Council asks staff to study options to expand Metropolitan Parks District after 20% signature threshold identified as barrier

County staff told the Clark County Council on June 17 that expanding a Metropolitan Parks District (MPD) countywide would face a major procedural barrier under state law. Jordan Bogey, policy analyst, said RCW 36.61.250 effectively requires either 25 registered voters in unincorporated territory or signatures equaling 20% of registered voters within a city for annexation, a requirement staff described as onerous and likely to prevent a county-led annexation effort.

Bogey outlined potential pathways: (1) dissolve the existing parks district and create a new, broader district (which would involve separate votes and legal complexity); (2) explore whether an "if-then" ballot structure could legally allow dissolution and re-creation contingent on voter approval; or (3) pursue a legislative change to RCW 36.61.250 to reduce or alter the signature threshold or provide a different annexation pathway. He said the Municipal Research Service Center and other advisors had not identified prior successful county annexations under the current language.

Councilors discussed alternatives and trade-offs. A levy-lid lift was identified as another revenue option, but several councilors noted it carries complications (shorter duration, potential double taxation for some residents) and may not produce the sustainable revenue an MPD aims to create. Councilor Little and others asked staff to look for partner organizations, to understand why the law has remained unchanged for more than a century, and to report back with options and legal analysis.

Action and next steps: The council directed staff to pursue additional legwork — including consulting with state and regional partners, reviewing case history, and evaluating legislative avenues — and to prepare a future presentation on realistic options, legal risks, and potential timelines for pursuing an MPD expansion or alternative funding pathway.

Context: Bogey noted the MPD approach is intended to secure a long-term, sustainable funding stream for parks and regional facilities; staff warned that signature requirements dating from the 1907-era statutory framework are rarely changed and present a significant procedural hurdle to countywide annexation without legislative action.

No formal vote on creating or placing an MPD on the ballot occurred at the meeting. Staff will return with options and legal analysis before any council decision to pursue a legislative change or ballot measure.