Incorporation Study — Dash Point and Browns Point, Washington State Department of Commerce (June 2025)
Summary
This June 2025 report to the Legislature is the Incorporation Study for Dash Point and Browns Point from the Washington State Department of Commerce, prepared under Chapter 376, Laws of 2024 (SB 5950). It states that the analysis does not advocate for or against incorporation and asks whether the study area, if it were a fully operating city, would have revenue adequate to cover its expenses. The report gives a population of 2,182 in 2024, estimates General Fund revenue of about $1.5 million annually and total expenditures of approximately $2.2 million annually, with police and public safety about $1.2 million per year. It estimates that expenditures would outpace revenues by $513,000 to $521,000 from 2026 to 2035.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Cite this document
“Incorporation Study — Dash Point and Browns Point, Washington State Department of Commerce (June 2025).”
Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/2025-commercereports-lgd-2024-dash-point-incorporation-study-final-ff2-5f3518752d/
, SHA-256 c724422618fd38777e56b784c818a281f0622ccfe8665ea4bf57eceb81ef694c.Full text
Incorporation Study for Dash
Point and Browns Point
Pursuant to Chapter 376, Laws of 2024 (SB 5950)
June 2025
Report to the Legislature
GROWTH MANAGEMENT
SERVICES Director Joe Nguyễn
v3.5.1
Acknowledgments
Washington State Department of Commerce
Dave Andersen, Managing Director, Growth
Management Services
Carol Holman, Western Regional Manager, Growth
Management Services
Eric Guida, Senior Planner, Growth Management
Services
Community Attributes Inc
Chris Mefford, President and CEO
Michaela Jellicoe, Senior Economist
Martin Arpin, Economics Analyst
Carly Bednarski, GIS Analyst
Brandon Bullard, Economics Analyst
Dominic Roche, Planning Analyst
Ethan Schmidt, Economics Analyst
Robert Shwed, Senior Economics and Planning
Manager
1011 Plum St. SE
P.O. Box 42525
Olympia, WA 98504-2525
www.commerce.wa.gov
For people with disabilities, this report is available on
request in other formats. To submit a request, please
call 7-1-1 and ask to be connected to 360-725-4000.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 2
Table of contents
Executive summary...................................................................................................................................... 4
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 7
General characteristics of the study area ..................................................................................................... 7
Revenues .................................................................................................................................................. 10
Expenditures ............................................................................................................................................. 23
Financial feasibility .................................................................................................................................... 29
Appendix A: Key inputs and assumptions ................................................................................................... 32
Appendix B: Baseline and alternative scenarios .......................................................................................... 34
Appendix C: Identification of comparable city for Dash Point and Browns Point .......................................... 40
Appendix D: Study area and market characteristics .................................................................................... 44
Appendix E: Homelessness, behavioral health, and public safety ................................................................ 47
Appendix F: Land use, zoning, demographics, commute trends, and existing districts ................................. 50
Appendix G: Pierce County's Countywide Planning Policies and other policies and programs related to
incorporation ............................................................................................................................................. 50
Appendix H: GMA planning requirements and incorporation ....................................................................... 53
Appendix I: Community survey results and community informational meeting ............................................ 55
Appendix J: Summary of revenue resources available for local governments .............................................. 62
Appendix K: Methodology .......................................................................................................................... 65
Appendix L: Incorporation process ............................................................................................................. 71
Appendix M: Implementation considerations for incorporation ................................................................... 75
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 3
Executive summary
Authorizing legislation
Chapter 376, Laws of 2024 (SB 5950) directs Commerce to:
[C]ontract with a consultant to study incorporating the unincorporated communities of Dash Point and
Browns Point into a single city. The study must include, but not be limited to, the impact of
incorporation on the local tax base, crime, homelessness, infrastructure, public services, and behavioral
health services, in the listed communities. The department must submit the results of the study to the
office of financial management and the appropriate committees of the legislature by June 1, 2025.
Overview
In 2024, the Legislature tasked the Department of Commerce with conducting a study on the fiscal feasibility
of incorporation for the communities of Dash Point and Browns Point (referred to as the study area). This
analysis does not advocate for or against incorporation but rather provides a foundation for understanding its
financial implications.
The study is informational in nature and was not initiated by residents. It provides:
Financial feasibility of incorporation
Supplementary information, including:
• Population, housing, and employment trends
• Housing market data
• Retail sales data
• Homelessness, behavioral health and crime data
• Land use and zoning
Appendices
Based on this approach, the study's core research question is:
If the study area were a fully operating city, would its revenue be adequate to cover its expenses to meet or
exceed existing levels of service?
Key findings
The study area includes the communities of Dash Point and Browns Point (Figure 1). This is a predominantly
residential area with a population of 2,182 in 2024.
If the study area were to incorporate, we estimate that the new city's General Fund would generate about $1.5
million in revenue annually, primarily from property and utility taxes. Total expenditures are estimated at
approximately $2.2 million dollars annually. Police and public safety represent about $1.2 million in
expenditures per year.
This means that estimated expenditures would outpace estimated revenues by $513,000 to $521,000 from
2026 to 2035. However, incorporated cities have the authority to set their own priorities, adjust those priorities
as needed, and develop a budget that balances desired services with available revenues.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 4
The analysis assumes the initial year of cityhood to be 2026 but does not adjust for inflation, so alternative
initial years can be used. As a result, the study analyzes projected population, housing, and employment
growth within the study area to capture changes in annual revenues or expenditures. This work includes
modeling high- and low-growth estimates alongside baseline estimates, using historical population and
housing data.
Figure 1. Dash Point and Browns Point study area
Table 1 presents the total revenues and expenditures associated with the city street fund, Real Estate Excise
Tax (REET) fund, and the surface water management costs. Costs and revenues related to the city street fund
are estimated to be similar, assuming no capital costs or grant funding. The REET fund is estimated to
generate roughly $115,000 per year, and the surface water management fund is estimated to be roughly
balanced, with service charges covering service costs and creating reserve funding.
Table 1. Estimated revenues and expenditures by fund, study area incorporated as a
city
General fund
Fund 2026 2030 2035
Fund revenues $1,520,000 $1,544,000 $1,579,000
Fund
$2,033,000 $2,063,000 $2,100,000
expenditures
Fund balance -$513,000 -$519,000 -$521,000
City street fund
Fund 2026 2030 2035
Fund revenues $68,000 $69,000 $70,000
Fund expenditures $76,000 $76,000 $76,000
Fund balance -$7,000 -$7,000 -$6,000
Real Estate Excise Tax Fund (REET)
Fund 2026 2030 2035
Fund revenues $114,000 $116,000 $119,000
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 5
Fund 2026 2030 2035
Fund
$0 $0 $0
expenditures
Fund balance $114,000 $116,000 $119,000
Surface water management fund
Fund 2026 2030 2035
Fund revenues $143,000 $145,000 $149,000
Fund
$64,000 $64,000 $64,000
expenditures
Fund balance $79,000 $81,000 $85,000
Note: Totals may not sum due to rounding.
Sources: Washington State Office of Financial Management, 2025; U.S. Census Bureau, 2025; Pierce County, 2025; Puget Sound Regional Council, 2025;
Community Attributes Inc, 2025.
Methodology
This study uses a comparable city methodology to estimate most general fund and special revenue fund
expenditures. The comparable city method is based on the budget of a city or cities that are similar in size and
other factors to the potential incorporated city, to provide a reliable indicator of costs and revenues.
To arrive at budget estimates, municipal budget data from comparable cities is converted to per capita
revenues and costs, and those per capita values are multiplied by the study area population to estimate
revenues and costs. This method assumes that, after incorporation, the study area would invest in levels of
service similar to the comparable cities.
While the methodology is appropriate for a majority of a potential city's budget, there are certain areas where
more accurate estimates can be achieved. These include the following:
Property tax, based on assessed values
Sales tax, based on taxable retail sales tax base
Real Estate Excise Tax (REET), based on assessor data of historic property sales to estimate annual sales
and sales value
Surface water management fees, which include user fees and system development charges for new users,
are based on fees and conditions from the selected comparable city
Capital costs, based on projected applicable costs from the county
Transportation impact fees, based on current fees charged by the county within the study area.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 6
Introduction
Background
This study is intended to provide a fiscal analysis of the potential for incorporation among the selected
communities, as well as supplementary information on the community and the incorporation process. This
study is not part of an incorporation process and no petition for incorporation has been submitted by a
resident. The analysis presented in this report is for informational purposes only.
Incorporation process
The incorporation process is designed to be local in nature (see RCW 35.02 and RCW 36.93). For a new city to
be successful, it must have broad support among residents — support that will ultimately manifest in the form
of a ballot measure.
The incorporation process begins with the filing of a notice of incorporation proposal with the county
legislative authority by a resident(s) of the proposed area. After the notice is filed, proponents gather voters’
signatures equal to at least 10% of the registered voters of the proposed area of incorporation. When the initial
proposal is filed and proponents have collected sufficient signatures, the Pierce County Boundary Review
Board holds public hearings. Once the petition is filed, the Boundary Review Board may also conduct studies
and explore factors as outlined in RCW 36.93.170-180. The Boundary Review Board makes a recommendation
in favor of or against incorporation. A referendum would then be held among residents of the proposed area of
incorporation.
If the incorporation election is successful, another election will be held to elect the council who will preside
over the city. The city incorporation becomes effective between six months and a year after the first election.
The winners of the council election have the authority to make interim plans for the new city to ensure a
smooth transition into incorporation.
General characteristics of the study area
This section provides an overview of the study area, including population, zoning, and assessed values. Further
information on the study area can be found in Appendix C and Appendix D.
Land use and zoning
The study area is a small, predominantly residential area totaling roughly 135 acres not dedicated to park land.
Key local parks include the Browns Point Lighthouse Park, Browns Point Playfield, and Dash Point Park and
Pier, while the state park represents a large portion of the study area's park acreage.
There are two small commercially zoned areas along SR 509, one in Browns Point and one in Dash Point,
otherwise, the two communities are mostly zoned for residential uses. In 2025, residential uses made up more
than $922 million of the total $950 million in total assessed taxable value. Vacant land and commercial
properties represented all but $2 million of the remaining assessed value.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 7
Figure 2. Dash Point and Browns Point study area
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 8
Population
To forecast potential revenues and understand the impact of assumptions on potential city revenues and
costs, the analysis includes forecasts of future population growth for the study area. Appendix B documents in
detail the methodology and evaluation of each of three growth scenarios and the data sources used. Figure 3
presents the population growth scenarios based on a baseline population of 2,190.
Figure 3. Study area population growth forecasts, 2010-2044
3,000
2,500
2,000
Historical Population
1,500
High Growth
1,000
Baseline
500
Low Growth
0
2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032 2034 2036 2038 2040 2042 2044
Sources: Washington State Office of Financial Management, 2025; Pierce County, 2025; U.S. Census Bureau, 2025; Community Attributes Inc., 2025.
This study assumes the most likely growth scenario is the medium, or baseline, growth scenario.
Taxable assessed value
Figure 4 presents the observed assessed property value in 2025 and estimated assessed property values for
2026, 2030, and 2035 for the study area. In 2025, taxable assessed property values totaled $950 million.
Figure 4. Study area assessed real property value, 2025, 2026, 2030, 2035
Millions
$1,200
$950.1 $953.9 $969.3 $988.6
$1,000
$800
$600
$400
$200
$0
2025 2026 2030 2035
Sources: Pierce County Assessor, 2025; Washington State Office of Financial Management, 2025; Pierce County, 2025; Puget Sound Regional Council,
2025; U.S. Census Bureau, 2025; Community Attributes Inc., 2025
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 9
Revenues
Incorporated cities typically rely on three key sources of revenue: property tax, sales tax, and utility tax. Cities
also collect revenues through other sources, typically in smaller amounts. There are many ways a city can
generate additional revenues and expand their revenue capacity. Additional revenue sources are discussed in
Appendix J. Table 2 presents the estimated general fund revenues for an incorporated study area in 2030.
Table 2. Estimated general fund revenues by line item, study area incorporated as a
city, 2030
Percent of
Revenue source 2030
total
Property tax $937,000 60.7%
Utility tax $271,000 17.5%
Local retail sales and use tax $96,000 6.2%
Local criminal justice sales tax $50,000 3.2%
Permits $47,000 3.0%
Charges for services $46,000 3.0%
State generated revenues $38,000 2.5%
Franchise fees $29,000 1.9%
Business licenses $17,000 1.1%
Fines and forfeitures $13,000 0.8%
Total Revenues $1,544,000 100%
Note: Totals may not sum due to rounding.
Sources: Washington State Office of Financial Management, 2025; U.S. Census Bureau, 2025; Pierce County, 2025; Puget Sound Regional Council, 2025;
City of Ruston, 2025; Town of Eatonville, 2025; Community Attributes Inc., 2025.
Table 3 presents estimated general fund revenues from 2026 through 2035 by major line item.
Table 3. Estimated general fund revenues, thousands, study area incorporated as a
city, 2026 - 2035
Revenue Source 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
Property tax $923 $926 $930 $934 $937 $941 $945 $949 $952 $956
Utility tax $267 $268 $269 $270 $271 $272 $273 $274 $274 $275
Sales and use taxes $144 $145 $145 $146 $146 $147 $147 $148 $148 $149
Licenses and permits $92 $92 $92 $93 $93 $93 $94 $94 $94 $95
State-shared revenues $37 $38 $38 $38 $38 $38 $38 $38 $38 $39
Other $58 $58 $58 $58 $59 $59 $59 $59 $59 $60
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 10
Revenue Source 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
Total revenues $1,520 $1,526 $1,532 $1,538 $1,544 $1,550 $1,556 $1,562 $1,568 $1,573
Sources: Washington State Office of Financial Management, 2025; U.S. Census Bureau, 2025; Pierce County, 2025; Puget Sound Regional Council, 2025;
City of Ruston, 2025; Town of Eatonville, 2025; Community Attributes Inc., 2025.
Not all revenues estimated for the study area are accounted for in the general fund and available to cover the
expenses associated with the operations of the city. Several of the revenue sources included in the analysis
are restricted in use. For example, motor vehicle gas tax distributions "shall be used for transportation services
only" including, but not limited to "new construction, reconstruction, and expansion of city streets, county
roads, and state highways and other transportation improvements." 1 Real Estate Excise Taxes must be used
for capital improvements.
Property tax
Property taxes are the primary source of city revenue for many of Washington's cities and provide cities with
an unrestricted revenue resource. In this analysis, the general fund levy will generate the city's estimated
property tax revenues. There are additional property tax options with restricted purposes, which can be voted
through by a city council or by residents.
Upon incorporation of the study area, the new city’s tax levy rate would be limited to a maximum of 0.16% or
$1.60 per $1,000 of assessed value. The study area is located within existing fire and library districts that
would continue to provide services after incorporation. The maximum allowable levy rate for cities that are not
annexed to a fire or library district is 0.36%. Cities annexed to fire and library districts cannot levy property
taxes on the portion of the total allowable property tax levy reserved for fire and library services when these
services are provided by public districts. The fire district levy for Pierce County Fire District #13 can be as high
as 0.15%. A library district levy for Pierce County Library System can be as high as 0.05%. Subtracting the
allowable fire and library district rates from the maximum city rate of 0.36% results in a maximum city levy of
0.16% (0.36% – 0.15% – 0.05% = 0.16%). The analysis performed for the study area assumes the existing fire
and library district providers will continue to provide services after incorporation.
Currently, the study area is subject to 11 individual property tax levies:
Washington state
Local school district
Library district
Port district
Fire district
Flood control district
County roads
Pierce County
Conservation futures fund
Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority (Sound Transit)
Emergency medical services
1 RCW 82.80.070
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 11
Most of the levies are countywide and would remain unchanged by incorporation. Table 4 presents the current
property tax levy rates for tax code areas in the study area.
Table 4. Property tax levy rates by tax code area, 2025
Tax code Tax code
Levy
area 255 area 005
State $2.39 $2.39
Local school $3.95 $3.95
Library district $0.33 $0.00
Port district $0.13 $0.13
Fire district $1.06 $0.00
Flood control district $0.09 $0.09
County road $0.96 $1.69
County tax $0.72 $0.72
Conservation Futures $0.03 $0.03
Park $1.20 $1.20
Transit $0.16 $0.16
EMS $0.43 $0.50
City N/A N/A
Total $11.46 $10.86
Sources: Pierce County, 2025; Community Attributes Inc., 2025.
Table 5 presents the change in property tax levy rates for the study area after incorporation. The only rates
expected to change are the county roads and city tax. The county imposes the county road tax only to
properties within the unincorporated areas of its boundaries 2. If the study area were to incorporate, the county
road tax would be replaced by a city levy.
Table 5. Forecasted tax levy rates after incorporation
Levy TCA 255 TCA 005
State $2.39 $2.39
Local school $3.95 $3.95
Library district $0.33 $0.00
Port district $0.13 $0.13
Fire district $1.06 $0.00
2 "Revenue Guide for Washington Cities and Towns," MSRC, November 2024.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 12
Levy TCA 255 TCA 005
Flood control district $0.09 $0.09
County road N/A N/A
County tax $0.72 $0.72
Conservation Futures $0.03 $0.03
Park $1.20 $1.20
Transit $0.16 $0.16
EMS $0.43 $0.50
City $0.96 $0.96
Total $12.10 $10.78
Sources: Pierce County, 2025; Puget Sound Regional Council, 2025; Community Attributes Inc., 2025.
