Edmonds Mayor Mike Nelson on Tuesday announced a proposal for a new citywide looped path — the Edmonds Greenway Loop.
Planning for the path is underway, the mayor said, and the public is invited to tour part of the trail on Sunday, Aug. 13 from 3-6 p.m., starting at Westgate Elementary.
“Our streets need to be designed to protect our most vulnerable users, not just cars,” Nelson said. “This multi-use trail network will connect schools and parks throughout Edmonds. It will allow children and adults to walk and bike safely to all of our parks and schools throughout our city.”
As proposed, the Edmonds Greenway Loop would be a nearly 20-mile path to connect schools, parks and open spaces in and around Edmonds. According to a city press release, “the Loop will offer scenic routes through parks, the waterfront, and nature areas providing an enjoyable and beautiful experience for users.”
Edmonds Planning and Development Director Susan McLaughlin said the Edmonds Greenway Loop is a design concept “that will require a significant amount of funding.” The project will require Edmonds City Council approval to incorporate it into the city’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and funding “is anticipated to come from multiple funding sources,” McLaughlin said.
“The route is nearly 20 miles, and we are planning to design and implement in phases,” she added. The southern portion of the project will be prioritized first, including 220th Street Southwest, which is the focus on the planned walk on Aug. 13.
Emphasis for the design will focus on accessibility for all ages and abilities, the city press release said. “Users can enjoy the path in a variety of ways — walking, jogging, biking, rolling or simply strolling.”
As proposed, “the Greenway Loop will be separated from traffic and motorized vehicles with a landscaped buffer to enhance safety while encouraging active forms of mobility,” the press release said. “This aligns with the city’s climate goals to reduce carbon emissions (by driving less for daily needs), to improve air quality, to improve public health and to help achieve a high quality of life for all Edmonds residents.”
Residents are invited to meet at Westgate Elementary Aug. 13 at 3 p.m. to walk approximately 1.5 to 2 miles. Attendees will learn about and be able to share safety concerns along the route. There will also be a neighborhood chalk art event happening on 96th Avenue West and 220th Street Southwest. Visit Edmonds Greenway Loop for more information.
It’s odd that the Loop ignores the Interurban Trail and basically pretends that walkers and riders would rather travel on the shoulder of 76th Ave W. Based on my observations about 100 times more walkers and riders traverse the Interurban Trail these days compared to the parallel segment of 76th Ave W. Nevertheless, 76th and other busy arterials are designated for all this future planning, design and money. The interurban Trail was paved and spruced up with great fanfare not too long ago by our Parks Dept. and there is a paved bike/walking trail planned for next year to connect the Interurban Trail to Ballinger Park and provide a nice short cut to the future MLT light rail station, partially funded by Edmonds.
Despite all this and despite what it says in the Parks PROS Plan about the Interurban Trail, it gets left out of this grandiose loop? Whoever dreamed up this loop might not be aware that the Interurban Trail exists…that’s the only possible explanation. Edmonds government should be looking for ways to extend/complete the trail across SR104 to King County instead of bypassing the trail with this loop.
Hi John,
The proposed trail network enables local cycling between Edmonds destinations. The Interurban is a great trail, and a valuable bike arterial for those traveling down to Seattle or up north, but its utility beyond that is limited – imagine if drivers only had I5! It also runs almost entirely outside of Edmonds. There are currently no grade-separated or protected path options anywhere in Edmonds, and certainly not any that connect people living in Edmonds with the Interurban. Mountlake Terrace recently built a solid path on their side of 228th from the MLT light rail station, but we don’t have anything like that yet. At least as proposed on the map, this network also completes Edmonds’ half of the “missing link” of the Interurban to cross 76th @ 104. More coordination with Shoreline will be necessary at that particular intersection to make sure an awesome connection takes shape, but this kind of forward-looking planning gets me excited about the future of active transportation & recreation within Edmonds city limits.
Hi Mackey,
Thanks for sharing. It’s very informative and were any Council members both in Edmonds and MLT involved in defining the project?
What’s this going to cost or cost share with MLT. Council just vetted its’ TIP (Transportation Improvement Plan) and this idea or concept was not brought up and are you or the citizens group going to request we re-open the TIP? The costs could run away from us if we don’t have a clearer perspective.
Interesting on how Mayor Nelson becomes invigorated about sustainable new projects around election times.
Kind of makes one wonder…
Just sayin’…
A 20 mile walking loop? How about putting an effort into completing sidewalks in this City? And here’s another thought: since the City trees have destroyed so many segments of existing sidewalks, how about replacing the culprit trees with ones more suitable to urban environments AND repairing the existing sidewalks? The benefits could be twofold. Citizens could have a safe sidewalk strip for walking and with proper trees it could reduce the amount of time the City maintenance crews spend clearing tree roots out of the City drainage pipes. Fix what’s broken first.
