Tuesday, August 4, 2026

Advocacy Committee News

Summer Business Tour

We Still Want to Hear From You!

As a reminder, the GKC Advocacy Committee is spending this summer connecting directly with Chamber members about the issues affecting your business, from local and state regulations to the challenges you're facing day to day. If you haven’t heard from us yet, please feel free to reach out to Alysa Grimes at alysa@silverdalelawyers.com to schedule a meeting. Or, you can keep an eye out for a call or visit this summer. The more businesses we hear from, the stronger our advocacy at every level of government.

RECAP: KPUD Listening Session

KPUD held a public listening session to gather community input on whether the district should pursue the legal authority to potentially provide electric service in Kitsap County. Currently, electric service is provided by Puget Sound Energy (PSE), a private, investor-owned utility regulated by the state Utilities and Transportation Commission (UTC).

KPUD Commissioners explained that under Washington law, the district would first need voter approval before taking any further steps. Approving a ballot measure would not commit KPUD to acquiring PSE's system or building new infrastructure; it would simply authorize the board to investigate feasibility further, with any future decision to actually provide service requiring additional public process and board votes. Staff emphasized this session was for listening only, not for county officials to debate or answer questions.

A deputy state attorney general also briefed attendees on the status of a separate, ongoing UTC rate case involving PSE.

Community Comments in Favor of Exploring the Option

Many speakers supported having KPUD investigate further, largely out of frustration with rising PSE rates. Recurring points included:

• Frustration that PSE posted a large annual profit (cited by one speaker at $478 million) while raising rates, with some arguing that money should stay with a public utility rather than go to investors.
• Comparisons to Mason County and Clark County, where speakers said public power providers offer lower, more stable rates without shareholder profit pressures.
• A belief that KPUD's board should at minimum be authorized to study the idea, since studying feasibility doesn't commit the county to anything.
• Frustration with the UTC rate-setting process, which some speakers noted is run by appointed, not elected, officials.
• Concerns about customer service, including one resident who described an eight-month wait for a new electrical connection, and a rate increase that came in higher than the percentage PSE had requested.
• A general view that PSE lacks accountability to Kitsap ratepayers and that a public alternative would provide more local control.

Community Comments Opposed or Skeptical

Other speakers urged caution or opposed moving forward, citing:

• Concern that this is moving too fast, with too little public information, ahead of asking voters to decide.
• Reference to Bainbridge Island's own feasibility study, which speakers said found the cost of building independent service would run significantly higher (by roughly $251 million) than continuing with PSE.
• Doubts about KPUD's technical expertise to operate an electric utility, given its current focus on water, wastewater, and internet service.
• Concerns that a transition could take years, involve costly litigation, and still leave the county buying power at the same wholesale prices PSE pays, since PSE's costs are driven mostly by the price of fuel and power supply, which is largely outside PSE's control.
• Testimony from union representatives representing utility workers, who cautioned that converting from an investor-owned to a public model is a fundamentally different undertaking than starting one from scratch, questioned how capital projects would be funded, and cited (without independent confirmation) a statistic that only a small share of municipalities that have explored municipalization in the past 25 years have followed through, with most finding costs came in well above projections.
• Several PSE employees spoke in support of keeping PSE as the provider, citing the company's experience and existing investment in grid modernization, wildfire mitigation, and electrification.
• A number of speakers placed blame for rising rates on state policy, specifically the state's Climate Commitment Act and clean energy mandates, rather than on PSE or KPUD, with some urging residents to contact state legislators instead.

PSE's Position

Representatives and supporters of PSE argued that the company has over 100 years of experience serving the region reliably, has more than doubled its renewable energy supply, and continues to invest in modernization, wildfire mitigation, and vehicle electrification. PSE representatives maintained that the vast majority of their costs come from the price of purchased power and fuel, which any new provider, including KPUD, would also have to pay, and that state clean energy requirements, not company decisions, are the primary driver of recent increases.

What's Next

Following the listening session and additional public comment, the KPUD Board voted to place a public power authority measure on the November 3, 2026 general election ballot. If approved, the measure would authorize KPUD to pursue construction or acquisition of electric infrastructure, but would not commit the district to providing electric service. KPUD has said that if voters approve, it plans to conduct a feasibility study evaluating costs, rates, financing, and other factors before any further decision is made. PSE has publicly opposed the measure, calling it premature without a clear operating or funding plan; KPUD Board President Debra Lester has defended the district's ability to take on new service areas, pointing to its experience building out internet service.

RECAP: GKC Primary Mixer

The GKC Primary Mixer was held Tuesday, July 28, on the rooftop at Marina Square, and it was a great turnout. Attendees enjoyed beautiful weather and stunning views while candidates and Chamber members mixed and mingled throughout the evening. A fun and successful event for all who joined! 

Local Government Updates

The following are scheduled meetings for local government bodies across Kitsap County in August 2026. Attending these meetings is one of the most direct ways to engage with local decision-makers and advocate on behalf of Kitsap businesses.

Kitsap County

Kitsap County Board of Commissioners

County Administration Building

619 Division Street

Port Orchard, WA 98366

Zoom Link via Meeting

Agenda: https://agendasuite.org/iip/kitsap

Regular Business Meetings (Commissioner Chambers)

August 10, 2026 @ 5:30 p.m.

August 24, 2026 @ 10:00 a.m.

AM Work Session (Port Blakely Conference Room)

August 3, 2026 @ 9:00 a.m.

August 5, 2026 @ 9:00 a.m.

August 10, 2026 @ 9:00 a.m.

August 12, 2026 @ 9:00 a.m.

August 17, 2026 @ 9:00 a.m.

August 19, 2026 @ 9:00 a.m.

August 24, 2026 @ 9:00 a.m.

August 26, 2026 @ 9:00 a.m.

August 31, 2026 @ 9:00 a.m.

PM Work Session (Port Blakely Conference Room)

August 3, 2026 @ 2:00 p.m.

August 5, 2026 @ 2:00 p.m.

August 10, 2026 @ 2:00 p.m.

August 17, 2026 @ 2:00 p.m.

August 24, 2026 @ 2:00 p.m.

August 26, 2026 @ 2:00 p.m.

August 31, 2026 @ 2:00 p.m.

More information about Kitsap County Board of Commissioners:

https://www.kitsap.gov/BOC_p/Pages/default.aspx

Office (360) 479-3579 | 705 Pacific Avenue in Downtown Bremerton

Silverdale Office (360) 692-6800 | Kitsap Mall

PO Box 1218 Silverdale WA 98383

If you need assistance, please contact us directly.