Levy rates that would not be impacted if the study area were to incorporate are:
state
local school
port district
fire district
flood control district
county tax
Conservation Futures
transit
emergency medical services
As a result, if the study area were to incorporate and adopt a city tax levy rate equal to the current county roads
tax levy rate, the total property tax levy rate for the study area would remain unchanged. If the study area
chooses to impose a higher city tax levy rate, the maximum increase study area residents would see in the levy
rate as a result would be $0.64 per $1,000 assessed of value, or a roughly 6% ($0.64/$11.46) increase in their
total property tax rate. If the study area were to adopt the maximum property tax rate allowed for cities, annual
property tax revenues are estimated to total $1.5 million.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 13
Figure 5. Property tax revenues, thousands, study area incorporated as a city, 2026,
2030, and 2035
Thousands
$1,000 $937 $956
$923
$900
$800
$700
$600
$500
$400
$300
$200
$100
$0
2026 2030 2035
Sources: Pierce County, 2025; Puget Sound Regional Council, 2025; Community Attributes Inc., 2025.
Washington caps a city's total property tax levy, but the amount of tax collected by a city can increase year
over year. Since the analysis performed for this study does not inflate revenues or costs, this cap did not
impact the modeling of property tax revenues.
Retail sales and use tax
Counties, cities, and towns can impose local sales tax on top of the state-imposed rate of 6.5%. These taxes
typically apply to the retail sales of "tangible personal property" by sellers with or without a physical presence
in the state. While most services are not subject to sales tax, some services such as those pertaining to hotels
and motels, landscape maintenance, and physical fitness activities, to name a few, are subject to sales tax.
Most of a city's sales tax revenue is typically generated by the basic and optional sales tax, also known as the
first half and second half sales tax, both of which can be imposed by cities or counties without voter approval.
The basic or first half is a 0.5% rate applied to any taxable event. The optional, or second half, is an additional
rate, up to 0.5%, imposed in increments of 0.1%. Cities retain 85% of the 1.0% tax; the remaining 15% goes to
the county.
Incorporation analysis assumes that the new city would impose the full 1.0% total basic and optional sales tax
in the study area. The estimated retail sales tax base uses 2023 taxable retail sales data sourced from the
Washington State Department of Revenue for the study area. The 2023 retail sales tax generated within the
study area is used to derive an estimate of taxable retail sales per capita. This taxable retail sales per capita
combined with population growth projections and the assumed sales tax rate is used to derive estimated sales
tax revenues between 2026 and 2035 for the study area under an incorporation scenario. Figure 6 presents the
estimated sales tax revenues that would be generated within the incorporated study area.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 14
Criminal justice service tax
Pierce County adopted a 0.1% additional sales tax, as allowed by Washington state law, for the purpose of
funding criminal justice services. Only counties may impose this tax, but the revenues are shared with cities. 3
Revenues from this tax are distributed to Pierce County cities based on a per capita (population) basis. The
incorporation analysis uses the per capita revenue figure from the Town of Eatonville in 2024 to estimate the
revenues that would be distributed to the incorporated study area.
Figure 6. Estimated sales and use tax revenues, study area incorporated as a city,
2026, 2030, and 2035
Thousands
$160
$144 $146 $149
$140
$120 $49 $50 $51 Criminal
Justice Sales
$100 Tax
$80
$60
$95 $96 $98 Retail Sales &
$40 Use Tax
$20
$0
2026 2030 2035
Sources: Washington State Department of Revenue, 2025; Pierce County, 2025; Puget Sound Regional Council, 2025; Community Attributes Inc., 2025.
Utility tax
Utility taxes are a form of business and use tax and are imposed on the income of utility companies serving a
city or town. Any city or town may impose a utility tax and there are no maximum rates on water, sewer, solid
waste, or stormwater utilities. Rates for electric, gas, steam, cellular, and telephone utilities are limited to a
maximum of 6% without voter approval. Cable TV utility taxes have special provisions. Utility taxes may be
imposed on the income of public or private utilities serving customers within the city or town boundaries. They
may also be imposed on any city-owned utility services. Utility taxes are applied to the gross revenues
generated by utility companies, and they may not be passed on to the customer. 4 The analysis assumes an
incorporated study area would receive similar per capita utility tax income to the Town of Eatonville in 2024,
which totaled $121.35. The City of Ruston collected a much lower per capita rate of $20.19 in the latest
available budget year of 2023. To validate this assumption, per capita utility taxes were pulled for the cities of
Fircrest ($102.52) and Roy ($129.45), similar to Eatonville's per capita revenue.
3 "Revenue Guide for Washington Cities and Towns," MSRC, November 2024.
4 "Revenue Guide for Washington Cities and Towns," MSRC, November 2024.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 15
Brokered natural gas use tax
Cities with a utility tax on natural gas may also impose a brokered natural gas tax. This tax functions as an
equivalent use tax on brokered natural gas sales that are otherwise exempt from the utility tax. These sales
occur when large customers bypass utility providers and negotiate directly with independent natural gas
brokers. 5 The Town of Eatonville and the City of Ruston did not collect revenues from a brokered natural gas
use tax in 2024 and 2023 respectively, so the analysis assumes an incorporated study area would collect no
revenues from this tax as well.
Figure 7. Estimated utility tax revenues, study area incorporated as a city, 2026, 2030,
and 2035
$300,000
$270,600 $275,500
$266,700
$250,000
$200,000
$150,000
$100,000
$50,000
$0
2026 2030 2035
Sources: Washington State Office of Financial Management, 2025; U.S. Census Bureau, 2025; Pierce County, 2025; Puget Sound Regional Council, 2025;
City of Ruston, 2025; Town of Eatonville, 2025; Community Attributes Inc., 2025.
State-shared revenues
State-shared revenues represent revenues that are shared by the state with counties, cities, and towns. These
revenues span tax sources and typically are distributed on a per capita basis. The incorporation analysis uses
data available through the MRSC on estimates of per capita revenues to be distributed to each city, town, and
county for the purposes of helping local governments develop budget forecasts. 6 The anticipated study area
tax revenues related to the motor vehicle gas tax have been excluded from the general fund and included in the
city street fund for this study.
5 "Revenue Guide for Washington Cities and Towns," MSRC, November 2024.
6 https://mrsc.org/explore-topics/finance/revenues/shared-revenue-estimator
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 16
Table 6. Per capita state-shared revenue estimates, 2025
Revenue source Per capita
Gas tax (MVFT) $17.07
Liquor profits $7.37
Liquor excise $6.56
Criminal justice (special programs) $1.40
Multi-modal distribution $1.27
Increased MVFT $1.11
Criminal justice (population based) $0.40
Total $35.18
Sources: MRSC, 2025.
Cannabis excise tax
In addition to the state-shared revenues presented in Table 6, the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis
Board collects and distributes a 37% excise tax on retail cannabis sales. These excise tax revenues are shared
with cities, towns, and counties that do not prohibit cannabis producers, processors, or retailers. A portion of
distributions are based on population and the remainder of distributions are based on actual cannabis retail
sales. All non-residential zones in the study area fall within areas where cannabis producers, processors, or
retailers are prohibited from operating under state law. As a result, cannabis excise tax revenues are excluded
from this analysis.
Other general fund revenues
Business and occupation (B&O) tax
Business and occupation (B&O) taxes are another unrestricted revenue option available to Washington cities
and towns. B&O taxes have not been included in the incorporation analysis due to their limited use and
because of the limited business activity and commercial land use availability within the study area.
Gambling tax
Gambling taxes can be applied to gambling activities within a jurisdiction. Washington limits the tax rate on
these regulated activities. Cities and towns have limited authority to regulate gambling, but they can prohibit
any or all gambling activities for which licenses are required. 7
7 "Revenue Guide for Washington Cities and Towns," MSRC, November 2024.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 17
Table 7. Maximum allowable gambling tax rates, 2025
Gambling activity Maximum tax rate
Actual costs of enforcement, not to exceed 2% of net
Amusement games
receipts
Bingo 5% of net receipts
Punch boards or pull-tabs (charitable or non-
10% of net receipts
profit)
Punch boards or pull-tabs (commercial) 5% of gross receipts or 10% of net receipts
Raffles 5% of net receipts
Social card games 20% of gross receipts
Sources: Washington State Gambling Commission, 2025.
Due to the limited commercial activity and gambling opportunities in the study area, the analysis assumes no
gambling tax revenues would be collected by an incorporated study area. For comparison, the Town of
Eatonville collected approximately $6 per capita in gambling excise tax in 2024, while the City of Ruston
collected no gambling excise tax revenues in 2023. If the study area were able to generate a similar per capita
gambling excise tax revenue as Eatonville, it could produce roughly $12,000 annually.
Leasehold excise tax
The leasehold excise tax is applied to publicly owned real or personal property in lieu of property taxes. Cities
may impose a local leasehold tax, credited against the state leasehold tax for the use or occupation of publicly
owned real or personal property.8 The incorporation analysis assumes the study area will not generate
leasehold excise tax revenue in the early years of cityhood, as the city will not own public facilities at the outset
of incorporation.
Franchise fees
Cities may impose a franchise fee on utility providers within their jurisdictions to recover the costs of
administering a franchise. Franchise agreements are contracts between a public or private utility provider and
a city that allows the providers to install, maintain, and repair utility infrastructure within the city's right-of-way.
Franchise agreements typically last 10 to 20 years. 9 Eatonville and Ruston collect similar levels of per capita
franchise fee revenues. Eatonville's per capita revenues were used for this analysis.
Charges for services and fees
Charges for services include but are not limited to concealed pistol license permits, parks and recreation use
fees, public records copying charges and, in some cases, contracted work for nearby communities. Per capita
revenues of $20.55 from the Town of Eatonville were used to estimate charges for services in this analysis.
8 "Revenue Guide for Washington Cities and Towns," MSRC, November 2024.
9 "Revenue Guide for Washington Cities and Towns," MSRC, November 2024.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 18
Licenses and permits
Licenses and permits capture a variety of revenue sources, including those generated through development
permits, business licenses, and other miscellaneous license and permit fees. Per capita revenues from
Eatonville were used in this analysis.
Public safety fines and forfeitures
Cities receive fine and forfeiture revenues generated through civil and criminal penalties assessed through the
city's municipal court. The per capita revenues collected by the Town of Eatonville were used for this analysis.
The City of Ruston collected a much higher per capita rate but included revenue sources less applicable to the
study area, such as parking infractions.
Intergovernmental revenues
Intergovernmental revenues primarily come from grants provided by the federal, state, or county government,
but can also include revenues generated from contracts to provide services to surrounding cities or towns.10
The incorporation analysis excludes intergovernmental revenues for the study area.
Interfund transfers
Interfund transfers represent the exchange of revenues between a city's revenue funds, not new or different
revenue sources. 11 The analysis performed for this study assumes no interfund transfers through 2035.
Other revenues
Other revenues typically include interest earnings from a city's allowable public fund investments. These
revenues are typically small in comparison to the primary revenue sources documented above. The
incorporation analysis excludes interest earnings for the study area. Though the study area would likely
generate revenue through interest earnings after establishing public fund investments as an incorporated city,
this analysis does not predict the level of investment.
Table 8 presents the estimated revenues generated by the other general fund sources discussed in this
section.
Table 8. Estimated other general fund revenues, study area incorporated as a city,
2026, 2030, and 2035
Revenue source 2026 2030 2035
Permits $46,000 $47,000 $48,000
Charges for services $45,000 $46,000 $47,000
Franchise fees $29,000 $29,000 $30,000
Business licenses $17,000 $17,000 $17,000
Fines and forfeitures $13,000 $13,000 $13,000
10 "Revenue Guide for Washington Cities and Towns," MSRC, November 2024.
11 https://sao.wa.gov/bars-annual-filing/bars-gaap-manual/accounting/interfund-activities/interfund-activities-overview
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 19
Revenue source 2026 2030 2035
Total $150,000 $152,000 $154,000
Note: Totals may not sum due to rounding.
Sources: Washington State Office of Financial Management, 2025; U.S. Census Bureau, 2025; Pierce County, 2025; Puget Sound Regional Council, 2025;
City of Ruston, 2025; Town of Eatonville, 2025; Community Attributes Inc., 2025.
Special revenue funds
Special revenue funds are typically used by cities to differentiate types of revenues and expenses, as well as to
create funds that hold restricted city revenues or revenues that must be used to serve a specific purpose.
These types of funds function as separate bank accounts kept by a city to ensure revenues are allocated
correctly. The incorporation analysis estimates the following special revenue fund sources:
City street fund
Transportation impact fees and motor vehicle fuel tax revenues are both common sources of revenue for
transportation-related capital funds. Motor vehicle fuel tax or gas tax is the largest source of state-shared
revenues for cities and towns. Revenues are distributed to cities and towns on a per capita basis and
distributions depend on the actual statewide fuel tax revenues received. 12 According to the 2025 State Shared
Revenue Estimator provided by the Municipal Research and Services Center (MRSC), the per capita distribution
of motor vehicle fuel tax (commonly referred to as the gas tax) for Washington cities is estimated at $18.18 for
the 2025 budget year. This figure is used in the analysis.
Impact fees are charged to developers to mitigate the impact of new development on specific types of
infrastructure. Traffic impact fees are charged by cities to mitigate the impacts of growth on transportation
infrastructure. Impact fees are one-time fees charged by a city, town, or county and do not require voter
approval. 13 Traffic impact fee revenues use the current Pierce County rate used for the study area, $5,702 per
new housing unit.
The Washington Transportation Improvement Board also offers Small City Programs to help generate
revenues for small cities and towns to go toward transportation infrastructure improvements. The grant
programs provide fundings to cities and towns with a population less than 5,000 through the Small City Arterial
Program (SCAP), the Active Transportation Program (ATP), and the Small City Preservation Program (SCPP). 14
While these grant programs would be available to the study area after incorporation, they have not been
included in the analysis as a city is not guaranteed those grants.
Parks capital fund
Parks are another type of capital infrastructure. Cities, towns, or counties have the authority to charge to fund
"publicly owned parks, open space and recreation facilities." 15 Dash Point and Browns Points local parks are
currently operated by Parks Tacoma. The incorporation analysis assumes that Parks Tacoma would retain
ownership of and responsibility for local parks. Parks Tacoma is funded by a property tax levied by the Tacoma
Metropolitan Park District. The incorporation of the study area would not impact Dash Point State Park.
12 "Revenue Guide for Washington Cities and Towns," MSRC, November 2024.
13 "Revenue Guide for Washington Cities and Towns," MSRC, November 2024.
14 https://www.tib.wa.gov/grants/grants.cfm
15 "Revenue Guide for Washington Cities and Towns," MSRC, November 2024.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 20
A newly incorporated city could opt to coordinate with Parks Tacoma to transfer ownership and take
responsibility for the local parks, such as the Browns Point Playfield or Dash Point Park and Pier, within the
metropolitan parks district. If the study area were to obtain ownership over local parks, the primary revenue
sources used to fund parks services include parks and recreation service charges and park impact fees. Park
impact fees are an important source of funding dedicated to covering capital improvement projects that help
meet the demands of a growing population. Impact fees may not be used for maintenance and operations
costs. They may only be used for the capital costs of facilities needed to serve growth. Cities, towns, and
counties often rely on grants to provide an additional funding source for the capital costs of parks and
recreation.
Fire impact fees
Fire impact fees imposed within a city served by a fire district are collected by the city and transferred to the
fire district and are not retained by the city. This analysis does not assume the adoption of fire impact fees.
School impact fees
As with fire impact fees, school impact fees are not included in the incorporation analysis because the
revenues are not retained by the city and the administrative expenditures for these programs are captured in
the general fund administrative expenditures.
Real Estate Excise Tax fund
REET is an important source of funding for the capital costs of cities and towns that plan under the Growth
Management Act (GMA). REET may contain two halves, REET 1 and REET 2. Cities fully planning under GMA
can adopt both halves, each totaling 0.25% imposed on all real estate sales within the jurisdiction's
boundaries. REET revenues are restricted for specific purposes. REET 1, or the first 0.25% can be used for
certain capital purposes. REET 2, or the second 0.25%, must be used for certain transportation, water, storm,
sewer, and parks capital projects. Passing a measure to impose either REET 1 or 2 does not require voter
approval for cities required to plan under GMA. 16
The analysis assumes an incorporated study area would adopt the total allowable REET rate of 0.5% on all real
estate sales. Using an estimated resale value per unit, the analysis estimates REET revenues within the
incorporated study area from 2026 through 2035. REET revenues are an important source of revenue for a city
or town but can be a volatile source of funding depending on the conditions of the real estate market.
This study uses sales data sourced from the Pierce County Assessor for the study area to inform the
assumptions necessary to estimate resale value. In 2024, 33 residential units were sold in the study area,
totaling about $26 million in sales value. There was one commercial sale in 2024 that totaled $1.4 million.
Historic real estate transactions trends for the study area were used in the modeling of future tax revenues for
the study. The 2024 residential turnover rate of 2.7% is used to estimate the number of residential sales per
year, meaning 2.7% of units within the study area can be expected to sell annually. This rate, combined with the
average sale value of residential units in 2024 of $783,530, provides an estimate of the value of residential real
estate transactions per year. A 20-year average ratio of commercial sale value to residential real estate value
16 "Revenue Guide for Washington Cities and Towns," MSRC, November 2024.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 21
was used to estimate the value of commercial real estate sales per year, which is expected to remain low,
aligning with historical trends for the study area.
Surface water management fund
Cities, towns, and counties in Washington may charge fees to fund the operations and capital improvements
for surface water management or stormwater facilities and programs. Currently, these fees are collected by
Pierce County on a per parcel basis and are included in the property tax bill for each parcel. These fees apply
to residential parcels, transportation infrastructure, and agricultural land uses. The current rate charged by
Pierce County for "base plus Water Quality Services" is $145 per residential parcel.
For this study, the analysis assumes roughly that one residential parcel equals one residential housing unit and
estimates surface water management revenues accordingly. On a per housing unit basis, Eatonville and
Ruston collected similar levels of per capita revenues related to surface water management service charges.
