Thursday, October 1, 2026
The Olympia City Council is considering a proposal to invest $100,000 in a new workforce scholarship program that would fund trade and vocational training for local students.
Economic Development Director Jennica Machado presented the proposal as part of the city’s implementation of the Olympia Strong plan at a council study session on April 21.
Under the Olympia Strong Workforce Investment Framework, the proposal outlines a two-year program with an annual investment of $100,000 through South Puget Sound Community College (SPSCC).
The program would cover tuition for Olympia high school graduates interested in pursuing trade or vocational technical programs at the college, including automotive technology, welding or machine technologies.
“It is anticipated this would fund around 15 to 20 students that would start year one, and we would be funding them through the full completion of that program into year two,” Machado said.
The scholarships would target low-income and ALICE (asset-limited, income-constrained, employed) households and structured as a “last dollar” in an after a Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) completion program.
According to Machado, the proposal was shaped by combining two Olympia Strong priorities: workforce development and youth career pathways. It aims to use existing community partnerships and programs to support low-income and ALICE households. The goal is to create a low-barrier training program that can be completed in about two years and lead directly to jobs in fields with strong demand.
The Olympia Strong report indicated that by 2035, 49 percent of jobs in Washington will require skills training, with many trade occupations already in demand in Olympia and offering competitive wages. Entry-level construction jobs can start around $51,000 annually, with higher level positions earning more.
The proposal is still in early discussions with SPSCC, with details yet to be finalized. Machado noted the college works to connect students with employers, but additional support could help participants during the two-year program and in linking them to local jobs after completion.
Funding for the program would come from business and occupation tax revenue allocated for economic development. The city would evaluate the pilot after two years to determine whether it should continue.
Council member Clark Gilman said he supports the pilot program.
“I hope that if we can do a couple of successful years, then we can make the pitch for more consistent revenue and potentially expand it," he said.
However, Council member Paul Berendt wondered if it is the best use of city funds.
“I question a little bit investing $100,000 into what would be essentially tuition assistance programs, unless they are targeted to a specific need within the community,” Berendt said.
He added that he prefers to see funds going toward investment in infrastructure that is going to be needed in the pipeline or the redevelopment of certain portions of the community.
Berendt also raised concerns about whether scholarship recipients would remain in Olympia after completing their training.
“I’m a little fearful that kids who are great and trying to get ahead will enter into a college scholarship program, but not end up living here or adding to the community in the long run," he said.
Machado acknowledged that retention can be a challenge in workforce programs, but said the city could strengthen connections between participants and employers for local job opportunities.
“Part of what I would be looking to see — can we enhance that support and have some type of program advisor role that is able to fill any gaps and ensure that we are doing that local coordination,” she said.
Machado added the proposal is based on a 10-year forecast of demand in trade occupations to ensure participants are training for jobs available locally.
The proposal remains in early stages, with additional details to be developed in partnership with SPSCC before returning to the council for further consideration.
10 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
BobJacobs
There seems to be no end to the kinds of programs the Olympia City Council is willing to fund.
There are already many job training programs in place at the state and federal and union levels. Has the city council looked at all those programs? They should be showing the public the list of those programs and explaining why they think a city government should enter this arena. This is not what city governments are established for.
Bob Jacobs
Tuesday, April 28 Report this
Tanker1982
I absolutely agree that the tradecrafts are the future. AI will decimate white collar trades. However, the trades offer private, not taxpayer supported funding, for these same skills. I question the use of taxpayer money funds. I am older, yet counsel my younger colleagues, to investigate the trades and the military. Congress is going to invest billions in shipbuilding
Tuesday, April 28 Report this
Tanker1982
So I absolutely agree with Bob Jacobs. He posted first
Tuesday, April 28 Report this
longtimeresident
Make the information publicly available, about current workforce programs. I have no clue what they are. Perhaps the high schools in our area are already doing this; if not, they should be!
Tuesday, April 28 Report this
KarenM
I comment Paul Berendt for speaking up about this and I agree with Bob. The city is already stretched with providing the basics such as police, fire, utilities, and transportation.
The Council could advocate for improvements or additions to existing programs through their legislative lobbiest, for example.
The best thing the city can do for economic development is to do what the city is responsible for very well. Have great public safety, have streets that are safe for everyone including those walking and rolling. Have parks and trails and parks programs that create a community where business wants to invest and people want to live.
Please do those things first and well before spreading too thin with too many programs and projects.
Tuesday, April 28 Report this
KarenM
One other point -
The proposal is for $100,000 but that does not include the many hours and days of staff time to manage this project/program. This is a cost.
Tuesday, April 28 Report this
36098501
This proposal is exactly the kind of incremental expansion that Olympia can no longer afford to normalize.
The issue is not whether workforce training is a worthwhile idea in isolation. It absolutely is. The issue is that the City Council continues to act as if every worthwhile idea automatically warrants public funding, new administrative effort, and long-term financial commitment, regardless of whether the City is already meeting its most basic obligations. In this moment, the City clearly is not.
Roads are deteriorating. Infrastructure maintenance is lagging. Core municipal services are stretched. Downtown is struggling. Affordability is pushing residents away. These are not abstract complaints; they are visible, persistent signs that foundational responsibilities are not being fully satisfied. And yet, rather than correcting course, the City repeatedly layers on additional programs. Rental registry. Electrical home audits. Raising taxes and fees. Expanding City funding and reliance on non-profits that diffuse accountability. Property acquisitions like the Jungle. The list goes on...
Each new initiative, no matter how “modest” at $100,000, adds administrative overhead, creates expectation of permanence, and expands the long-term fiscal footprint. This is how budgets drift: not through a single large decision, but through continuous accumulation of small ones. And every added layer competes directly with the funding needed to maintain what already exists.
The consequence of this pattern is increasingly clear to residents: rising fiscal pressure and declining affordability. Olympia is not operating in a vacuum. When taxes and fees rise to support expanding program ambitions, households with limited income absorb the impact first. Over time, this becomes a form of quiet displacement—where those who cannot keep pace with the cost structure are effectively pushed out.
It is also difficult to ignore the broader governance issue: a lack of meaningful diversity in fiscal and philosophical approach on the Council. When decision-making becomes too ideologically uniform, there is a natural tendency to expand the role of government into more and more aspects of civic life. In that context, it was notable—and frankly refreshing—to see at least one brave Council Member apply restraint and question the pace of expansion rather than defaulting to another 7-0 consent calendar approval.
Olympia does not have a shortage of ideas. It has a shortage of prioritization. Until the City demonstrates discipline in maintaining its core obligations before expanding into new programming, affordability and infrastructure will continue to erode as does the public's confidence in the Council and the costly bureaucracy it works so hard to create.
Wednesday, April 29 Report this
HappyOlympian
Spend spend spend, and like many posted here these services/programs already provided thru many other pathways. Staff often do these things to justify their being on the payroll and then get to add this to their resumes. Boooooooooo
Wednesday, April 29 Report this
Tractor1
How about a $100,000 project to fix the terrible streets in the downtown?
Wednesday, April 29 Report this
MrCommonSense
Economic Development Director Jennica Machado should be working on expand existing businesses and attracting new businesses to the City. Please leave education to those in the education business, especially if this is an ongoing annual commitment. If the City wants to create a perpetual/sustainable endowment/scholarship at SPSCC I believe each scholarship would require a one-time investment of about $25,000 and cost nothing beyond that. But even that is not the best use of the City's funds. Focus on what cities do: Public safety, streets, parks, water, sewer and garbage AND a sustainable balanced budget!
Wednesday, April 29 Report this