Kari Sand is a Member in the firm’s Municipal practice group. Her practice focuses on all areas of municipal law, with an emphasis on land use, condemnation, employment and labor law, and local finance and taxation matters. From 2015 until 2019, she was the in-house City Attorney for the City of Mercer Island and previously was with the Kenyon Disend PLLC firm for ten years representing numerous Puget Sound cities and in-house at City of Tacoma for six years.

Kari is a member of the Washington State Bar Association and Washington State Association of Municipal Attorneys (WSAMA). She also serves on the Board of Directors for the Municipal Research and Services Center (MRSC).

Born in Vancouver, Washington, Kari received her B.A. in Political Science from the University of Washington in 1993 and her J.D. from the University of Oregon School of Law in 1997, where she was the Operations Editor of the Oregon Law Review. She lives in Sammamish, Washington, and when she is not working, she enjoys travel, gardening, walking her dogs, and spending time with her family.

Practice Areas

Association Memberships

  • Washington State Bar Association
  • Washington State Association of Municipal Attorneys


  • J.D., University of Oregon School of Law, 1997
  • B.A., University of Washington, Political Science, cum laude, 1993

Professional and Community Activities

  • Municipal Research and Services Center (MRSC) – serves as a Director on the Board of Directors

Representative Experience

  • Thompson v. City of Mercer Island, 193 Wn. App. 653 (2016) – Division I of the Washington State Court of Appeals held that petitioner in Land Use Petition Act appeal lacked standing to challenge approval of landowner’s application to amend short plat to alter easement on landowner’s property based on failure to show any immediate, concrete and specific injury.
  • PSE, Inc. v. Bellingham, 163 Wn. App. 329 (2011) – Division I held that activities of utility taxpayer, which sold electric light and power to customer living within city, including revenue from sales of steam, late payment fees, billing initiation charges, and connection and reconnection charges, were subject to city utility tax even though taxpayer defined such activities as “non-utility.”
  • Tukwila Sch. Dist. No. 406 v. Tukwila, 140 Wn. App. 735 (2007) – Successfully defended school district’s action against city, seeking declaratory judgment and tax refund and challenging city’s storm and surface water utility charge as an unlawful tax, as Division I held the primary purpose of charge was to regulate runoff, supporting a finding that the charge was a fee, not a tax.
Back to Top