‘I had to veto those programs’: Gov. Ferguson cuts retail crime funding as lawmaker says WA theft crisis grows

Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson is facing criticism after vetoing $500,000 in funding aimed at combating organized retail crime, a move that comes as the state continues to grapple with some of the highest theft rates in the nation.

Ferguson issued the veto just before signing the state’s supplemental operating budget, removing funding that lawmakers had proposed to continue efforts targeting retail theft. He explained that state agencies are already being asked to do more with less after taking significant budget cuts last legislative session, and this year they are facing another $1 billion in reductions.

“While we face this challenging situation, consequently, we have limited ability to absorb additional work or expenses that are not funded in the budget,” Ferguson said. “That is why I vetoed a few programs. It’s also consistent with how I approach budgeting. We have a proposal to do something in our budget. We’ve got to have the funding to do it.”

WA ranks among the worst in U.S. for organized retail crime

Washington has ranked among the hardest-hit states for organized retail crime, with Forbes naming it the worst in the nation in 2024. The impact has been significant, with businesses, according to many experts, losing more than $2.5 billion in revenue and the state missing out on more than $600 million in state and local tax collections.

State Rep. Mari Leavitt, a Democrat from University Place, criticized the decision and warned it could undermine recent progress.

“I am deeply disappointed and puzzled by the Governor’s decision to veto a budget measure that focuses on combating organized retail crime,” Leavitt said in a statement. “Washington is number one in the nation for retail crime, contributing to nearly a $3 billion impact to our economy and businesses because of lost revenue, and representing a consequential challenge to our state.”

Lawmakers last year launched a retail theft pilot program with $1 million in funding, an effort that had support from the governor at the time. The program allowed local jurisdictions to expand enforcement and prosecution efforts.

Data from the first half of 2025 showed increased activity in King County, where prosecutors filed 142 retail theft cases between January and June — more than double the average over the previous four years. Other counties, including Snohomish and Spokane, also used the funding to strengthen coordination among law enforcement and expand diversion programs.

According to the Washington Retail Association, the pilot program generated hundreds of law enforcement responses and thousands of retail crime reports in its early months, while identifying more than a thousand individuals eligible for diversion programs.

“Without these funds, we are unable to build on those successes, and the progress we have made has been put at risk,” Leavitt said. “It leaves our small businesses at risk and does nothing to help customers and workers in our communities feel safe. It is short-sighted and harmful to our neighborhoods. This veto will end up costing us far more than what was requested in the allocation.”

Small businesses face greater risk without continued funding

Retail theft has had visible impacts across Washington, contributing to store closures and increased security measures. Two Fred Meyer locations in Everett and Kent have shut down in part due to theft-related losses, and many retailers have added guards and anti-theft measures at store entrances.

Commonly stolen items include everyday goods such as laundry detergent, baby formula, clothing, and alcohol, which are often resold through informal street markets.

Leavitt and other supporters of the funding said eliminating the program could put small businesses at greater risk and slow efforts to address organized retail crime, which they argue has broader effects on public safety and access to goods in some communities.

Ferguson has defended the veto as part of broader budget decisions, signaling a need to balance spending priorities as the state finalizes its financial plan across the board.

“When there was no funding provided, and agencies could not absorb the costs, I had to veto those programs,” Ferguson said.

Follow Luke Duecy on X. Read more of his stories here. Submit news tips here.