Due to a greater similarity in geography between Ruston and the study area, Ruston's per capita revenues were
selected.
Federal, state, and county grants
Due to the uncertain nature of grant funding, it has been excluded from this analysis.
Capacity to generate revenue
Revenue estimates in this study follow, to the extent possible, revenue sources and rates for the comparable
cities (City of Ruston and Town of Eatonville) for the incorporation analysis. Specific adjustments are made
throughout the analysis to create the most realistic estimate of the study area's potential to generate revenue,
should it be incorporated.
Cities have the capacity to generate additional revenue based on alternative approaches that can be adopted
by a city council or with voter approval. For example, the newly incorporated study area may do the following:
Adopt several additional sales taxes through voter approval, including a cultural access program sales tax,
housing and related services sales tax, or public safety sales tax.
Adopt additional property tax levies through voter approval, including cultural access program levy.
Adopt a B&O tax, which would impose a tax on all businesses within the jurisdiction.
Many revenue sources listed in this section are restricted resources and therefore limited in use to specific
topics.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 22
Expenditures
Cities are typically responsible for providing several basic services — such as police, streets, and surface water
management. Many cities also provide parks and recreation programs and facilities. Other services may be
provided either by cities or separate districts, including utilities, schools, and fire protection.
The incorporation analysis assumes the following services will continue to be provided by the same districts
and providers that currently serve the study area: fire and EMS, utilities, transit, parks and recreation, and
schools.
The following services would be managed by a new city for the study area:
Public safety
Public works, including streets and surface water management
Community and economic development
Administration and finance
Municipal court
Use of funds is a key aspect of incorporation analysis. Funds act like individual bank accounts for different
sources and uses of revenue. The general fund of this analysis covers all expenditures except for the capital
expenditures for streets and surface water management. Streets and surface water management are
presented in the discussion of special revenue funds.
General fund
Expenditure estimates for an incorporated study area are primarily based on per capita expenditures from
Eatonville’s 2024 budget. Exceptions were made for legislative (city council), executive (mayor), and police and
public safety. For legislative and executive functions, Ruston’s per capita expenditures were used due to the
unique structure of Eatonville’s executive office. Eatonville’s executive expenditures were significantly higher,
largely driven by the inclusion of a city administrator whose salary and benefits comprised the bulk of that
budget. To provide further context, legislative and executive expenditure data from the smaller city of Roy and
the larger city of Fircrest were also reviewed. Both cities showed expenditures similar to Ruston’s, reinforcing
the decision to use Ruston’s per capita figures for the analysis.
To estimate the costs of police and public safety, direct contract rates charged by Pierce County in interlocal
agreements were used to create police and public safety expenditures. Further detail regarding this
assumption is included below.
Expenditures in a general fund cover all basic elements required to operate a city, including salaries, benefits,
supplies, basic service costs, vehicles, facilities, and equipment (Table 9).
Table 9. Estimated general fund expenditures for the study area incorporated as a
city, 2026-2035
Service area (figures in thousands) 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
Police and public safety $1,160 $1,165 $1,169 $1,174 $1,178 $1,182 $1,186 $1,190 $1,195 $1,203
Finance and administrative services $379 $380 $382 $383 $384 $386 $387 $388 $390 $391
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 23
Service area (figures in thousands) 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
Planning and community
$210 $210 $211 $212 $213 $213 $214 $215 $216 $217
development
Municipal court and jail $126 $127 $127 $128 $128 $128 $129 $129 $130 $130
Legislative $86 $87 $87 $87 $88 $88 $88 $89 $89 $89
Executive $33 $33 $34 $34 $34 $34 $34 $34 $34 $34
Legal $38 $38 $38 $38 $38 $39 $39 $39 $39 $39
Total $2,033 $2,040 $2,048 $2,055 $2,062 $2,070 $2,078 $2,085 $2,092 $2,107
Sources: Washington State Office of Financial Management, 2025; U.S. Census Bureau, 2025; Pierce County, 2025; Puget Sound Regional Council, 2025;
City of Ruston, 2025; Town of Eatonville, 2025; Community Attributes Inc., 2025.
Police and public safety
To estimate total expenditures, we made assumptions regarding the size of the police force the study area
would choose to contract. The baseline assumes the study area would contract a police chief, three deputies,
and administrative aide from Pierce County. This would represent 1.83 commissioned officers per 1,000
residents. This number is close to the level of service seen in Eatonville: 1.72 commissioned officers per 1,000
residents. The current level of service experienced as a part of unincorporated Pierce County is 0.64
commissioned officers per 1,000 residents.17 We used direct contract rates to estimate total police and public
safety expenditures.
The Town of Eatonville operates its own police department at a per capita cost of $378. If the study area were
to incorporate, there may be opportunities to achieve cost efficiencies while still providing the higher level of
service that community members have indicated is a priority. If the study area could match Eatonville’s per
capita cost while maintaining a comparable level of service, annual police and public safety expenditures could
be reduced to approximately $840,000. This is significantly lower than the estimated $1.2 million cost
associated with contracting services from Pierce County. However, that figure does not include the upfront
costs required to establish a police department.
Finance and administrative services
Finance and administrative service expenditures primarily cover salaries and benefits for finance department
staff, including roles such as the city clerk and administrative assistants, as well as professional services
supporting finance operations. These expenditures may also include costs related to insurance, program
oversight, communications, and audit coordination. In 2024, the Town of Eatonville reported finance and
administrative service expenditures totaling $172.34 per capita.
Planning and community development
Planning and community development captures a variety of costs of services provided by a city. The analysis
assumes the study area would incur similar planning and community development costs to Eatonville upon
incorporation. Eatonville's planning and community development budget captures expenditures for staff and
17 https://www.waspc.org/crime-statistics-reports
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 24
operations pertaining to building inspections, permitting and plan review. The Town of Eatonville currently has
planning and community development expenditures totaling $95.37 per capita.
Municipal court and jail
A city may choose to operate its own municipal court and jail or contract these services from existing
providers. This analysis assumes an incorporated study area would contract these services through Pierce
County. Contracting is a common approach among Washington cities, including Eatonville, which contracts
with Pierce County, and Ruston, which contracts with the City of Fircrest. For this study, municipal court and
jail expenditures are estimated using Eatonville’s 2024 per capita cost of $57.40.
Legislative and executive
Legislative and executive expenditures reflect the costs associated with operating the city council and mayor’s
office. These include salaries, benefits, supplies, training, and other operational expenses. This study assumes
the incorporated study area would adopt a mayor–council form of government — the most common structure
among cities in Washington, with 227 out of 281 cities using this model. 18 In 2023, the City of Ruston's budget
reported per capita expenditures of $39.33 for the city council (legislative) and $15.17 for the mayor’s office
(executive).
Legal
Cities can employ prosecutors or contract the work of prosecuting attorneys for their municipal courts.
Additionally, cities and towns require legal services for their work and employ city attorneys. The current cost
of the legal department for the Town of Eatonville is $17.21 per capita.
Special revenue funds
The only expenditures estimated for special revenue funds for the incorporation analysis pertain to capital
projects, driven by the assumption the general fund will cover all operation and maintenance costs. Estimates
of potential capital expenditures incurred for each fund presented below use a simplified methodology. Current
planned projects for the study area are a starting point for potential capital expenditures but are likely an
underestimate. A newly incorporated city would have to implement additional capital projects and build
infrastructure to provide urban services.
City street fund
For small cities, the street fund typically includes both road maintenance and capital expenditures. In this
analysis, road maintenance costs are estimated using Eatonville’s 2024 per-road-mile expenditure of
$5,249.14. A review of Pierce County’s Adopted 2025–2030 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)
indicates that no transportation capital projects are planned for the study area through 2030. Accordingly, no
transportation capital expenditures are included in this analysis.
Real Estate Excise Tax fund
No expenditures are estimated within the REET fund for this analysis. Administrative costs associated with the
program are included in the general fund. Because REET funds are restricted to capital expenditures, they may
be allocated to support future capital needs and transferred to appropriate funds as necessary. However, this
18 https://mrsc.org/explore-topics/government-organization/cities/city-forms-of-
government#:~:text=The%20mayor%2Dcouncil%20form%20consists,as%20the%20municipality's%20legislative%20body.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 25
analysis does not speculate on specific capital projects or priorities within the study area. REET revenues
could potentially support future transportation improvements, as reflected in the corresponding capital funds.
Surface water management fund
Surface water management fund expenditures include both operational costs and capital expenditures. For
this analysis, operational costs are estimated using Ruston’s per-acre expenditure levels. A review of Pierce
County’s Surface Water Improvement Program (SWIP) indicates no capital projects are planned for the study
area through 2027. As a result, no surface water capital expenditures are included in this analysis.
Parks capital fund
Although a parks capital fund is not included in this analysis, such funds in small cities are typically used to
support ongoing park maintenance and capital improvements, similar to the city street fund. In the case of the
study area, local parks are assumed to remain under the ownership and management of Parks Tacoma, which
would continue to be responsible for capital improvements. Currently, one capital project is underway: the
Dash Point Park and Pier is undergoing improvements funded by Parks Tacoma, with the next public meeting
scheduled for spring or summer 2025, prior to the start of construction. 19
Sewer services and a capital fund
Sewer services in the Study Area are currently provided by Pierce County, which owns the existing piping and
pump stations in the Study Area and operates under a service agreement with the City of Tacoma to use the
Central Tacoma Treatment Plant. The most cost-effective option for a future incorporated Study Area would be
to contract sewer services from Pierce County. According to the Pierce County Planning and Public Works
Sewer Division, the County does not charge an administrative fee for such service agreements and would
remain responsible for funding any capital projects planned within the Study Area. If the County were to require
the Study Area to contribute to capital costs, it would likely do so through a buyback program, a method
previously used with other cities. This analysis assumes sewer services would be contracted from Pierce
County and a sewer capital fund is not included.
Levels of service comparison
Levels of service vary by jurisdiction. Naturally services with more tangible benefits — such as parks and
recreation, police, sewer, and transportation and roads — are more easily tracked. Less tangible services —
such as community and economic development, planning, and administrative services — are less
straightforward to measure and monitor. Table 10 presents the existing levels of service and targeted levels of
service for parks and recreation, police, sewer, and transportation services for the study area, unincorporated
Pierce County, City of Ruston, and Town of Eatonville, given publicly available data.
Table 101. Levels of service comparison for select jurisdictions
Levels of service Unincorporated Pierce
Study area incorporated as a city Town of Eatonville City of Ruston
comparison County
Current: 5.6 park
Current: 24.4 acres/1,000
Parks and acres/1,000 residents Neighborhood park: 2 Current: .0078 acres per
Current (excl. state park):
recreation Target: 6.7 acres /1,000 acres /1,000 residents capita
3.3/1,000
residents
19 https://engagepiercecounty.mysocialpinpoint.com/dashpointpier
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 26
Levels of service Unincorporated Pierce
Study area incorporated as a city Town of Eatonville City of Ruston
comparison County
Community park/open
space: 8 acres/1,000
residents
Service targets are broken
out as follows:
No data specifically for study Emergency calls: 6.1
area, likely similar to average minute response time
2 officers/1,000 Current: 6.57
Law enforcement response time for law Priority 2 Calls: 9 minutes
residents officers/1,000 residents
enforcement in unincorporated Priority 3 Calls: 6 Minutes
Pierce County
Officers per 1,000
residents: 0.63
Levels should align with
Current: Adopts City of
unincorporated Pierce County, as 220 gallons per day (GPD)
274 gallons per Tacoma Standard 200
Sewer unincorporated Pierce County per residential equivalent
household per day gallons per capita per
currently provides sewer services plus 15% reserve capacity.
day
to the study area.
Uses design-based level
of service standards for
roads.
Design standard ratings
Urban Level of Service F
include 10 elements
(1.1 Volume to capacity
There are no data specific to the rated from 0-10
ratio)
Transportation study area's roadway levels of LOS D including lane width,
Rural Level of Service LOS
service. walkability, sidewalk
E (<1.1 Volume to capacity
width, non-peak hour
ratio)
free flow speed.
Street segments must
score above 75 points
(LOS B - Very Walkable)
Sources: Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs, 2025; City of Ruston, 2025; Town of Eatonville, 2025; Pierce County, 2025.
Table 11 presents the local property tax and sales tax rates for unincorporated Pierce County, the City of
Ruston, and Town of Eatonville. Though property tax and sales tax are two primary sources of revenues for
cities, numerous other mechanisms are available for a city to generate revenues. Table 11 aims to provide
context for the variability in levels of service relative to local property tax and sales tax rates.
Table 11. Local tax rate comparisons, 2025
Tax code Property tax (per Local sales
City
area $1,000 AV) tax rate
Unincorporated Pierce County N/A $0.96 1.6% - 3.6%
Town of Eatonville 060 $1.71 1.6%
City of Ruston 105 $1.65 3.6%
Sources: Washington State Department of Revenue, 2025; Pierce County, 2025; Community Attributes Inc., 2025.
Balancing the general fund
The analysis conducted for this study uses assumptions informed by existing conditions and community
feedback to estimate total general fund revenues and expenditures if the study area were to incorporate.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 27
However, if incorporation were to occur, the new city would have the authority to set priorities and develop a
budget that balances desired services with available revenues. In addition to prioritizing certain services over
others, the city could also choose to increase its property tax levy — up to the maximum of $1.60 per $1,000 of
assessed value — or opt to provide services directly if doing so proves more cost-effective than contracting
them out, to achieve a balanced budget while achieving community goals.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 28
Financial feasibility
This study is intended to equip readers with detailed information on the assumptions, data sources, and
methodologies used in the financial analysis of incorporation for the study area, enabling informed decision-
making regarding feasibility. The results presented are estimates. Should the study area incorporate and
mature as a city, it may expand services, take on additional capital projects, and secure funding through
county, state, or federal grants. City budgets are also influenced by broader economic conditions, introducing
additional uncertainty.
Earlier, Table 2 presented general fund estimates for 2030 by line item in an incorporated study area. Property
taxes and utility taxes represent the largest revenues sources within the general fund, representing roughly
80% of general fund revenues. Meanwhile, police and public safety is the largest expenditure in the general
fund, representing 60% of spending.
The estimated general fund balance in 2030, under assumptions used for the baseline analysis, is roughly
negative $510,000 to negative $520,000.
Table 12. Estimated general fund revenues and expenditures, study area incorporated
as a city, 2026, 2030, and 2035
General fund 2026 2030 2035
Fund revenues $1,520,000 $1,544,000 $1,573,000
Fund expenditures $2,033,000 $2,063,000 $2,100,000
Fund balance -$513,000 -$519,000 -$527,000
Sources: Washington State Office of Financial Management, 2025; U.S. Census Bureau, 2025; Pierce County, 2025; Puget Sound Regional Council, 2025;
City of Ruston, 2025; Town of Eatonville, 2025; Community Attributes Inc., 2025.
Table 13. Estimated special revenue funds revenues and expenditures, study area
incorporated as a city, 2026, 2030, and 2035
City street fund
Fund 2026 2030 2035
Fund revenues $68,000 $69,000 $70,000
Fund expenditures $76,000 $76,000 $76,000
Fund balance -$7,000 -$7,000 -$6,000
Real estate excise tax (REET) fund
Fund 2026 2030 2035
Fund revenues $114,000 $116,000 $119,000
Fund expenditures $0 $0 $0
Fund balance $114,000 $116,000 $119,000
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 29
Surface water management fund
Fund 2026 2030 2035
Fund revenues $143,000 $145,000 $149,000
Fund expenditures $64,000 $64,000 $64,000
Fund balance $79,000 $81,000 $85,000
Sources: Washington State Office of Financial Management, 2025; U.S. Census Bureau, 2025; Pierce County, 2025; Puget Sound Regional Council, 2025;
City of Ruston, 2025; Town of Eatonville, 2025; Community Attributes Inc., 2025.
Table 14 presents fund balances under alternative scenarios for growth assumptions that drive revenues and
expenditures. The scenarios include a low and high growth scenario.
Table 14. Sensitivity analysis summary, study area incorporated as a city, 2030
Low
General fund revenues Baseline High growth
growth
Taxes $1,354,000 $1,323,000 $1,386,000
Licenses and permits $93,000 $91,000 $95,000
State generated revenues $38,000 $37,000 $39,000
Charges for services $191,000 $186,000 $196,000
Fines and forfeitures $13,000 $13,000 $13,000
Total operating revenues $1,544,000 $1,509,000 $1,580,000
General fund expenditures Baseline Low growth High growth
Legislative $88,000 $86,000 $90,000
Executive $34,000 $33,000 $35,000
Finance and administrative
$384,000 $376,000 $393,000
services
Planning and community
$213,000 $208,000 $218,000
development
Municipal court and jail $128,000 $125,000 $131,000
Legal $38,000 $38,000 $39,000
Police and public safety $1,178,000 $1,153,000 $1,205,000
Total operating
$2,063,000 $2,018,000 $2,110,000
expenditures
Fund balance -$519,000 -$509,000 -$530,000
Sources: Washington State Office of Financial Management, 2025; U.S. Census Bureau, 2025; Pierce County, 2025; Puget Sound Regional Council, 2025;
City of Ruston, 2025; Town of Eatonville, 2025; Community Attributes Inc., 2025.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 30
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 31
Appendix A: Key inputs and assumptions
Table 15. Key inputs and assumptions
Study area baseline data
Input Value Unit Source
Population (2024) 2,182 people Office of Financial Management (OFM)
Housing units (2024) 1,051 units OFM
Employment (2023) 200 jobs Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC)
Pierce County Assessor, Community Attributes Inc.
