The claim

The tax was rushed through in secret

“They did this in secret and rushed it through.”

Seen: Comment threads and hearing testimony, June to August 2026.

Our finding Unsupported by the record

The record is complete enough to check it, and does not bear it out.

Two different charges are tangled together. On whether it was done in the open the record is unusually complete: eight open meetings from April 14, both August hearings set three months ahead, the schedule read into the record five times. On whether residents found out, the council agrees with the criticism: three of the five said so by name from the dais before voting, and a fourth voice said it in the cross-talk that followed.

The numbers

Open meetingsApril 14 to August 6, before the first adoption8

Schedule readMay 5, May 26, June 2, June 16, August 65 times

Hearings setboth fixed by resolution on May 53 months ahead

What’s true

Residents did not hear about it in time to weigh in early, and that is not in dispute. The council conceded it on the record before the vote, and the concession is the strongest evidence for the complaint.

Where it goes wrong

Nothing was done outside a noticed public meeting. The Sheriff's Office presented the staffing case in an open work session on April 14; on May 5 the council accepted the tentative budget, acknowledged the proposed increase and declared its intent to exceed the certified rate, setting both August hearings; the mayor read the impact schedule that night, and again on May 26, June 2 and June 16, and the June 16 hearing ran with public comment answered at length. The June 2 reading is recorded in the minutes rather than the recording, which runs out partway through public comment. The August 6 hearing took about sixty speakers over three hours.

Where this comes from

Every finding here is drawn from an open-meeting recording or a published document. Check it yourself.

“Transparency — we failed you. We absolutely failed you.”

Councilmember Zac HuishThe meeting, August 6, 2026 Read the transcript

“I think we did a horrible job of communication. I think that's been highlighted by every person here. And so for that, I want to apologize… I will own that. I should have communicated.”

Councilmember Rich WoodThe meeting, August 6, 2026 Read the transcript

Three resolutions in one nightTentative budget accepted, the Budget Officer's statement of a proposed increase acknowledged, and intent to exceed the certified rate declared, which is what fixed both August hearing dates.The meeting, May 5, 2026

More checks on how it was decided

See all 21 fact checks →

Checked August 19, 2026. Nothing goes on the fact-check list unless an open-meeting recording or a published document can settle it: the rules. Spot a mistake? civicrollcall@gmail.com