Vancouver resident Martha Baumgarten believes those facts explain why Proposition 5 is such a ‘practical, balanced step forward for public safety in Vancouver’

Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in this letter to the editor are those of the author alone and may not reflect the editorial position of ClarkCountyToday.com

As both a property owner and a member of Vancouver’s Police Community Advisory Committee, I wish every voter could see what our committee learned about the police staffing situation in our city. The facts are sobering — and they explain why Proposition 5 is such a practical, balanced step forward for public safety in Vancouver.

I’m encouraged by the potential for Vancouver to benefit from HB 2015’s state funding, working in tandem with the local investment proposed in Proposition 5. While some have suggested the state program makes local measures unnecessary, each serves a distinct and complementary purpose — and both operate under clear limits. Under the state’s program, Vancouver will compete with other jurisdictions for a share of HB 2015 funds, based on a rigorous review of policies, practices, and other qualifying conditions.

HB 2015 authorizes grants that may cover up to 75 percent of entry-level salaries and benefits for new officers, for no more than 36 months. Each agency must provide a 25 percent local cash match and cannot use the funds to recruit lateral hires. The maximum state share is $125,000 per position, and any costs above entry level remain a local responsibility. It also limits eligibility to the recruitment and retention of “new law enforcement officers from the community in which the officer will be working,” further narrowing the applicant pool for cities like Vancouver. Even if Vancouver receives funding, we will still bear a significant share of the expense — and the grants have a relatively short expiration date. That said, qualifying for HB 2015 would mean Vancouver taxpayers would see some return on the state taxes we already pay — a worthwhile complement to Proposition 5’s stable, local approach. In summary, HB 2015’s grant funding is complementary, competitive, conditional, and temporary.

That’s why Vancouver needs dependable local support. Proposition 5 provides that stability. It allows Vancouver to move forward quickly with a voter-approved, dedicated funding source that helps establish and sustain safer staffing levels and supports both new and lateral officers — professionals who can serve our neighborhoods sooner and cost less to train.

Vancouver’s population has grown from 167,416 in 2010 to nearly 200,000 in 2025 — an increase of about 19 percent — yet the number of authorized officers has stayed roughly the same. The city currently operates at 1.21 officers per 1,000 residents, one of the lowest staffing levels among cities our size. Washington’s statewide average is about 1.35 officers per 1,000 — already last in the nation — while the national average is 2.31.

Proposition 5 funds 13 additional officers — a necessary and timely step in the right direction to begin closing this gap. This proposed increase is modest, costing property owners about $6.50 per month on a $500,000 home. It won’t solve everything overnight, but it will make a difference in response times, coverage, and community presence.

Reliable local funding also allows for long-term planning — for training, technology, and retention — and reduces dependence on short-term grants. It signals to our current officers, prospective new hires, and citizens alike that Vancouver is committed to supporting its police department and maintaining a safe, well-served community.

Please vote YES on Proposition 5 — a modest, thoughtful, and community-driven investment in Vancouver’s safety and future.

Martha Baumgarten
Vancouver

---

Also read:

• 
  CCRW to host dinner event featuring Charter Review Commission members
  The Clark County Republican Women will host a Feb. 12 dinner event focused on the work of the County Charter Review Commission, featuring multiple commission members.
• 
  Letter: PDX activists flood Clark County Council over anti-ICE resolution
  Rob Anderson argues that organized Portland-based activist groups dominated public comment at a Clark County Council meeting to pressure councilors over an anti-ICE resolution.
• 
  Opinion: Moving the ball down the field
  Nancy Churchill argues that while HB 2221 will not advance this session, the public hearing marked meaningful progress by opening dialogue, building relationships, and advancing science-based wildlife management discussions in Olympia.
• 
  A sub-district vote could be a way to go to pay O&M costs associated with light rail
  Clark County Council members heard details on how a voter-approved C-TRAN sub-district could be created to fund long-term operations and maintenance costs for light rail tied to a new Interstate Bridge.
• 
  Speculation on Seahawks’ sale heats up following proposed WA ‘jock tax’
  Speculation about a potential Seahawks sale has intensified amid debate over a proposed Washington income tax that would apply to high-earning athletes and performers.