Total taxable assessed value (2025) 950,071,013 dollars
(CAI)
Total taxable assessed value (2024) 880,855,710 dollars Pierce County Assessor, CAI
Total acreage 607 acres Pierce County Assessor
Total park acres 472 acres Pierce County Assessor
Taxable retail sales (2023) $11,100,000 dollars Washington State Department of Revenue (DOR)
Taxable retail sales per capita (2022) $5,087 dollars DOR, PSRC
Road miles 14.4 miles Pierce County
Development and finance assumptions
Input Value Unit Source
City property tax millage rate 0.96 dollars Pierce County
Assessed value per housing unit (2025) 755,879 dollars Pierce County Assessor, CAI
Sale value per housing unit (2024) 783,530 dollars Pierce County Assessor, CAI
Commercial assessed value (2025) 7,489,900 dollars Pierce County Assessor, CAI
Commercial assessed value per employee 37,450 Dollars Pierce County Assessor, PSRC, CAI
Commercial sale value to AV (2024) 0.19 percent Pierce County Assessor, CAI
Assessed value revaluation rate 0 percent CAI
Construction cost as a percentage AV 80 percent CAI
Annual residential turnover rate (% homes
2.7 percent Pierce County Assessor, CAI
resold each year)
Sales tax rate 1 percent DOR
Sales tax revenue retained by city 85 percent MSRC
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 32
Eatonville baseline data
Input Value Unit Source
Population (2024) 2,905 people OFM
Housing units (2024) 1,155 units OFM
Total acreage 1,169 acres OFM
Parks acres 285 acres Town of Eatonville
Road miles 24.5 miles Pierce County
Ruston baseline data
Input Value Unit Source
Population (2024) 1,065 people OFM
Housing units (2024) 521 units OFM
Total acreage 164 acres OFM
Parks acres 0 acres City of Ruston
Road miles 5.8 miles Pierce County
Pierce County baseline data
Input Value Unit Source
Incorporated land area (acres) 95,795 acres OFM
Unincorporated land area (acres) 971,701 acres OFM
Total land area (acres) 1,067,496 acres OFM
Unincorporated population (2024) 447,645 people OFM
REET inputs
Input Value Unit Source
Residential re-sale count (2024) 33 unique sales Pierce County Assessor, CAI
Residential re-sale value (2024) 25,856,500 dollars Pierce County Assessor, CAI
Commercial re-sale value (2024) $1,400,000 dollars Pierce County Assessor, CAI
Total commercial resale value as percentage of
1.3% percent Pierce County Assessor, CAI
total residential resale value (20 year-average)
REET tax rate 0.5% percent MSRC
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 33
Appendix B: Baseline and alternative scenarios
This appendix presents two alternative scenarios of the financial feasibility of incorporation. The body of this
study contains the "baseline" scenario. It reflects outcomes that may be most likely given current and past
conditions. The two scenarios in this appendix are defined as the "low growth" scenario and the "high growth"
scenario.
The purpose of testing alternative scenarios is to examine the underlying impacts of key assumptions used to
estimate the Browns Point and Dash Point study area's costs and revenues if incorporated. Only selected
assumptions are altered for scenario testing, namely growth rates in population, housing units, and
employment. Population growth targets are the most significant input driving the feasibility analysis. However,
both housing unit growth and employment growth drive and serve as inputs for some sources of revenue. The
per capita comparable city approach is used to calculate many costs and estimates of revenue.
This report aims to capture the most realistic scenario for a future city, which is referred to as the baseline
scenario. The baseline is not assumed to be the median of the three scenarios.
Table 16. Population, housing units and employment growth rates by scenario
Topic Low Medium High
Population 0.00% 0.37% 0.74%
Housing units 0.00% 0.47% 0.94%
Employment 0.00% 0.73% 1.46%
Sources: Washington State Office of Financial Management, 2024; Puget Sound Regional Council, 2024; Pierce County Countywide Planning Policies;
2023; U.S. Census, 2024; Community Attributes Inc., 2025.
Low growth scenario
The low growth scenario adjusts population and employment growth assumptions compared to the baseline,
to understand the potential impacts on municipal costs and revenues under conditions of lower growth. The
study area has experienced occasional periods of low levels of growth, including annual averages of as low as
0.1% in population and 0.3% in housing units between 2010 and 2015, and negative employment growth for
multiple years between 2015 and 2020. A zero-growth scenario was thus selected to represent a slightly more
acute but still plausible version of historical experience within the study area.
No specific growth targets have been set for the study area under the Pierce County Countywide Planning
Policy, which determines the minimum growth the county is required to accommodate through 2044. However,
Pierce County has adopted growth targets for urban unincorporated areas, which include the study area. These
equate to average annual growth rates of 1.4% for population and housing units and 1.2% for employment. The
study area's historical levels of low growth, let alone a zero-growth scenario, are below the adopted Pierce
County Countywide Planning Policy target levels for all three elements (population, housing units, and
employment).
High growth scenario
Given the low historical levels of growth in the study area, the high growth scenario was set at rates double
that of the baseline growth estimate. Population growth is projected at 0.74% annually, while annual housing
unit and employment growth are projected at 0.94% and 1.46%, respectively. These growth rates align with
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 34
historic growth rates for the study area based on data from the Office of Financial Management and the Puget
Sound Regional Council. This level of population growth is roughly equivalent to the rate the study area
experienced during its peak growth period between 2015 and 2019. It represents a level of growth in housing
supply that is roughly double to that seen during the area's period of fastest housing growth between 2020 and
2024. Employment levels have fluctuated multiple times during the 14 years from 2010 to 2023, including by
20% annually between 2019 and 2021, making estimates of average growth highly sensitive to the base years
chosen. The high growth rate selected is slightly above the average annual rate of growth experienced
between 2020 and 2023, and it includes both periods of the COVID-era decline and recovery.
Comparison of alternative scenarios
Tables 17 and 18 present the general fund and special revenue fund estimates, respectively, under the
baseline, low, and high growth scenarios.
Table 17. General fund estimates under alternative scenarios, study area
incorporated as a city, 2030
General fund Baseline Low growth High growth
Taxes $1,354,000 $1,368,000 $1,386,000
Licenses and permits $93,000 $91,000 $95,000
State generated revenues $38,000 $37,000 $39,000
Charges for services $191,000 $186,000 $196,000
Fines and forfeitures $13,000 $13,000 $13,000
Total operating revenues $1,544,000 $1,553,000 $1,580,000
Expenditures
General fund Baseline Low growth High growth
Legislative $88,000 $86,000 $90,000
Executive $34,000 $33,000 $35,000
Finance and administrative
$384,000 $376,000 $393,000
services
Planning and community
$213,000 $208,000 $218,000
development
Municipal court and jail $128,000 $125,000 $131,000
Legal $38,000 $38,000 $39,000
Police and public safety $1,405,000 $1,375,000 $1,438,000
Total operating expenditures $2,290,000 $2,241,000 $2,343,000
Fund balance -$746,000 -$688,000 -$763,000
Sources: Washington State Office of Financial Management, 2025; U.S. Census Bureau, 2025; Pierce County, 2025; Puget Sound Regional Council, 2025;
City of Ruston, 2025; Town of Eatonville, 2025; Community Attributes Inc., 2025.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 35
Table 18. Special revenue fund estimates under alternative scenarios, study area
incorporated as a city, 2030
City street fund
Special revenue fund Baseline Low growth High growth
Fund revenues $69,000 $40,000 $98,000
Fund expenditures $76,000 $76,000 $76,000
Fund balance -$7,000 -$36,000 $23,000
Real estate excise tax (REET) fund
Special revenue fund Baseline Low growth High growth
Fund revenues $116,000 $113,000 $119,000
Fund expenditures $0 $0 $0
Fund balance $116,000 $113,000 $119,000
Surface water management fund
Special revenue fund Baseline Low growth High growth
Fund revenues $145,000 $141,000 $149,000
Fund expenditures $64,000 $64,000 $64,000
Fund balance $81,000 $77,000 $85,000
Sources: Washington State Office of Financial Management, 2025; U.S. Census Bureau, 2025; Pierce County, 2025; Puget Sound Regional Council, 2025;
City of Ruston, 2025; Town of Eatonville, 2025; Community Attributes Inc., 2025.
Impacts of the low growth scenario on incorporation
Generally, the low baseline rates of historical growth and the low levels of variation modeled under the two
alternative scenarios produced relatively small impacts on revenue and expenditure estimates, with both low
growth and high growth scenarios deviating from the baseline by approximately 2.0%.
Under the low growth scenario, stable revenues owing to the lack of population, housing, and employment
growth were offset by reduced expenditures. A low growth scenario saw total general fund revenues decline by
2.3% versus baseline levels, while total expenditures decreased by 2.2%. Owing to the overall negative fund
balance under the baseline scenario, however, the overall decrease in the overall fund balance was nearly 2.0%.
The effect was more pronounced in the special revenue funds, as the lack of growth in population and housing
correlated to produced revenues too low to fund the necessary levels of expenditure, which remained constant
as they are driven by physical characteristics of the area. All three special revenue funds saw negative fund
balances under the low growth scenario.
Impacts of the high growth scenario on incorporation
The high growth scenario resulted in small impacts as well, with population and housing unit growth driving
slightly higher revenues. While general fund expenditures also increased under this scenario, they did so to a
slightly lesser extent. Overall, total revenues rose by 2.3%, and expenditures by 2.3%, leading to a net
improvement of 2.2% in the general fund balance relative to the baseline scenario.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 36
The high growth scenario had a similar positive impact on the special use funds, sufficient to produce a
positive balance in the city street fund, driven by the increase in impact fee revenues which are charged to new
housing units. The surface water management fund balance also remained positive.
Baseline and forecast methodology
The remainder of this appendix presents the data sources and methodologies used to estimate baseline
population and demographic data for the study area and estimate population, housing unit, and employment
growth within the study area.
Baseline population, housing units, and employment
The study area aligns with the Browns Point Urban Growth Area, adjacent to the cities of Tacoma and Federal
Way. Population and housing unit figures are available from the 2024 Washington State Office of Financial
Management’s Small Area Estimates Program (OFM SAEP). Total population for the study area grew from
2,084 in 2010 to 2,182 in 2024, representing an average annual growth rate of 0.3%. Housing units grew from
1,003 in 2010 to 1,051 in 2024, producing a similar average annual growth of 0.3%.
The Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) provides employment figures through its Land Use Vision
Implemented Targets (LUV-IT) growth forecast. Employment, based on data from PSRC, grew from 182 in
2010 to 200 in 2023, or an average annual growth rate of 0.7%.
Table 192. Study area baseline population, housing units, and employment, 2023
Study Area Population Housing units Employment
Browns Point UGA 2,182 1,051 200
Sources: Washington State Office of Financial Management, 2024; Puget Sound Regional Council 2023; Community Attributes Inc., 2025.
Forecast and growth scenario methods
Three potential growth scenarios were modeled to examine the implications of different levels of growth and
their impact on the feasibility of incorporation. For the purposes of this study, a baseline growth scenario was
modeled using a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 0.4% annually for population, 0.5% annually for
housing units and 0.7% annually for employment. For each scenario the appropriate growth rate was applied
annually for each year beginning from 2024 for the population and housing unit estimates, and from 2023 for
the employment estimates.
Population forecasts
Population forecasts are based on information from the Office of Financial Management (OFM), the U.S.
Census Bureau and the Pierce County Countywide Planning Policies.
Future population levels are estimated by applying different annual growth rates set for each scenario to the
2024 population of the study area as estimated by the OFM Small Area Estimate Program (SEAP).
The baseline scenario is estimated based on a compound annual growth rate of 0.4%, which represents a
continuation of the study area's most recent historic population growth rate, when its population grew from
2,150 in 2020 to 2,182 in 2024, per the SAEP.
The low growth scenario applies a zero-growth rate to examine the impact of population stasis, while the
high growth scenario aims to capture the impacts of population growth at rates higher than those in recent
years but still within the range of those experienced in the area.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 37
The high growth scenario reflects an average annual growth rate of 0.7%. This is benchmarked as a
doubling of the baseline growth rate, and is roughly comparable with the highest growth rate experienced
in the project area, which amounted to 0.9% annually between 2015 and 2019, when the population in the
study area grew from 2,095 to 2,168.
The baseline and high growth rate scenarios can also be benchmarked against the planned growth between
2020 and 2044 outlined in the adopted Pierce County Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs) in 2022. The CPPs
establish an overall share of the county's growth that is to be absorbed in different areas of the county,
including cities and towns as well as unincorporated areas. The study area lies within an urban unincorporated
area.
The CCPs specify that the urban unincorporated areas absorb a total of 32,066 new residents between 2020
and 2044, representing a compound annual growth rate of 1.4% over the 79,517 people living in those areas in
2020. However, the 1.4% overall county target is not prescriptive for every geography within the county's
unincorporated areas. It can be set by negotiation between a given unincorporated area and the county
government. Given this, although the selected growth rates applied in the baseline and high growth scenarios
for the study area are lower than the target for urban unincorporated areas, they are considered reasonable,
and appropriate given the small size and largely built-out nature of the study area.
Housing forecasts
Housing unit forecasts are informed by data from the Office of Financial Management Small Area Estimates
Program and the Pierce County CPPs. The methods used to develop baseline, low, and high growth forecasts
follow the methods used to develop the population forecasts.
Baseline growth for housing units assumes growth will continue at observed growth rates over the ten-year
period between 2015 and 2024, which equate to a CAGR of 0.5%. Projected through to 2044, this indicates a
total of 1,151 housing units in the study area. The low growth scenario applies a zero-growth assumption to
examine the implications of reduced impact fee revenues that accompany residential construction, resulting in
the same number of housing units (1,051) that exist in 2024. Similar to the population growth forecast, the
high scenario assumes growth will occur at double the baseline rate, or 0.9% annually. This is slightly above
the highest historical level experienced in the study area, which was slightly less than 0.9% between 2020 and
2024. It thus represents a slight increase over historical high growth periods, and points to a total of 1,267
housing units in the study area in 2044.
As with population growth projections, the level of housing unit growth estimated is lower than the overall
target for the county's urban unincorporated areas.
Employment forecasts
Forecasts for employment growth leverage historic employment data for the study area from the Puget Sound
Regional Council (PSRC), as well as the PSRC Land Use Vision Implemented Targets (LUV-IT) forecast and the
adopted Pierce County CPP growth target.
Employment in the study area has varied considerably since 2010, seeing double-digit growth in five of the 13
years between 2010 and 2023, and double-digit or near-double-digit declines in four years in that same period.
This is not necessarily unusual for areas with such small employment bases, where the opening or closing of
one or two businesses can have an outsized impact. Moreover, even where jobs remain, they may not be
reported in the PSRC data, which allows figures to be withheld from publishing if too few reporting companies
exist in a given area.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 38
With that caveat, the baseline employment growth scenario leverages historic employment data, assuming
that growth in the study area continues along the overall historical trend from 2010 to 2023 reported by the
PSRC LUV-IT forecast for the study area, when employment within the study area rose from 182 to 200 jobs.
This represents an overall average annual growth rate of 0.7%, which, carried through to 2044 indicates a total
of 273 jobs.
As with population and housing, for consistency the low growth scenario applies a zero-growth assumption,
resulting in the same number of jobs that exist in 2024: 233 jobs. The high growth scenario reflects a growth
rate double that of the baseline scenario, or nearly 1.5%. This is a level generally in line with the simple average
of year-to-year variations that occurred between 2010 and 2023, reflecting the potential for both growth and a
decrease in any given year but also an overall positive-growth trend over time. This growth rate suggests a
total of 310 jobs in 2044.
As with population and housing growth targets, all three scenarios represent lower levels of growth than is
identified as the overall target for the county's urban unincorporated areas.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 39
Appendix C: Identification of comparable city for Dash
Point and Browns Point
This study uses a comparable city method to develop estimates for most costs and revenues for the study
area. The premise of this method is that the comparable cities will provide revenue and cost data that is a
reliable indicator of the study area’s revenue and costs.
The cities of Eatonville and Ruston were selected as the most comparable cities to the study area. This
appendix outlines the criteria used in the selection of the comparable cities. All the comparable cities most
closely considered in this analysis include:
Buckley
Carbonado
Eatonville
Fircrest
Roy
Ruston
South Prairie
Steilacoom
Wilkeson
Table 20 outlines basic characteristics of the study area and selected comparable cities. The 2024 population
of the study area was 2,180 compared to 2,905 in Eatonville and 1,065 in Ruston. If the study area were to
incorporate it would be the 6th smallest city in Pierce County.
The study area has nearly twice the number of housing units as Ruston, however the ratios of residents to
housing units are similar. While Eatonville has a similar count of total housing units to the study area, it has a
slightly higher ratio of people per housing unit.
Estimated median income in the study area is $116,200, which is comparable to many of the cities that were
examined. When a set of additional variables were considered, however, Ruston and Eatonville were
determined to be the most relevant comparables for the purpose of this analysis.
Table 20. Comparable city characteristics, selected Pierce County cities, 2023 and
2024
2023
2024 Housing 2024 Persons 2023 Median 2023
Jurisdiction 2024 Population Employment to
Units per HU Income Employment
HU
Study Area 2,180 1,050 2.1 $116,200 200 0.2
Fircrest 7,230 2,960 2.4 $107,800 1,360 0.5
Steilacoom 6,850 2,980 2.3 $97,600 680 0.2
Buckley 5,740 2,260 2.5 $121,700 2,160 1.0
Eatonville 2,910 1,160 2.5 $93,600 900 0.8
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 40
2023
2024 Housing 2024 Persons 2023 Median 2023
Jurisdiction 2024 Population Employment to
Units per HU Income Employment
HU
Ruston 1,070 520 2.0 $114,000 600 1.1
Roy 820 320 2.6 $88,500 160 0.5
Carbonado 760 250 3.0 $105,500 70 0.3
South Prairie 630 260 2.4 $112,900 80 0.3
Wilkeson 500 180 2.7 $106,000 70 0.4
Sources: Washington State Office of Financial Management, 2024; U.S. Census Bureau, 2024; Puget Sound Regional Council; 2024; Community
Attributes Inc., 2025.
