Thursday, October 29, 2026
The Lacey City Council approved a resolution that endorses a multimillion-dollar bond measure from Lacey Fire District 3 in the Nov. 3 General Election.
The measure calls for the authorization of up to $98.3 million in general obligation bonds, which would be used for capital improvements to address deficiencies in fire station space, emergency response coverage, training resources and storage.
Council members adopted Resolution 1187 during their meeting on Tuesday, Oct. 6. The funding proposal is on the Nov. 3 General Election ballot as Proposition No. 1.
The resolution encourages voters to approve the measure, identifying an increase in emergency calls and current and future service needs as reasons for additional fire district facilities.
Lacey Fire District 3 Chief Jennifer Schmidt said the district is preparing for continued growth, most notably in areas north of Interstate 5 (I-5). The proposed investments aim to improve emergency services in Lacey and its urban growth area.
The bond measure would also pay for a new Station 36 north of I-5, and a new or replacement facility for Station 32 off Yelm Highway.
The proposal also includes a regional live-fire training facility and a logistics warehouse. Schmidt said the district currently lacks its own training center, something the growing agency needs.
Schmidt also said the district finances regular expenses, including personnel and emergency vehicles, through a levy.
If the bond measue is approved, the money would be repaid through annual excess property tax levies over 20 years. Schmidt estimated an additional $8 to $11 in monthly property taxes for an average family.
Mayor Andy Ryder supported the proposal, praising the financial management of the fire district and its preparation for growth in Lacey and its urban growth area. He said emergency responders need proper training and equipment to save lives.
“They are by far the busiest fire district in Thurston County, and the amount of calls they receive keeps going up and up as the growth has happened in Lacey and urban growth area,” Ryder said.
Council member Carolyn Cox also supported the resolution and praised the quality of emergency services provided by the district. She thanked district members for their service.
Council member Lenny Greenstein abstained, objecting to the practice of elected bodies taking action on measures awaiting a voter decision. He said he has followed that position throughout his 15 years on the council.
“In fact, I sit on the Lacey Fire District 3 Community Advisory Board,” Greenstein said. “This has nothing to do with whether I’m in support or against. I take the same stance in all cases, and for that reason, I will abstain from this vote.”
The resolution passed with the one abstention. According to a city staff report, approving the resolution has no fiscal impact on the city.
4 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
MartyKenney
New juicy details on the taxpayer pillaging levy!
“ Schmidt also said the district finances regular expenses, including personnel and emergency vehicles, through a levy.”
You can count on a NO vote from me to finance your personal vehicles… that’s baloney… in the middle of financial hard times they want new vehicles….
Use the Olympia training facility…. Sharing is caring
Make the deep pocket developers pay for the new fire station while they gobble up all our pristine lands in north lacey.
Hard financial times call for tightening the belt and using what we have, is station 32 really that unusable that it needs a $15million renovation?
Please, tell me where I’m wrong, I’d like to know why they want my hard earned money.
Saturday, October 10 Report this
MartyKenney
I’m hopefully the first person to notice the error in my comment. The article says Personnel vehicles, not personal vehicles… that’s my bad reading. But still….maybe buy some used vehicles at a fraction of the cost? Or no new vehicles at all?
Saturday, October 10 Report this
MrCommonSense
A more investigative report would have been helpful for informing the public of what is included in the bond issue and why it may or may not be needed. It would help voters determine whether it's worth the investment. Are other jurisdictions going to share in the use and expense of a training center? What additional personnel are going to be hired for what positions? What equipment is in need of replacement and why? Etc.
@Marty Kenney, I've asked the JOLT on multiple occasions to allow editing of posts, placing most recent post first and allowing readers to "like" and/or reply directly to comments. Deaf ears so fat.
Hopefully I haven't made any errors in this comment as I won't be able to fix them. : )
Monday, October 12 Report this
MrCommonSense
And there you have it, an error I can't fix.
Monday, October 12 Report this