based on the average assessed valuation increases of about 2.9 percent that was received from the county,” Carrizosa said.
Total property tax collection for 2026 is estimated to be $5,257,500, according to the agenda memo.
The council adopted the ordinance and passed the resolution on a 4-2 vote with Position 1 Councilwoman LaTrisha Suggs and Position 7 Councilman Jon Hamilton voting against following comments during the public hearing from many city residents against the 1 percent increase.
“It’s not just a 1 percent tax, it never is,” Port Angeles resident Noah Brady said. “But it’s 1 percent in addition to all the other taxes and burdens that this population already has to bear.”
He said taxes are burdensome for people living paycheck to paycheck.
Port Angeles resident James Taylor said the city is having to increase the tax rate because it’s not willing to control its budget.
The tax increase “appalled” Port Angeles resident Laura Dere, she said.
“I left Seattle because the property taxes were more than I could afford then,” she said. “And that was in 2018, and now I’m seeing the same property tax increase. And I have less options and less services than I did in West Seattle.”
Port Angeles resident Susie Blake told the council that since she moved to the city seven and a half years ago, her tax bill has gone up 95 percent.
“If it continues on that trajectory without any additional increases, our property tax bill alone by the time I reach full retirement age will be over $500 a month just in taxes,” Blake said. “And in that same time, I’ve seen the quality of life go downhil rapidly.”
Position 2 Councilman Drew Schwab clarified the way tax collection is done.
“It was mentioned that 1 percent’s not actually 1 percent and that’s correct because it’s not 1 percent of your tax bill, it’s 1 percent of how much the city is allowed to collect in total,” Schwab said. “It is possible for your tax bill to go down if taxes go up. Property taxes actually work in the opposite of what makes sense. … There is a state limit of 1 percent of existing houses and that’s the total amount that can be collected, not actually how much can be collected from an individual and that’s actually split up mong multiple things.”
In explaining her decision to vote against the tax increase, Suggs said the real problem lays at the state level because Washington has a regressive tax structure which taxes middle- and lower-income people more than the wealthy.
“That’s what we need your help to help us to change the regressive tax structure of the state of Washington and have those who can most afford to pay those taxes the wealthy, the people that have millions of dollars that they can afford to pay a 1 percent increase,” she said.
During the meeting, the council also held a public hearing for the 2026 budget.
The city’s 2026 budget is balanced at $199,877,000, Carrizosa said, which is an overall increase of 23.7 percent compared to the city’s 2025 amended budget.
“Each year, as we build our budget, there are a number of challenges and 2026 was no different,” she said. “There were many things that we had to overcome during the budget process, including seeing a slowing of revenue trends as compared to prior years that really resulted in the inability to grow our city services and this was coupled with the loss of federal grant funding that’s expected on 2026.”
People speaking during the public hearing took issue with the budget because it uses $36 million in reserves. Schwab explained that by comparing the reserve fund to funds that are earmarked for specific purposes and Carrizosa agreed.
“Regarding the use of reserves, almost all of the $36 million is going toward capital money that we’ve been saving for, essentially,” she said. “… We’re building those up with the intent to use them.”
The public hearing on the budget will be continued during the council’s Dec. 2 meeting.
_______
Reporter Emily Hanson can be reached at emily.hanson@peninsuladailynews.com.