Table 21 provides a comparison of developmental characteristics. The study area encompasses 605 acres of
total gross land area and represents the median of the selected comparable cities, it is smaller than Eatonville
(1,170 acres) and larger than Ruston (165 acres). The study area has an estimated 38.8 acres of vacant and re-
developable land and is most similar to Ruston at 35 acres, Eatonville is estimated to have 620 acres of vacant
land, which represents over half of the gross land acres. The total assessed value of the study area is more
than $909 million, more than double the reported value for Eatonville at $438 million and Ruston at $426
million.
Table 21. Comparable city land area, developable land, and assessed value
characteristics, selected Pierce County cities, 2024
Vacant and
Gross Land Area Population 2024 assessed
Jurisdiction redevelopable AV/person AV/acre
(Acres) Density value (millions)
land (acres)
Study area 605 3.6 38.8 909.3 416,730 1,497,085
Buckley 2470 2.3 945 1,113.8 194,040 450,855
Steilacoom 1285 5.3 235 1,523.8 222,620 1,183,885
Eatonville 1170 2.5 620 438.0 150,785 374,840
Fircrest 1015 7.1 65 1,466.7 202,860 1,447,275
Roy 310 2.6 130 108.6 133,300 351,335
Wilkeson 300 1.7 60 76.4 152,865 256,165
Carbonado 265 2.8 150 112.2 148,665 421,230
South Prairie 245 2.5 150 79.1 126,630 322,880
Ruston 165 6.5 35 426.8 400,725 2,609,190
Sources: Washington State Office of Financial Management, 2024; U.S. Census Bureau, 2024; Pierce County Buildable Lands Report, 2022; Pierce County
Assessor, 2024; Community Attributes Inc., 2025.
Tables 22-24 outline the demographic characteristics for the study area and comparable cities. The study area
and Ruston have similar demographic characteristics, Eatonville has a higher female population and a much
younger population overall. The study area maintains a higher proportion of residents aged 35 and older
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 41
compared to both. The populations of Eatonville and Ruston are slightly more diverse than the study area,
Ruston has a greater population of residents who have completed education beyond an associate's degree,
Eatonville has a higher concentration of high school educated residents, reflecting the younger demographic
makeup of the area.
Table 22. Comparable city age and sex, selected Pierce County cities, 2023
Femal
Jurisdiction Male 0-17 18-34 35-64 65+
e
Study area 51% 49% 13% 15% 45% 28%
Buckley 49% 51% 21% 15% 41% 23%
Carbonado 54% 46% 34% 23% 34% 8%
Eatonville 45% 55% 33% 29% 29% 9%
Fircrest 47% 53% 19% 16% 47% 18%
Roy 53% 47% 23% 28% 33% 15%
Ruston 47% 53% 14% 20% 43% 23%
South Prairie 55% 45% 31% 20% 38% 11%
Steilacoom 48% 52% 20% 20% 41% 19%
Wilkeson 55% 45% 24% 34% 27% 15%
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2024; Community Attributes Inc., 2025.
Table 23. Comparable city race, selected Pierce County cities, 2023
Native American
Two or
Hawaiian Indian or
Jurisdiction White More Black Other Asian
or Pacific Alaskan
Races
Islander Native
Study area 83% 8% 1% 1% 6% 2% 0%
Buckley 95% 3% 1% 0% 1% 0% 1%
Carbonado 92% 8% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Eatonville 78% 17% 1% 2% 1% 0% 1%
Fircrest 71% 14% 4% 2% 9% 0% 1%
Roy 81% 15% 2% 0% 1% 0% 0%
Ruston 75% 12% 1% 2% 8% 0% 2%
South Prairie 84% 8% 0% 4% 3% 1% 0%
Steilacoom 75% 12% 4% 2% 5% 0% 1%
Wilkeson 91% 8% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1%
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2024; Community Attributes Inc., 2025.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 42
Table 24. Comparable city educational attainment, selected Pierce County cities,
2023
Greater than
Less than high Associate's Bachelor's
Jurisdiction High school bachelor's
school degree degree
degree
Study area 5% 44% 12% 23% 17%
Buckley 7% 63% 10% 17% 3%
Carbonado 14% 53% 15% 17% 2%
Eatonville 7% 61% 14% 14% 4%
Fircrest 3% 42% 5% 26% 23%
Roy 6% 57% 19% 12% 6%
Ruston 2% 32% 8% 33% 25%
South Prairie 10% 68% 7% 12% 3%
Steilacoom 5% 35% 12% 26% 22%
Wilkeson 4% 69% 11% 15% 0%
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2024; Community Attributes Inc., 2025.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 43
Appendix D: Study area and market characteristics
Demand for housing and commercial activity affects the revenues received from the study area, as well as
demand for services. Key market considerations and indicators are included in the body of the report.
Population and density
Table 25 outlines a data profile for the study area. The estimated 2024 population is 2,180 with a population
density of 3.6 people per acre. The study area had an estimated 1,050 housing units in 2024. Employment was
200 with 0.19 jobs per housing unit. Total land area for the study area is 605 acres.
Table 25. Dash Point and Browns Point incorporation study area characteristics, 2024
Characteristic Value
Population 2,180
Population density 3.6
Housing units 1,050
Median household income 116,200
Employment (2023) 200
Employment to housing unit ratio (2023) 0.19
Gross land area (acres) 605
Number of parcels 1235
Vacant land (acres) 22.8
Underutilized land (acres) 16
Total vacant and re-developable (acres) 38.8
Assessed land value (millions) $467.29
Assessed improvement value (millions) $441.98
Total assessed value (millions) $909.3
Sources: Washington State Office of Financial Management, 2024; U.S. Census, 2024; Pierce County, 2024; Puget Sound Regional Council, 2024;
Community Attributes Inc., 2025.
Housing units
Housing units in the study area have grown at a rate of 0.3% annually between 2014 and 2024 which equates
to 34 total units added over the same period or 3.4 units per year on average.
Real estate conditions
Table 26 shows sales of real properties in the study area for 2024. Sales data for the study area are sourced
from public data available through the Pierce County Assessor. In 2024, 34 units were sold in the study area,
totaling over $27 million. Sales in 2024 represented less than one percent of total assessed value in the study
area. Most of the sales were for residential properties, with only one recorded sale of commercial property.
Total sales values were nearly 1.2 times higher than the assessed values for residential sales and 1.5 times
higher than commercial sales.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 44
Table 26. Study area real property sales, 2024
Value
Residential sale amount (2024) $25,856,500
Residential number of sales (2024) 33
Residential average sale price (2-year average) $783,530
Commercial sale amount $1,400,000
Commercial number of sales 1
Residential sale value as a percentage of AV 1.15
Commercial sale value as a percentage of AV 1.50
Residential turnover rate 2.7%
Frequency of resales (years) 37
Commercial sales as a share of residential sales (20-year
1.3%
average)
Sources: Pierce County, 2023; Community Attributes, 2023.
Real estate trends were used to inform modeling of future tax revenues. The 2024 sale value as a percentage
of total assessed value (2.7%) is used as a turnover rate to calculate Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) revenues
from annual residential property sales. This means that 2.7% of residential units can be expected to be sold
each year. Combined with the average sale value per housing results in the estimated value of residential real
estate transactions per year. A 20-year average ratio of commercial sale value to residential real estate value is
used to estimate commercial real estate sales per year
Employment
Employment is a driver of demand for services within the study area and supports revenue generation.
Employment has been consistent in the study area since 2015, excluding the decreased employment figures
experienced between 2020 and 2022. The largest employment sectors represented in the study area are
services and construction and resources, followed by wholesale, transportation, and utilities.
Table 27. Employment by major sector, study area, 2015-2023
Sector 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Services 142 151 126 129 122 110 94 131 143
Construction and resources 13 29 18 13 15 18 14 18 18
Wholesale, transportation, and utilities 28 32 34 67 72 23 17 17 17
Finance, insurance and real estate 7 10 * * * 9 7 7 8
Government 2 3 4 3 5 2 3 4 5
Manufacturing 0 * * * * * * * *
Retail 12 * 0 0 0 * * * *
Public Education 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 45
Sector 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Total 205 236 198 226 225 169 144 185 200
*Reflects employment data is not disclosed.
Source: Puget Sound Regional Council, 2024.
Retail sales
Taxable retail sales are a key driver for one of a city’s major revenues sources, local sales and use taxes. To
arrive at taxable retail sales estimates within the study area through 2037, a custom data request was made to
the Washington State Department of Revenue (DOR). DOR was able to provide observed taxable retail sales
estimates within the study area for 2022, from which, a per capita taxable retail sales figure was obtained. This
number was inflated to reflect 2024 dollars and then used alongside forecasted population growth to estimate
taxable retail sales through 2037. Figure 8 presents estimated taxable retail sales between 2024 and 2037.
Figure 8. Estimated taxable retail sales, study area, 2024-2037
Millions
$14.0
$12.3 $12.3
$12.0 $12.1 $12.1 $12.2 $12.2 $12.3
$11.8 $11.8 $11.9 $11.9 $12.0 $12.0
$12.0
$10.0
$8.0
$6.0
$4.0
$2.0
$0.0
2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037
Source: Washington State Department of Revenue, 2023; Pierce County Countywide Planning Policies, 2023; Community Attributes Inc., 2023.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 46
Appendix E: Homelessness, behavioral health, and
public safety
Homelessness
The Pierce County Human Services Department manages homelessness services in all unincorporated and
incorporated areas in Pierce County. They partner with several cities and community partners to provide
resources to individuals or families experiencing homelessness. These resources come from a variety of
programs and include safe parking locations, access to showers and day centers, and overnight shelter
options. 20
Across agencies, there are several definitions of homelessness that are often set by federal funders. These
differing definitions make it difficult to measure and compare whether certain strategies are effective at
reducing the number of people experiencing homelessness. 21 One method to understand trends in
homelessness is Pierce County’s Homeless Point-in-Time survey. As required by the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Pierce County leaders, service providers, and volunteers perform an
annual count of people on the street and in shelters.
While this survey is not an exhaustive count of everyone experiencing homelessness, it can reveal
characteristics that can be compared year after year. The 2024 Point-in-Time survey captured 2,661 people
experiencing homelessness, an increase of 23% since 2023. 22 However, this increase was not associated with
growth in service use. In 2024 just 54% of people experiencing homelessness were sheltered compared to the
65% in 2023.
The primary cause survey respondents noted was lack of affordable housing, which is a shift from previous
years’ response being family crisis. 23 The Pierce County Comprehensive Plan to End Homelessness aligns
several key goals with statewide objectives. 24 Pierce County Human Services has allocated $17 million for
homeless housing services and $2.5 million has been allocated to build emergency housing directly. 25, 26
While the limited housing supply contributes significantly to the rise in homelessness, a range of other risk
factors are also known to influence a person's likelihood of entering or exiting homelessness. The Center for
Social Innovation presented findings on supporting partnership for anti-racism in Pierce County. In addition to
systemic racism and related factors, the report indicates the primary barriers to exiting homelessness (or risk
factors for entering homelessness) include: 27
Food Access (SNAP)
Unemployment/underemployment
Housing quality (age)
Felonies
20 Homeless Programs
21 Pierce County 5 Year Strategic Plan Final
22 News Flash 2024 Point-in-Time Count Results
23 2024 Point-in-Time Count Results
24 Washington state five-year Homeless Housing Strategic Plan released.
25 Pierce County Human Services awarding nearly $18M for homeless, housing services
26 Pierce County budget includes $2.5M in federal funds for a ‘micro-home village’
27 SPARC Initial Findings from Quantitative and Qualitative Research
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 47
Credit scores
Evictions
Ultimately, addressing homelessness is complex, and a comprehensive understanding of service needs and
costs will require a more detailed assessment of how county services interrelate and coordinate with services
potentially provided by an incorporated city within the study area.
Behavioral health
Assessing the needs for health and human services requires an understanding of the root causes of
homelessness, along with the growing demand for mental health support after the COVID-19 pandemic. While
there are no behavioral health providers within the boundary of the study area, understanding the access to
these services nearby is critical. Federal Way is home to the closest resources to the study area, which include
LightHeart Associates, HealthPoint Federal Way, and Thrive Counseling Center. The services offered vary by
provider, but include therapy, psychiatry, and medication management for children, adolescents and adults.
The Pierce County Behavioral Improvement Plan (BHIP) received an update in December 2024 and details
funding priorities for services over the next six years. Most of the funds come from Ordinance 2020-138s,
which created an additional sales and use tax to fund chemical dependency or mental health services. 28 For
the 2024-2025 biennial budget, Pierce County has designated $44.7 million from the county’s behavioral health
and therapeutic courts tax for mental health and substance use disorder treatment services not covered by
Medicaid or private insurance. This includes funding for community behavioral health clinics, youth behavioral
health programs, crisis response, and therapeutic courts.29 An additional $10 million in funding comes from
the Opioid Settlement Fund, Behavioral Health Partnership Funds, and Funding for Tacoma-Pierce County
Health Department Family Resource Centers. The general goal behind these funds is to build a responsive,
equitable, and accessible behavioral health system that adapts to community needs.
If the study area were to be incorporated, the county would likely continue delivering services there, as it does
in both incorporated and unincorporated areas. An incorporated study area might need to consider if there are
any service gaps to the behavioral health services provided at the county level and address challenges
residents might face traveling to nearby Tacoma or Federal Way for care.
Public safety and crime
Maintaining effective public safety is essential when evaluating incorporation. While the study area currently
benefits from a relatively low crime rate compared to some more populous urban neighbors, incorporation
would shift the responsibility of public safety services from Pierce County to a potential city government. 30
Mapping the study area on Crimegrade.org illustrates where crime levels are on a scale of A+ (being the lowest
level of crime) to F (being the highest level of crime). The southern coast along Marine View Drive has an F
rating, while Browns Point up to Dash Point along the coast improves to a C grade. Looking inland, east of East
Side Drive, the grade improves to an A- for most of the geography.
28 https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=82.14.460
29 https://www.piercecountywa.gov/8366/Behavioral-Health-Systems-Substance-Use-
30 https://crimegrade.org/safest-places-in-pierce-county-wa/
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 48
An incorporated city would need to consider the appropriate staffing level for a law enforcement department.
Currently public safety services in the study area are provided by the Pierce County Sheriff’s Department. The
sheriff's office currently consists of 300 commissioned officers that serve all unincorporated areas within the
county.31 Given the population of unincorporated Pierce County, the officer-to-resident ratio is approximately 1
to 1,200. To achieve ratios similar to the Town of Eatonville (approximately 1 officer per 600 residents) the
study area would require three officers. 32
31 https://www.piercecountywa.gov/133/Office-Overview---Staffing-Jurisdiction
32 https://policescorecard.org/wa/police-department/eatonville
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 49
Appendix F: Land use, zoning, demographics, commute
trends, and existing districts
This section provides detailed maps on land uses, zoning, population, and demographics within the study area
and surrounding areas.
The predominant land uses in the study area are listed below.
Residential use represents much of the study area, and the large area of vacant land uses to the northeast
is part of Dash Point State Park.
Local parks within the study area include Browns Point Lighthouse Park, Browns Point Playfield, and Dash
Point Park and Pier.
Commercial uses are concentrated along East Side Drive, including Browns Point Town Center.
Nearly the entire UGA is designated for low-density residential. Prior to the adoption of the updated
comprehensive plan low-density residential zoning was 4 units per net acre. The updated comprehensive
plan adopted slight increases to the density of the residential zone within the area, called suburban
residential. The suburban residential zone allows for densities of 4 to 6 housing units per net acre.
The neighborhood center zoning designation given to Browns Point Town Center in the southeast portion
of the UGA was not changed by the comprehensive plan update.
Appendix G: Pierce County's Countywide Planning
Policies and other policies and programs related to
incorporation
Vision 2050: A plan for the Central Puget Sound Region
In October 2022, the Puget Sound Regional Council officially adopted VISION 2050, a comprehensive plan
guiding the region’s growth. The plan outlines a long-term vision for the central Puget Sound’s environmental
sustainability, economic development, and transportation systems. VISION 2050 also presents a regional
growth strategy that details how and where the region can accommodate a projected population of 5.8 million
people and 3.4 million jobs by 2050. 33 These objectives manifest in Multicounty Planning Policies (MPPs)
which address regionwide issues through a collaborative planning framework. Key goals and MPPs of VISION
2050 relating to incorporation include:
MPP-DP-28: Joint planning for urban unincorporated areas: Support joint planning between cities,
counties, and service providers to work cooperatively in planning for urban unincorporated areas to ensure
an orderly transition to city governance, including efforts such as: (a) establishing urban development
standards, (b) addressing service and infrastructure financing, and (c) transferring permitting authority. 34
33 https://www.psrc.org/planning-2050/vision/vision-2050-planning-resources
34 VISION 2050 A Plan for the Central Puget Sound Region, October 2020.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 50
MPP-DP-29: Phased annexation and incorporation: Support annexation and incorporation in urban
unincorporated areas by planning for phased growth of communities to be economically viable, supported
by the urban infrastructure, and served by public transit. 35
MPP-DP-35: Coordination on new community proposals: In the event that a proposal is made for creating
a new fully contained community, the county shall make the proposal available to other counties and to the
Regional Council for advance review and comment on regional impacts. 36
An exhaustive list of MPPs is available online.
