Did you actually read the first sentence in the OP's small wall of text? The EV thing would be tax credits. Which means you need enough tax liability to make use of the credit. Which means you're making substantially more than minimum wage, even for a used EV (they exist, just not many decent ones, yet). The only way it tends toward "free car" is if the credit is refundable, which precisely none of the one I've seen are. In fact, existing programs can't even carry the credit forward; if you don't have enough income to generate enough tax liability to use it all in the year you buy the car, tough luck.

It's interesting that the proposal covers used EVs in addition to new. Every other program, federal, state, and local, covers new only, which makes it even less available to people of average income with the lowest-priced new EVs of any value as a car coming in around $35-40K. Then, unless the federal law changes, the current (fairly large) credit isn't available for cars from GM and Tesla - they've sold too many EVs already, so they don't get the credit any more. So covering used is a good thing for people whose income isn't graced with 6 digits before the decimal point, and used should be showing up more as the early adopters of things like the Bolt sell it off (hopefully with the battery fixed - it's recalled) in favor of one of the newer offerings from Ford, Hyundai, VW, etc.

Anyway, whatever might be wrong with the move toward EVs and electric-only buildings (and I can think of a few), it has little to do with abandonment of a granger branch in E. Washington. Yes, WA needs to do more to support those things, but if they in fact make no economic sense any more then it might just be time to let some of them go. Sell one to the speeder rides guy who's messing with F&W?