Pierce County Countywide Planning Policies
The Countywide Planning Policies, adopted May 17, 2022, and ratified November 14, 2022, serve as a unifying
framework for Pierce County to meet the requirements outlined in the Growth Management Act. They also
outline processes and tools to promote collaboration among the jurisdictions. With respect to incorporation,
the countywide planning policies have limited advisement and prefer annexation over incorporation. The plan
highlights that annexations and incorporations can significantly influence county government revenue,
potentially impacting the county’s capacity to provide certain regional services. In cases where incorporation
does occur, the county will work with existing municipalities to ensure the transition is made efficiently. 37
Pierce County Comprehensive Plan
The Pierce County Comprehensive Plan is a 20-year policy document that addresses growth in the
unincorporated areas of Pierce County. It is the foundation for several community plans and capital facilities
planning, which must be consistent with the comprehensive plan’s policy framework. Counties are required to
conduct a thorough review of their comprehensive plans and development regulations every 10 years and have
the option to amend their comprehensive plans annually. The most recent comprehensive plan was finalized in
2024 and became effective February 1, 2025. Prior to adopting the current comprehensive plan, the most
recent amendment to the prior Pierce County Comprehensive Plan had been in July 2023.
Comprehensive plans identify areas within their urban growth area (UGA) suitable for potential incorporation
(potential incorporation areas, PIA) or annexation (potential annexation areas, PAA). The study area is situated
within Pierce County's Urban Growth Area and is identified in the current Pierce County Comprehensive Plan as
a potential annexation area for the City of Tacoma. The Comprehensive Plan identifies two specific potential
incorporation areas within the county, in South Hill and Tehaleh, but makes no comment regarding
incorporation of or within the study area.
The Pierce County Comprehensive Plan includes the following land use (LU) goals related to incorporation.38
Goal Land Use (LU) 2 - Ensure that unincorporated urban areas within the urban growth area are either
affiliated with neighboring cities and towns as potential annexation areas (PAAs) or identified as potential
incorporation areas (PIAs).
• LU-2.3 - Affiliate unincorporated urban areas with neighboring cities or towns rather than being
identified as a PIA.
35 VISION 2050 A Plan for the Central Puget Sound Region, October 2020.
36 VISION 2050 A Plan for the Central Puget Sound Region, October 2020.
37 Pierce County Countywide Planning Policies
38 Pierce County Comprehensive Plan, February 2025. https://www.piercecountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/140621/Pierce-County-
Comprehensive-Plan-Effective-Feb-1-2025
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 51
• LU-2.4 - Establish a PIA designation where incorporation of an area is appropriate based upon logical
geographic boundaries; size; population; a potential tax base to support a City; a variety of uses needed
for a City, including residential, businesses, civic and recreational; urban services and facilities provided
other than by adjacent cities; a community identity; and other appropriate factors.
Goal LU-3 - Explore incorporation and annexation of identified areas.
• LU-3.1 - Establish stakeholder groups of residents, service providers, businesses, and other interested
parties to identify opportunities and challenges associated with the incorporation of identified areas.
• LU-3.2 - Explore the economic viability of incorporation through the completion of incorporation
feasibility studies.
Goal LU-23 - Implement the Suburban Residential land use designation within unincorporated urban areas
to encourage the development of single-family residential neighborhoods.
Dash Point and Browns Point Community Plan
Community goals outlined in the Browns Point and Dash Point Community Plan emphasize the preservation
and enhancement of existing residential and commercial uses. Maintaining views of the Puget Sound and
focusing redevelopment efforts within the Browns Point Town Center were identified. Additionally, the
community plan places high recreational, cultural, and economic value on their natural shoreline environment.
As such, land-use development is advised to consider long-term goals to preserve native vegetation and
species. Many of these goals are also informed by the Washington State Shoreline Management Act (SMA)
and the Hylebos Browns-Dash Point Basin Plan. With respect to infrastructure and facilities needs for the
future, Browns Point and Dash Point have unique circumstances because they are built out and isolated from
other unincorporated areas. Where existing levels of service standards are not met with public facilities and
services, actions will be taken to eliminate or prevent the issues from becoming worse.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 52
Appendix H: GMA planning requirements and
incorporation
Planning and community development departments facilitate the development and implementation of long-
range plans and policies. If the study area were to incorporate, the new city is required to adopt a
comprehensive plan and development regulations pursuant to the GMA (RCW 36.70A). The study area has
shoreline and special flood hazard areas; therefore, the new city would need to adopt a Shoreline Master
Program and local floodplain management regulations. A suite of supporting long-range plans may be
desirable as well to expand on specific topics in the comprehensive plan.
Comprehensive plan
The new comprehensive plan would address elements such as land use, housing, capital facilities, climate
change and resilience, utilities, transportation, economic development, and parks. The new city would then
adopt zoning and development regulations to implement planning policies set forth in the comprehensive plan
and guide the issuance of permits and enforcement of city codes.
Capital improvement plan
The capital facilities element 39 of a comprehensive plan guides the development and improvement of publicly
owned land, buildings, infrastructure, and systems. Capital facility planning efforts in cities typically document
project needs for public buildings; transportation systems including streets, intersections, sidewalks; water,
stormwater, and wastewater systems, parks and recreation facilities, and police and fire protection.
Transportation improvement plan
In addition to the transportation element required as part of a comprehensive plan, all cities, towns, and
counties are required to develop and adopt a six-year transportation improvement program (TIP), also known
as a transportation improvement plan (RCW 35.77.010).
The TIP is a short-range planning document that describes the available budget for transportation
improvement projects planned for the next six years. The TIP must be consistent with the comprehensive plan
and updated yearly through a public hearing process.
Shoreline Master Program
The western and northern boundaries of the study area border Puget Sound, which is a designated shoreline of
the state.
The Shoreline Management Act requires local governments with shorelines of the state within their boundaries
to develop and administer a shoreline master program (RCW 90.58). Local shoreline master programs
establish goals and policies that are implemented through use regulations. A city’s shoreline master program
must be incorporated into its comprehensive plan. After that, the new city would need to adopt regulations to
implement the program to ensure that no substantial development is permitted on the state's shoreline unless
a permit is obtained from the city that demonstrates consistency with the shoreline master program.
39 RCW 36.70A.070(3)
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 53
Additional long-range plans
Some of the additional plans a new city could consider developing to expand on or add to the required
comprehensive plan elements include:
Climate action and sustainability plans
Emergency management, hazard mitigation, and disaster debris management plans
Urban forestry management plan
Transportation system plan
Parks master plan
Stormwater management, watershed, and basin plans
Subarea and neighborhood plans
Coordination of plans and policies with other jurisdictions
Solid waste management plan
Each county, in cooperation with the jurisdictions within the county, is required to prepare a comprehensive
solid waste management plan (RCW 70A.205.040). Pierce County most recently adopted the Tacoma-Pierce
County Solid and Hazardous Waste Management Plan: 2021-2040 (Tacoma-Pierce County 2021). This plan
also serves the cities and towns that have interlocal agreements to participate in the county’s disposal system.
This plan would apply to the newly incorporated city after it signed an interlocal agreement.
Basin plans
One basin plan adopted by Pierce County, the Hylebos-Browns Point-Dash Point Basin Plan, overlaps with the
study area. The goals of the basin plans are to reduce flood hazards, improve water quality, and improve
wildlife habitat. The basin plans are focused on unincorporated Pierce County but include areas in
incorporated cities, because the basins span both incorporated and unincorporated land, and stormwater
runoff travels through the basins. If the study area were to incorporate, management of the basins within the
study area would be the responsibility of the new city and best managed in collaboration with Pierce County
and any other jurisdictions within the basin’s boundaries.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 54
Appendix I: Community survey results and community
informational meeting
Community survey results
Community Attributes conducted an online survey on behalf of the Department of Commerce to request
residents' input to inform this study. The survey was conducted in January, February and March 2025 and
received 151 responses. Among respondents, 138 live in the study area.
Table 28. Survey respondent profile
Respondent
Percent
location
Live in the study
area 82%
Live and work in
the study area 11%
Work in the study 4%
Neither 3%
Total Respondents 151
Survey respondents were asked to rate their level of satisfaction with current public services within the Dash
Point and Browns Point study area from 1(very unsatisfied) to 5 (very satisfied). Respondents living within the
study area were least satisfied with the current level of public safety services in the study area, followed by
roads and transportation services. Respondents living in the study area were satisfied or very satisfied with fire
services, parks and recreation, and utility services in the study area. Overall, 57% of respondents living in the
study area were either satisfied or very satisfied with the overall level of public services in the study area.
(Figure 9)
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 55
Figure 9. Level of satisfaction within the Dash Point and Browns Point study area,
respondent living in the study area
1 (Very Unsatisfied) 2 (Unsatisfied) 3 (Neutral) 4 (Satisfied) 5 (Very Satisfied)
Public Services (n=134) 6% 15% 22% 32% 25%
1% 1%
Fire Services (n=138) 14% 27% 56%
Parks & Recreation (n=138) 4% 8% 12% 28% 49%
Utilities (n=138) 3% 12% 12% 37% 36%
Roads & Transportation (n=137) 14% 12% 18% 35% 21%
Health & Human Services (n=135) 5% 10% 33% 25% 26%
Public Safety (n=135) 17% 23% 23% 19% 18%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Sources: Community Survey, 2025; Community Attributes Inc., 2025.
Survey respondents were also asked to select their top three concerns or priorities for public services for
future investment within the study area. Among respondents living within the study area, public safety and land
use policies were issues selected by more than 50% of respondents.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 56
Figure 10. Ranked concerns or priorities for public services for future investment
within the study area, respondents living in the study area
Public safety 68%
Land use policies 53%
Transportation and roads 46%
Utility infrastructure and capacity 35%
Public transit 34%
Access to parks and recreation amenities 24%
Access to amenities 23%
Economic development 10%
Health and human services 6%
Access to housing 2%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Respondents were also provided with an opportunity to add additional thoughts to inform the study through an
open-ended question. The following themes emerged from the responses received (76 of which 69 live in the
study area).
Opposed to incorporation. More than a quarter of open-ended responses by respondents living within the
study area mentioned opposition to incorporation or skepticism about the feasibility of incorporation.
Satisfaction with community. Respondents (17%) living within the study area also mentioned their
satisfaction with the community as it is. Respondents mentioned that the community is "quiet, safe" and a
"close knit neighborhood that functions well". One respondent wrote "we live in a great community!"
Sidewalks and roads. Respondents (14%) living within the study area mentioned lack of sidewalks and/or
road maintenance as issues.
Police and public safety. Among respondents living within the study area 13% mentioned police and public
safety as a concern. Respondents noted both the slow response times as well as limited presence of
police within the community. Respondents also mentioned speeding as a common concern (9%) as well as
the safety and condition of SR 509 specifically (9%).
Other themes mentioned include concerns about development standards, zoning, and housing types within
the community; utilities including preferences for underground power and concerns with water, sewer, and
solid waste; concerns about the existing tax burden and the potential for increased tax burden; and the
need to repair the Dash Point Pier.
The tables below provide information about the survey respondents indicating they live within the study area
on age, gender, race, household income, and educational attainment.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 57
Table 29. Survey respondents' age, respondents living within study area
Age Responses Share
Less than 25 years
2 1%
old
25 to 35 years old 5 4%
36 to 59 years old 45 33%
Over 60 years old 83 61%
Total 135 100%
Sources: Community Survey, 2025; Community Attributes Inc, 2025.
Table 30. Survey respondents' gender, respondents living within study area
Gender Responses Share
Female 68 50%
Male 60 44%
Prefer not
8 6%
to answer
Total 136 100%
Sources: Community Survey, 2025; Community Attributes Inc, 2025.
Table 31. Survey respondents' race, respondents living within study area
Race Responses Share
White 114 88%
Two or more races 3 2%
Native Hawaiian or Pacific
2 2%
Islander
Black 1 1%
Other 9 7%
Total 129 100%
Sources: Community Survey, 2025; Community Attributes Inc, 2025.
Table 32. Survey respondents' household income, respondents living within study
area
Income range Responses Share
$25,000 to 34,999 1 1%
$35,000 to 49,999 6 5%
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 58
Income range Responses Share
$50,000 to 74,999 8 6%
$75,000 to 99,999 20 16%
$100,000 to
28 22%
149,999
$150,000 to
17 14%
199,999
More than
45 36%
$200,000
Total 125 100%
Sources: Community Survey, 2025; Community Attributes Inc, 2025.
Table 33. Survey respondents’ educational attainment, respondents living within the
study area
Education Responses Share
High school degree 13 10%
Associate's degree 16 12%
Bachelor's degree 54 40%
More than a bachelor's
53 39%
degree
Total 136 100%
Sources: Community Survey, 2025; Community Attributes Inc, 2025.
Community informational meeting
On February 13, the Washington State Department of Commerce and Community Attributes Inc., held a public
meeting to share notice and basic information regarding the informational incorporation study with the Dash
Point and Browns Point communities. This included receiving feedback from attendees regarding their current
satisfaction with the provision of various public services. Each attendee was given three sticky notes and
asked to provide feedback for seven focus areas: public safety, health and human services, fire services,
utilities, roads and transportation, parks and recreation, and other. In total, 94 sticky notes were received.
Public safety: 29 stickies, 31%
Health and human services: 0 stickies, 0%
Fire services: 5 stickies, 5%
Utilities: 17 stickies, 18%
Roads and transportation: 15 stickies, 16%
Parks and recreation: 13 stickies, 14%
Other: 17 stickies, 18%.
Recurring themes by focus area included:
Public Safety
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 59
• Police – lack of law enforcement presence
• Police response time (described as slow)
• Speeding on 509
Fire Services: Support for fire services
Utilities
• Poor cell service
• Sewer services / septic
• Underground wiring
Roads and transportation
• Better roads / better road maintenance
• Speed / speed controls needed
• No public transit
Parks and recreation
• Dock and pier maintenance and replacement
• Park maintenance / litter
Other
• Why do we need more density?
• Preserve/maintain single family homes
• Rentals/Airbnb
• Who is behind this study?
• What is tax impact? What will it cost? What will we get?
The questions and answers asked during the meeting:
Do you need to be a resident of Browns Point or Dash Point to participate in the survey?
• A: The survey asks about residency status, either live, work, or neither. Results can be screened/sorted
by residency status.
Are you working with the Tribes? What role do they have in the study?
• A: The Puyallup Tribe has been contacted and is aware of the study and been offered the opportunity
for input via a focus group. So far, they have not expressed interest in a focus group.
What is the difference between a city and a township and why are both being used to describe Browns
Point and Dash Point?
• A: Should Browns Point and Dash Point incorporate into a single jurisdiction, that entity would be
classified as a city under Washington state law.
Do you have examples of other small cities you’re looking at for comparison?
• A: Eatonville, Fircrest, Roy, and potentially other small Pierce County cities are being looked at.
What about the part of the area which is currently incorporated as part of Tacoma?
• A: The study is only looking at the areas which are currently unincorporated.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 60
What are the variety of ways cities can generate revenue?
• A: There are different layers of taxes – property and sales being the largest– all of which contribute
toward the provision of different services. This will be laid out in the report.
Will the study provide details as to how a city can generate enough revenue to balance out expenses
(revenue streams)?
• A: Yes, the study will answer the question, If the study area were a fully operating city, would its revenue
be adequate to cover its expenses to meet or exceed existing levels of service?
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 61
Appendix J: Summary of revenue resources available
for local governments
This appendix provides an overview of revenues sources available to local governments in Washington. Details
on the capacity, structure, and restrictions for each source are available through the Municipal Research and
Services Center of Washington (MRSC), including the Revenue Guide for Washington Cities and Towns. 40
Washington state taxation
There are two basic categories of taxes in the state – property taxes and excise taxes. Property taxes are the
oldest form and largest single revenue source for many local governments. Excise taxes have the broadest
categories, with sales tax being the most significant.
Restrictions have been imposed on property taxes over time. State taxing power has changed during this time
through the imposition of a variety of excise taxes allowing local jurisdictions to diversify their revenue
streams. Early occupation taxes were levied and expanded to impose retail sales tax and new business and
occupation taxes by 1935. The state granted authority to cities and counties to impose a sales and use tax of
0.5% for general local government purposes in 1970, resulting in the combined 1% still in place today.
How taxes are generated and calculated
Property taxes and sales and use taxes
Washington state has a budget-based property tax structure. Within this framework, as part of their annual
budget process, local governments and other taxing districts establish the total dollar amount of property tax
revenue they aim to generate for the year and then decide the levy rate that applies to property owners based
on the total assessed valuation (AV) of all properties. Properties are taxed by their tax code area, which
includes combinations of overlapping taxing districts. Taxing districts are government units with property tax
authority. There are limits to the aggregate levy rate within a tax code area. Jurisdictions can also use pro-
rationing, which establishes levy hierarchies, or buy-down agreements, paying another taxing district to reduce
its levy, if they exceed or will exceed the levy limits.
The state imposes a 6.5% sales tax. Cities, counties, and other taxing districts can impose local sales taxes on
top of the state rate. For many cities and towns, sales taxes represent the first or second largest revenue
source within their general fund. Given the growth in online shopping, in 2008 the state adopted a destination-
based sales tax system known as the “streamlined sales tax” in which the location where sales tax is
calculated is considered the destination.
Property taxes and sales taxes are imposed differently, which impacts revenue streams. Property taxes are
based upon changing property values and must be re-calculated and re-imposed every year, while excise taxes
remain in effect on all taxable events upon adoption. Sales taxes can be especially advantageous for cities
with significant shopping, commercial centers, and tourist attractions; however, they are also sensitive to
economic conditions and have a disproportionate burden on households with lower incomes.
40 https://mrsc.org/getmedia/d3f7f211-fc63-4b7a-b362-cb17993d5fe5/Revenue-Guide-For-Washington-Cities-and-Towns.pdf?ext=.pdf
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 62
Excise taxes
Any city or town may impose a variety of taxes and fees upon local businesses and utility companies, including
business and occupation (B&O) taxes, utility taxes, and business license fees. B&O taxes and utility taxes are
major revenue sources for cities. B&O taxes are less common than utility taxes.
Additional excise taxes include:
Lodging tax – Any county, most cities, and certain public facilities have the authority to levy lodging taxes.
There are two tax options, a basic and additional lodging tax and these may be imposed in addition to
tourism promotion area fees.
Real Estate Excise Taxes (REET) – The state levies a real estate excise tax (REET) upon all sales of real
estate. The tax rate used to be a flat 1.28%, but effective January 1, 2020, the state implemented a
graduated tax scale based on the selling price of the property, with the sale price thresholds adjusted on a
four-year schedule. A portion of the proceeds are deposited into the public works assistance account for
loans and grants to local governments for public works projects; the city-county assistance account for
distribution to qualifying cities and counties; and the education legacy trust account for the support of the
common schools, expanding higher education and other educational improvement efforts. Counties can
impose local real estate taxes on top of the state rate. REET revenues can be somewhat volatile since they
depend on both the volume and value of real estate sales.
Counties and cities can impose a range of other excise taxes such as event admissions tax and
commercial parking taxes.
Intergovernmental revenues
State and federal governments also provide intergovernmental sources of funding for local government
programs. State shared revenues are generally revenues distributed to cities, towns, and counties by a formula
set in state statute or appropriated by the Legislature through the state budget process. These revenue
streams depend on the federal and state legislative process, the economy and political factors.
Special taxing districts
Counties and cities have the option to form special taxing districts to generate additional revenue or shift
funding sources. For most of these districts, the county legislative body serves as the governing body, though
some may be governed by elected commissioners or by interlocal agreement. Cities have the option to form
certain special taxing districts, generally corresponding with the city’s boundaries. In addition, cities can annex
into existing library districts and fire protection districts or join with other fire protection jurisdictions to form
regional fire authorities, all of which have revenue impacts especially in property tax levy rates. Some of the
special taxing districts may be organized as a separate governmental entity or may be structured as an
extension of the city’s existing operations.
Other revenue sources
Counties can establish other revenue resources, including departmental fees, charges and reimbursements,
particularly as charges for services by county departments. Some fees may be retained by the county, while
others are transmitted to the state or distributed among all counties. Impact fees can be imposed by both
counties and cities, authorized for jurisdictions that are fully planning under the Growth Management Act, onto
developers to mitigate the impacts of facilities due to increased demand from new development or growth.
Local governments can also secure resources by borrowing money for operations and capital investments.
The mechanisms are either short or long-term and can be repaid through tax revenues, user fees or special
assessments.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 63
Municipal debt
Cities and towns also have access to funds through municipal debt. Additional information on the types of
municipal debt, bond capacity, and limitations can be found through MRSC's resources. 41
Cities may leverage:
General obligation bonds, some of which may be issued by a vote of the legislative body and some of
which require voter approval.
Revenue bonds may be issued to finance projects for self-supporting enterprises, most commonly water
and wastewater projects, and stormwater systems.
Improvement district bonds, which are commonly used for projects such as street improvements,
sidewalks, and water and sewer systems the primarily or wholly benefit only a subset of residents.
Refunding and advance refunding bonds which are issued to replace and refinance outstanding general
obligation or revenue bonds.
Private activity bonds or the Bond Cap Allocation Program are tax-exempt bonds often issued by pubic
development corporations formed to finance non-governmental activities.
There are limits to the borrowing power of local governments that are based on both constitutional and
statutory restrictions and based on a percentage of the assessed valuation of the taxable properties within
each jurisdiction. Additionally, federal law establishes rules about the tax status of government securities and
the process for issuing and disclosing debt obligations. The debt limit is expressed as a percentage of the
taxing district's total assessed value of taxable properties. Debt limits also restrict how much of this capacity
can be used for various purposes.
41 https://mrsc.org/explore-topics/finance/debt/types-of-municipal-debt
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 64
Appendix K: Methodology
Financial feasibility
The results of the analysis, based on the data and assumptions outlined in this report, are presented in the
following sections. Detailed information on data sources, assumptions, and methodologies for each scenario
is provided in Appendix A and Appendix B. The analysis projects revenues and expenditures using anticipated
growth in population, housing units, and employment. The medium growth scenario reflects historical trends,
which have shown minimal variation in growth rates since 2010. Given that Dash Point and Browns Point are
small communities with limited vacant or re-developable land, growth in population, housing, and employment
are expected to remain low and near historical growth rates.
Financial analysis assesses the study area's first fully operational year after incorporation and the next nine
years. The analysis assumes 2026 to be the first full year of cityhood but does not adjust for inflation, so the
financial analysis can be replicated using alternative initial years. Projected growth is the sole variable that
drives changes to annual revenues or costs within the study area. Projections are presented through 2035.
The methodology excludes analysis of the year in which incorporation takes effect, based on the assumption
that the study area would become operational partway through its inaugural year. Instead, the financial
analysis begins with the first full fiscal year of operations. Additionally, the cash flows and one-time revenue
sources associated with interim operations during the inaugural year are not expected to impact the larger
question of long-term financial feasibility.
Among the many issues a newly incorporated city must consider is that some services may be contracted
initially, and some equipment may be leased or purchased on credit. Some of the most critical factors to
consider include:
Partial-year operations
Transition to cash flow of key revenues, such as property and sales tax
Initial cost of space and equipment
Arranging for contracts for continued service
Adoption of interim codes and ordinances
The cost of developing a comprehensive plan and associated environmental assessments.
Services
Some of the services that cities provide are essential or core services and others are discretionary. The city
council determines which services to provide, and at what level.
For the purposes of this study, the following city services are identified as core or discretionary:
Core (non-discretionary) services and facilities
Building and planning
City administration
Fire
Police
Sewer
Solid waste
Streets and sidewalks
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 65
Wastewater
Water
Discretionary services and facilities
Parks and recreation
Human services
Library
Bicycle facilities
Transit support facilities
Discretionary services are not funded in this incorporation analysis. While parks and recreation services within
the study area are currently managed by Parks Tacoma, a metropolitan parks district serving Tacoma and
some surrounding areas, the report includes a discussion of parks and recreation services to provide
information on the revenues and costs. Funding for human services and bicycle facilities would be determined
by the potential city as revenues allow. Transit support facilities are provided by Pierce Transit. Libraries are
provided by the Pierce County Library System. The area is also served by Dash Point State Park.
Cities also will decide which core services will be provided by other government agencies, by contracts, or by
city employees.
Other factors
State law lists factors the Boundary Review Board must consider when contemplating a proposed
incorporation. This analysis focuses on the financial feasibility of the study area if it were to incorporate, and
not the elements to be reviewed by the Boundary Review Board. However, these factors are listed below.
According to RCW 36.93.170:
“In reaching a decision on a proposal or an alternative, the board shall consider the factors affecting such
proposal, which shall include, but not be limited to the following:
(1) Population and territory; population density; land area and land uses; comprehensive plans and zoning,
as adopted under chapter 35.63, 35A.63, or 36.70 RCW; comprehensive plans and development
regulations adopted under chapter 36.70A RCW; applicable service agreements entered into under chapter
36.115 or 39.34 RCW; applicable interlocal annexation agreements between a county and its cities; per
capita assessed valuation; topography, natural boundaries and drainage basins, proximity to other
populated areas; the existence and preservation of prime agricultural soils and productive agricultural
uses; the likelihood of significant growth in the area and in adjacent incorporated and unincorporated
areas during the next ten years; location and most desirable future location of community facilities;
(2) Municipal services; need for municipal services; effect of ordinances, governmental codes, regulations
and resolutions on existing uses; present cost and adequacy of governmental services and controls in
area; prospects of governmental services from other sources; probable future needs for such services and
controls; probable effect of proposal or alternative on cost and adequacy of services and controls in area
and adjacent area; the effect on the finances, debt structure, and contractual obligations and rights of all
affected governmental units; and
(3) The effect of the proposal or alternative on adjacent areas, on mutual economic and social interests,
and on the local governmental structure of the county.”
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 66
Comparable cities
This analysis uses the comparable city method to develop estimates for most costs and revenues for the
study area. The method is based on the principle that revenues and costs of another city comparable to the
study area are reliable indicators.
The indicators and comparable cities considered for this study are further explained in Appendix C.
The next step involves aggregating and analyzing data on key indicators for cities in Pierce County that are
roughly comparable to the study area in terms of size and composition. To identify appropriate comparison
cities, data on population, housing units, employment, land area, assessed property values, and household
income were collected for all Pierce County cities. These metrics were then compared to those of the study
area, with particular emphasis on population, housing units, land area, and median income. Based on this
analysis, Eatonville and Ruston were selected as the primary comparison cities.
To estimate study area revenues and costs, the analysis converts municipal budget data from the City of
Ruston and Town of Eatonville to per capita revenues and costs, and those per capita values are multiplied by
the study area's population. It is important to note that using per capita costs of a comparable city assumes
that the hypothetical incorporated city will receive levels of service similar to the comparable city for each
service.
When using the comparable city method, the current and future population for the study area becomes an
important consideration. Appendix B provides the detailed analysis employed to estimate current and
forecasted population for the study area. In some budget areas, a custom approach is used in lieu of the per
capita comparison. The analysis uses data specific to the study area whenever possible or uses an alternative
per capita comparison that better reflects the study area to better estimate potential revenues and
expenditures. These alternative approaches include using the study area's assessed values to estimate
property taxes, and taxable retail sales to estimate sales and use tax revenues.
Additional methods
Some of the study area's characteristics, expenditures, and revenues can be estimated more accurately using
methods other than the comparable city method. Estimation of key baseline data and budget items benefits
from data specific to the study area.
Population and development
Data on population and housing units for the study area are sourced from the Washington State Office of
Financial Management's Small Area Estimates Program. Detailed methods and data sources for both baseline
and forecasted population, housing units, and employment are documented in Appendix B.
Property tax
Property tax revenue projections for the study area are based on the assessed valuation of existing buildings
and land, estimates of the value and tax revenue from new construction, and an assumed millage rate. These
projections are customized for the study area using 2025 Pierce County Assessor data and GIS parcel
information.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 67
Sales tax
The amount of sales tax revenue received by a city is largely determined by the volume of sales made by
businesses within its boundaries. In 2008, the state adopted a destination-based sales tax system under the
Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement, which allocates local sales tax revenue based on the point of
delivery rather than the location of the business or warehouse. Given the significant difference in business
activity between the study area and Ruston and Eatonville, sales tax revenue is not estimated using the
comparable city method. Instead, retail sales tax projections for the study area are based on direct data on
taxable retail sales and sales tax collections provided by the Washington State Department of Revenue.
Real Estate Excise Tax
Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) revenue estimates are based on projected property sales within the study area,
as well as the assessed value of existing residential and commercial properties.
Transportation impact fees
Transportation impact fee revenues are estimated using the current impact fee rates charged by Pierce
County, as the analysis assumes an incorporated study area would be able to charge the same rate.
Capital costs
Capital costs vary significantly between cities due to a range of local factors, including the age and condition
of existing infrastructure, service level standards, and growth rates. Because Eatonville and Ruston’s capital
expenditures are tailored to address their own infrastructure needs and deficiencies, their budgets are not
reliable indicators of the study area’s capital cost requirements. As a result, this analysis relies on Pierce
County’s assessment of current conditions and future infrastructure needs within the study area.
Data Sources
The data used in this study are sourced from state, regional, and local sources:
Population, housing, and employment
Pierce County
Puget Sound Regional Council
Washington State Office of Financial Management
U.S. Census Bureau
Revenues and expenditures
City of Ruston
Town of Eatonville
Pierce County
Washington State Department of Revenue
Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington (MRSC) 42
42 MRSC is a nonprofit that helps local governments across Washington by providing legal and policy guidance.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 68
Assumptions
The findings in this study depend on a combination of data and assumptions. Understanding the specific
assumptions, which are identified throughout the report, is important to reading the findings of the study.
Levels of service similar to comparable city
The financial responsibility of incorporation has been assessed based on the assumption that a hypothetical
incorporated study area would offer levels of service similar to those currently provided by the comparable
cities of Ruston and Eatonville, given similar levels of taxation in the Study Area.
Responsibility for services and facilities
When an area incorporates as a city, the responsibility for governmental services and facilities falls into three
categories:
Services that remain the responsibility of existing government agencies
Services that become the responsibility of the new city
Services that the city can choose to provide itself or contract with an existing government agency to
provide
Additionally, a new city does not necessarily have to provide services that become its responsibility, if the city
ensures these services are still provided through a contract with an existing government agency. For this
study, such services are assumed to be provided by the newly formed city. While the new city may choose to
contract with another agency rather than hire employees, the city is ultimately responsible for ensuring service
delivery. For example, the city could choose to contract with a local jurisdiction to provide municipal court
services within the newly incorporated community, or it could choose to establish a city-run municipal court.
Other services that are often contracted by cities include law enforcement and animal control. Whether the city
elects to contract for services or provide them directly, these services are considered to be the responsibility of
the city and provided by the city.
Service areas that existing agencies will continue to provide:
Public health—Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department
Schools—Tacoma Public Schools
State roads—State of Washington
Transit—Pierce Transit
Service areas to be provided by new city upon incorporation:
Land use planning and regulation
Streets and roads
Stormwater
Administration (city council, mayor, city clerk, attorney, finance, personnel)
Services the new city can choose to provide directly or contract with existing agencies to provide:
Law enforcement (police, jail, courts, animal control)—Pierce County
Fire protection and emergency medical services—Pierce Fire Protection District #13
City parks and recreation—Parks Tacoma
Library—Pierce County Library District
Solid waste collection—Murrey's Disposal
Water—City of Tacoma
Sewer—Pierce County Planning and Public Works Sewer Division
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 69
Population and housing
Analysis includes three forecasts of growth rates using data from the Washington State Office of Financial
Management, Pierce County, Puget Sound Regional Council, and U.S. Census Bureau. The methodologies used
for these forecasts are described in Appendix B.
Revenues and expenditures
This study assumes that taxes, fees, and charges will remain at approximately the same levels as those in
place at the time of analysis. The property tax and sales tax bases are calculated based on existing real
property values and current economic activity within the study area. Additional revenues are projected based
on anticipated growth and include sales tax from new construction and consumer spending, property tax from
new development, and Real Estate Excise Tax revenue from expected market turnover. Revenue sources not
present in the study area are included only if they are both used by the comparison cities and commonly
adopted by cities throughout Pierce County.
Projections of revenues and costs for determining financial feasibility within this study should be conservative
to avoid overestimating the financial feasibility of the study area to successfully operate as a city. This means
that when uncertain, the financial analysis errs on the low side for revenues and the high side for costs.
Fund accounting
Local government revenue comes from various sources, some of which can be used for a range of purposes,
while others are restricted to specific uses. To track the purpose and restrictions of each revenue source,
government agencies create distinct funds. Unrestricted funds are placed in the general fund, while funds
designated for specific uses, such as stormwater or street maintenance, are placed in dedicated accounts.
The term "fund" refers to an account used for tracking revenue and expenditures, not a source of revenue
itself. Throughout this analysis, the fund associated with each revenue and expense forecast is clearly
identified.
Government agencies typically manage numerous individual funds, with varying names. Additionally, cities
often use internal service funds and interdepartmental cost allocations, which are excluded from this analysis.
Though the net effect of these allocations is zero, they can influence the financial feasibility of individual
funds. This is not a detailed discussion of internal service funds and interdepartmental cost allocations. For
simplicity, the financial analysis in this study focuses on:
General fund
City street fund
Real Estate Excise Tax fund
Surface water management fund
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 70
Appendix L: Incorporation process
The state of Washington, through provisions of RCW 35 and 35A, outlines steps for the creation of new cities
through a petition process initiated by residents in the area proposed to be incorporated.
Any contiguous area with at least 1,500 residents may propose incorporation. Any area within a county that
plans under the Growth Management Act may incorporate only if it lies within a designated urban growth area
(UGA) (RCW 36.93.150(2)). Effective June 30, 2028, if the proposed area of incorporation is within five (air)
miles of the boundaries of a city with a population equal to or exceeding 15,000 residents, the proposed area
must have a minimum of 3,000 inhabitants.
Incorporation process
Incorporations must occur within designated UGAs. In 1994, the Legislature adopted Laws of 1994, Chapter
216 (SHB 2176), which changed the process for the handling of petitions. The bill also established and
outlined a priority procedure for competing annexations and incorporations, whereby annexations initiated
within 90 days of the start of the incorporation process would have priority over the incorporation effort.
Interested persons or groups determine the boundaries to be proposed for a new city, form of government
proposed, etc. The process set out in the statutes:
Proponents, who must be registered voter(s) residing in the proposed city, file notice of the proposed
incorporation with the county legislative authority. The notice must include the information required to be
included in the incorporation petition under RCW 35.03.030 and requires a filing fee (RCW 35.02.015).
The county legislative authority notifies the boundary review board (BRB) of the incorporation notice.
Within 30 days of the notice being filed, the BRB holds a preliminary public meeting regarding the
incorporation notice, which gives the general public an opportunity to voice their feedback, whether in favor
of or opposition to the proposed incorporation (RCW 35.02.015).
The County auditor assigns an identification number within one working day after the public meeting (RCW
35.02.017). Proponents must finalize the legal description to be used on the petition at that time.
Proponents of incorporation seek signatures on the petition. The petition of incorporation must be signed
by at least 10% of the number of voters residing within the proposed city or town and filed with the auditors
of the county no later than 180 days after the date of the public meeting on the proposed incorporation
(RCW 35.02.020 as amended by SHB 2176).
Once the auditor certifies the sufficiency of the petition, the petitioner files a formal notice of intention of
the proposed incorporation with the BRB (RCW 35.02.037).
Once the jurisdiction of the BRB has been invoked per RCW 36.93.160(1), the BRB schedules a public
hearing. 43 The board is required to give at least 30 days advance notice of the hearing, and to post and
publish notices regarding the hearing in the area affected.
If the Board invokes jurisdiction, it holds hearings, conducts studies and makes a recommendation about
the proposal. The BRB may amend boundaries pursuant to statutory requirements and criteria as part of its
approval (RCW 36.93.010 et seq., as amended by SHB 2176). The BRB must file its written decision within
40 days of the conclusion of the hearing (RCW 36.93.160(4)).
The county legislative authority sets the election date at the next special election held at least 60 days after
Board action (RCW 35.02.078 as amended by SHB 2176).
43 Washington State Boundary Review Board for Pierce County: Practice and Procedure, Article IV, Section A.2, February 2012.
https://www.piercecountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/5848/BRB-Practice-And-Procedure
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 71
Information required in petition to incorporate
RCW 35.02.030 requires that a petition to incorporate:
Indicate whether the proposed city shall be a non-charter code city operating under RCW 35A, or a second-
class city operating under RCW 35.
Indicate the form or plan of government the city or town is to have (mayor-council or council-manager).
Set forth and particularly describe the proposed boundaries of the proposed city.
State the name of the proposed city.
State the number of inhabitants therein, as nearly as may be.
“Pray” that the city be incorporated.
Role of the boundary review board
The BRB was created by RCW 36.93.030. The statute establishes local independent review agencies to
facilitate and regulate municipal and special district boundary changes, either by annexation or incorporation,
for counties with a population of 210,000 or more. The BRB may review any proposal pertaining to the creation,
incorporation, or change in the boundary, other than a consolidation of any city, town or special purpose
district (RCW 36.93.090).
The BRB is tasked with reviewing certain annexations to cities and special purpose districts, incorporations of
new cities, and the creation of new special purpose districts.
The BRB is to act in a manner consistent with the GMA, particularly regarding the urban/rural line. The BRB
cannot allow the annexation or incorporation of rural areas.
While the BRB is required to review any proposed incorporation or other action as outlined above in the county
in which it is located, it does not formally do so unless certain events occur within 45 days of the filing of a
notice of intention by the jurisdiction proposing the action (RCW 36.93.100).
For its final decision, the board is required to attempt the following objectives, as provided in the statute:
“Preservation of natural neighborhoods and communities; Use of physical boundaries, including but not
limited to bodies of water, highways, and land contours; Creation and preservation of logical service areas;
Prevention of abnormally irregular boundaries; Discouragement of multiple incorporations of small cities
and encouragement of incorporation of cities in excess of ten thousand population in heavily populated
urban areas; Dissolution of inactive special districts; Adjustment of impractical boundaries; Incorporation
as cities or towns or annexations to cities or towns of incorporated areas which are urban in character;
and Protection of agricultural and rural lands which are designated for long term productive agricultural
and resource use by a comprehensive plan adopted by the county” (RCW 36.93.180).
The BRB may do any of the following in response to an incorporation proposal:
Approve the proposal as submitted.
Modify and approve the proposal by adding or deleting territory.
Disapprove a proposal of an area of less than 7,500 population.
Recommend against incorporation of an area with a population of 7,500 or more.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 72
Pierce County boundary review board
In addition to carrying out statutory procedural requirements, each boundary review board adopts its own rules
of practice and procedure. In accordance with state law, the BRB for Pierce County has established procedures
to make arrangements to hold a public meeting within 30 days after the Pierce County Council receives a
notification of proposed circulation of incorporation proceedings. 44 This includes coordinating with the
advocate(s) on the schedule and publishing notice of the meeting. The primary purpose of the public meeting
is to engage the proponent(s) who filed the notice of the incorporation and members of the proposed
incorporation community by exchanging information and feedback. The meeting is required to be in the
evening at a location proximal to the proposed new city incorporation and is not required to include a quorum
of the BRB.
The Pierce County BRB has outlined a format required for a notice of intention for incorporation proposals. 45
The required documentation includes:
A brief description of and reason for seeking the proposed action, to include a statement of the method
used to initiate the proposed action (i.e., petition or election method), and the complete RCW designation.
The original petition calling for the incorporation/formation with a letter of certification from the Pierce
County Elections Department.
A copy of the declaration and current State Environmental Policy Act checklist with adequate explanations
to answers.
The legal description of the boundaries of the area involved in the proposed action.
Maps: Pierce County Assessor’s quarter section map and required vicinity maps.
Further, a study of the proposed incorporation is required sufficient to support the BRB’s review of factors
affecting the proposal. This study also can inform voters and may be useful to new city officials. The board
must consider the following factors as outlined in RCW 36.93.170:
Overview: population of proposal area (what percentage is the population of proposal to unincorporated
Pierce County); territory (number of acres); population density; assessed valuation.
Land use: existing land uses and uses permitted under current plans and policies.
Planning data: revenues and expenditures (provided through budgets and transition plans); information on
service providers (water, sewer, fire service, community).
General: analysis and description of the effect of the proposal on adjacent areas and on the local
government structure of the county or any service district; description of the topography and natural
boundaries of the proposal; information on how much growth has been projected for this area during the
next 10-year period.46
Finally, the intention documentation must describe how the proposal meets the objectives of RCW
36.93.180. 47 The same chapter provides guidelines for BRBs to use in pursuing the state objectives.
Differences between incorporation and annexation
Effectively, incorporation is the act of creating a new city and annexation is the process by which a specific
area becomes part of an existing city. Pursuant to state laws, cities and residents ultimately have final say on
44 Washington State Boundary Review Board for Pierce County: Practice and Procedure, Article IV, Section A.2, February 2012.
45 Notice of Intention Format (Incorporations/Formations) As Amended May 11, 1999.
46 Pierce County Notice of Intention Format, May 1999.
47 Pierce County Notice of Intention Format, May 1999.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 73
an incorporation or annexation. Both processes can be initiated by residents of the area subject to
incorporation or annexation. 48
In the case of new city incorporations, the BRB oversees preparation of an impartial consultant study to assess
the financial feasibility of the proposed new city. After the study, the BRB holds a public hearing, establishes
final boundaries, and makes a recommendation to the voters, who make the final decision in an election on the
incorporation.
For annexations, the BRB notifies all potentially interested jurisdictions of the action but holds a hearing only if
the action is contested. The request for a hearing and BRB review must come from an affected jurisdiction or
from residents or property owners by petition. After the hearing in contested cases, the BRB may approve,
deny, or modify the boundaries of the proposed annexation, merger, or other boundary action.
48 Annexations
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 74
Appendix M: Implementation considerations for
incorporation
This section summarizes important considerations for incorporation of a new city. It documents the forms of
government newly incorporated communities in Washington can establish, including organizational roles and
responsibilities. Additionally, it reviews the potential impact of the form of government on the incorporation
process and provides overviews of the interim transition period as the new government is established.
Classification types and forms of government
The incorporation proposal for a proposed new incorporation area must indicate the type of city that will be
created both in terms of the plan for the city classification designation and the form of government.
Specifically, the Petition for Incorporation to the county governing body must indicate whether the proposed
city or town will be a non-charter code city 49 operating under Title 35A RCW or a second-class city operating
under Title 35 RCW and the proposed form or plan of government.
The classification types depend in part on the size of the municipality at the time of incorporation or
reorganization and include:
First-class cities have a population greater than 10,000 at the time of organization and have adopted a
charter.
Second-class cities have a population greater than 1,500 at the time of organization and are not code cities
operating under RCW 35A.
Towns have a population less than 1,500 at the time of organization and are not code cities operating
under RCW 35A. As RCW 35.02.010 requires a minimum population of 1,500 to incorporate, new towns can
no longer be incorporated.
Code cities operate under RCW 35A. In addition to new cities incorporating as a code city, existing cities or
towns may reorganize as a code city (RCW 35A.02). According to MRSC, most cities in Washington are
code cities. 50
The classification of the city affects the authority of the municipality in general, as code cities enjoy more
autonomy in matters of local concern while second-class cities have more limited powers, including only those
expressly granted to it by statute. 51 The city classification also impacts the framework of the statutory rules
regarding the form of government, including the powers of the mayor, the size of the city council, and required
appointed positions.52 Code cities and first-class cities are authorized to perform any function not specifically
denied by state law, whereas second-class cities and towns have only those powers expressly granted to them
by the Legislature.53
Municipal forms of government
There are two forms of government provided to code cities under the Optional Municipal Code — the mayor-
council form (RCW 35A.12 for code cities and RCW 35.23 for second-class cities) and the council-manager
49 Any non-charter code city with population 10,00 or greater may adopt a charter and become a charter code city (RCW 35A.70.010).
Code city as defined by RCW 35A.01.035 includes both non-charter code city and charter code city.
50 Washington City and Town Profiles
51 Municipal Research and Services Center (MRSC), MRSC Code City Handbook, 2009,
52 MRSC Code City Handbook, 2009, pages 9, 13.
53 MRSC Code City Handbook, 2009, p. 4.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 75
form (RCW 35A.13 for code cities and 35.18 for second-class cities). The primary difference between these
plans is the allocation of powers between the legislative and executive officials.
The mayor-council form is the oldest and most widely used form of government in the state and is used by
many community types (such as large, small, urban, and rural). The mayor and city council members are both
elected city positions, who must comply with requirements for residency and voter registration. The mayor
serves as the chief executive and administrative officer and ceremonial head of state while the city council
adopts and enforces ordinances, provides services, and levies taxes. Appointments are required for the
positions of city clerk and chief law enforcement officer. A hybrid version of this municipal form exists in
which a chief administrator or city manager is hired, creating separate roles for political representation and
professional administration of city operations.
Many medium-to-large sized cities in the state use the council-manager form of government, including many
new cities that have formed since 1970. In this form, the city council members are the only elected positions,
and they are responsible for policymaking as well as appointing a professional city manager, who serves as
the chief executive and administrative officer. The city council is not allowed to interfere with the city
manager’s administration but may vote for their termination. The form was designed to enhance the
professionalism and efficiency of the city’s administration. The city manager is required to be selected based
on administrative and executive qualities, as the structure is based on a business model, such as a corporate
board of directors appointing a chief executive officer. 54
Municipal forms adopted in Washington and Pierce County
There are currently five second-class cities in Washington, all operating under the mayor-council form and all
located in the eastern part of the state. Most new cities created by incorporation since 1970 (16 out of 17)
have been formed under the council-manager system. After incorporation, three of those 16 have switched to
mayor-council form of government. According to MRSC, since 1970 about two-thirds of cities that have
successfully switched forms of government have switched to the council-manager form. 55
According to MRSC, of the 23 municipalities in Pierce County (including three that straddle both Pierce and
King counties), 17 (74%) follow the mayor-council form of government, with the remaining six the council-
manager form. The cities of Edgewood, Lakewood, and University Place were all incorporated in the 1990s and
all three incorporated under the council-manager form. The City of Edgewood switched to the mayor-council
form of government in 2014 after incorporating in 1996.
For comparison to the study area, Ruston and Eatonville are both municipalities in Pierce County that follow
the mayor-council form of government. Eatonville was incorporated as a town in 1909. Ruston was
incorporated as a city in 1906 but converted to a non-charter code city under RCW 35A in 2012, although it
continues to use the moniker "Town of Ruston."
Considerations for the incorporation process
The number of cities created through incorporation in Washington increased significantly during the 1990s,
fueled in part by increased growth and development, particularly in the Puget Sound area, as well as by the
passage of the GMA. The GMA equipped localities with more tools to provide adequate services for further
54 “City and Town Forms of Government.” Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington. Last update January 7, 2025.
55 “City and Town Forms of Government.” Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington. Last update January 7, 2025.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 76
development. Incorporation also gives communities greater autonomy to determine their character and the
level of services.
In addition to shaping how cities determine those objectives and how they aim to achieve them, the planned
form of government can also impact how the incorporation petition communicates to the BRB on how
incorporation will meet statutory objectives. The Pierce County Boundary Review Board, as part of its review of
an incorporation proposal, requires documentation be provided in the Notice of Intention to incorporate which
addresses the following considerations as outlined in RCW 36.93.170:
A description of the population and territory of the area, including population density, land area and uses,
assessed valuation, proximity to other populated areas, and likelihood of significant growth in the area,
amongst others.
Comprehensive plans, zoning, and development regulations adopted, as well as interlocal, service, or
annexation agreements.
Municipal services to be provided, how they will be provided and by whom, the cost of doing so and
potential sources of funding to cover that, and the effect of these on other governmental units.
The impact of the proposal on adjacent areas, economic and social interests, and the local governmental
structure of the county.
Incorporation transition period and formation of new government
During the interim or transition period, the new city must be organized, staffed, and funded. To do this, basic
municipal functions are provided through a city council governing body per RCW 35.02.130, including the
provision of local services. Under a council-manager format, the municipal framework is established by the
selection of a presiding officer. In the mayor-council format, the mayor is the formal presiding officer.
In the council-manager plan, a city manager is hired and given the authority to hire the administration staff.
Under the mayor-council format, a chief administrator can also be hired and division of responsibilities
between the mayor and chief administrator clarified.
A salary schedule for the interim period will be established either through ordinance or application of the
statutory compensation schedule in RCW 35A.12.070 and 35A.13.040, which sets a salary formula by size of
community and type of position. In the council-manager form, the council directs the interim manager to
prepare the preliminary first-year budget. In the mayor-council form, the mayor prepares and sets the
preliminary first-year budget.
Overview of incorporation transition
Timeline of incorporation and transition
The major steps after the successful election on an incorporation proposal are:
Before the election of the officials, the formation of an informal or transition group can begin the planning
process. This working group can help facilitate the city’s development, including organizing pre-officer
election activities and workshops for candidates to discuss issues that will face the interim council.
Resource partners, such as the Association of Washington Cities, MRSC, and neighboring cities can also
provide information and assistance.
Elections of officials:
• The primary election will be held at the next special election after the election for incorporation.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 77
• After the primary election at the next special election date, an election is held to fill elective positions
per statutory requirements (RCW 35.02.086, 29A.52.355, 35.02.110, 29A.04.330, RCW 35.02.125).
The interim period is the time between when the newly elected officials are elected and the official date of
incorporation. During this time, the interim city council has statutory authorizations and can work to plan
and implement the community’s transition to a city (RCW 35.02.130).
The official date of incorporation is set and specified in a resolution adopted by the City Council and may
be anywhere between 180 and 360 days after the date of the incorporation election (RCW 35.02.130).
Interim period
During the interim period, the elected officials are authorized to:
Adopt ordinances, contracts, State Environmental Policy Act policies, property tax levies, development
moratoria, and budgets, which will become effective from the date of incorporation
Borrow funds or issue short-term notes, either based on tax or revenue anticipation notes or by borrowing
from federal, state, and other governments as if the city were officially incorporated
Acquire city facilities and equipment as needed
Hire staff, including an interim city manager or administrator who may serve up until the date of
incorporation
Submit ballot propositions to authorize taxes to take effect from the date of incorporation
Authorize an annexation of the city or town by a fire protection district or library district (RCW 35.02.130)
The interim council could give the highest and most immediate priority to ensuring the effective continuation
of local public services, while deferring critical long-term decisions until competent, professional, legal and
administrative advice is obtained.
There are several laws to which the interim city council is subject (RCW 35.02.130) during the interim period,
including but not limited to those related to immunity for discretionary decisions (RCW 4.24.470); open
government (RCW Title 29B), open public meetings (RCW 42.30), and public records (RCW 40.14); ethics and
conflicts of interest (RCW 42.20 and 42.23) and liability insurance (RCW 36.16.138), as well as others related
to public contracts, bidding, and interlocal cooperation.
Organizing city government
To begin organizing the governmental framework, the newly elected interim city council identifies a presiding
officer and rules of procedure. Staff critical to facilitating the city’s transition are hired. In the council-manager
form of government, this can include hiring the city manager, who (if provided hiring authority) can begin to fill
out the city’s administrative infrastructure. Other positions can be hired during this period, such as the city
clerk, treasurer/financial officer, and city attorney. Related personnel policies are also addressed, such as the
salary schedule, which can be set by ordinance or follow RCW 35A.12.070; 35A.13.040 (MRSC 2013).
Financial management
The city then starts to establish financial management policies and practices, including an accounting system
and funds to pay for expenses. The interim city council can borrow funds through tax or revenue anticipation
notes and borrowing from other governmental entities to help finance various city costs (MRSC 2013).
Budget process
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 78
The interim council adopts a provisional budget for the interim period and a second provisional budget if the
interim period extends into the next calendar year. The council must also adopt a first-year budget (RCW
35.02.132).
Municipal services
The interim city council must determine the services, level of service, and service delivery methods for a variety
of services to be provided initially, with some considerations for future services. For example, the newly
incorporated community can continue contracts with the county for the provision of police protection or
establish a city police department. During the interim period, counties or other service districts providing
services to the area remain responsible for continuing to do so up until the date of incorporation, and for law
enforcement and road maintenance services, for up to 60 days beyond that to give the new city sufficient time
to begin receiving sales tax or road tax levies.
Formal incorporation date
The official date of incorporation is a critical decision that impacts a city’s first year of operations. The
decision requires allowing adequate time for completing the interim period duties, in addition to considerations
involving maximizing the revenue flow to the new city as soon as possible and taking advantage of county-
provided services for as long as possible.
INCORPORATION STUDY FOR DASH POINT AND BROWNS POINT 79
File and source
- File
- 2025_commercereports-lgd-2024-dash-point-incorporation-study-final-ff257368.pdf
- Size
- 4,216,675 bytes
- SHA-256
- c724422618fd38777e56b784c818a281f0622ccfe8665ea4bf57eceb81ef694c
- Original
- No public link identified.