I am very troubled that the current mayor is proposing a scenic trail when there are many areas in Edmonds that have no sidewalks. Why is Mayor Nelson proposing to spend “a significant amount of funding” on a greenway when pedestrians taken their lives into their hands walking on Walnut Street and other roads with no pedestrian sidewalks. This is another example of Mayor Nelson’s tone-deaf attempts to appear relevant now that it’s election time. I urge the members of the Edmonds City Counsel not to approve this “project” until and unless there are sidewalks throughout Edmonds.
I don’t see any dollar figure for this project nor any funding identified. So is this another add on to our City Budget, along with the Unocal property and the Burlington property…these pie-in-the-sky ideas are not within our budget. How about we ask some questions before selling this project as a done deal, starting with “Taxpayer, do you want to pay for this project.”
I think the time is ripe for a solid discussion on belt-tightening in this community. It is wonderful to “plan” all these remarkable community oriented changes that help get us walking and bicycling versus sitting inside and watching movies on screens. But, we need to have serious discussions about our fiscal house and our reserves. I see a growing risk for our city – moving towards loss of all reserves if we don’t control our impulses to spend in order to create a theoretical “Eden in Edmonds”. My “we need to increase this “X” tax/fee to pay for “Y” project” tolerance is just about at empty.
The top portion of OVD is in Lynnwood’s hands, even though it borders both cities. I’ve tried really hard, for the better part of 20 years, to just get traffic calming implemented on OVD from 176th down to 76th at Perrinville. Lynnwood officials are incredibly cheap, and beyond slow, when it comes to the safety of this residential straight section of OVD, that is an arterial, full of speeding cars, motorcycles, semis, dual cement trucks, CT busses, ESD busses, all able to go well over 30, or they pass the slower vehicle. I’d estimate less than 20% of the drivers go the 30 mph speed limit. The most I’ve been able to get out of the city of Lynnwood is a few 30mph signs. And that was at a snail’s pace bc of low priority to Lynnwood. Doesn’t matter that four schools are within walking distance. Lynnwood, and probably Edmonds, is no different in protecting their jobs and salaries above all else. Back when this section was redone, they chose to forego bike lanes bc they were not willing to pay residents for the necessary space. Factor this reality into your “significant amount of funding needed” Edmonds.
Noticed the 30 MPH signs, thank you for your efforts in getting them installed. Agreed, that stretch of road is like a freeway. Used to be traffic enforcement on that road from Lynnwood with radar near Blueridge. Have not seen it for quite some time. EPD routine patrols through the Meadowdale Edmonds neighborhood area side have decreased as well. They used to be visible regularly here.
Thanks for acknowledgment Mike, but my efforts of time, research and asked for communications with LPD and Traffic Engineer; Paul Coffelt, for all these years, those signs are nothing…
This straight stretch of OVD has become beyond anything resembling safe. I’ll give (as in free) either Lynnwood or Edmonds an easement on my property to install a
speed camera capable of giving out enforceable tickets. A must is that 100% of the revenue collected is split between the two cities once the cost to install is recouped. And that revenue goes for walker’s, stroller’s and wheelchair’s safety. Are either of you listening, Paul Coffelt and Bill Franz? Just from knowing your two salaries alone, and your many years with the City, justifies citizens expecting real action. I’m not talking about comparison salaries to other comparable areas. I’m talking about your inability to get problem issues resolved as quickly and efficiently as humanly possible.
Vote Nelson out. Rosen let us know safety was going to be his primary concern among others. Rosen has leadership experience and was able to make things happen. I am hopeful on Rosen’s watch, there will be safe sidewalks soon for the children to walk to school or visit a friend.
Nelson has not listened to the public, whether it’s about the Police Chief debacle or closing down Main Street turning Edmonds into a PARTY TOWN, while his crew pushed for defunding the police. Nelson won’t listen to you or me about sidewalk concerns. Vote him and his agendas out of Edmonds!
By the time Rosen figures out what he’s doing after getting months of input and guidence from the very people who have caused a lot of the problems; the city will be broke and on the marginal or don’t buy lists for municipal bonds, that will be needed to finance our debt. Do we have a year or more to get Rosen up to speed and what does he really know about running city government at this point?
Karen, you are absolutely correct. Our financial posture is poor. We run out of spendable reserves before the end of the year unless something is done (reduction in services, hiring freeze or layoffs) because there appears to be no additional revenue to offset the continued spending by the administration and Council. When our mayor says we have reserves, he is only telling us half the story. The remaining reserves we have are for emergency purposes only and cannot be used for covering our operational shortfalls. Brace yourselves for the inevitable.
This is a great plan, start to finish, full stop. It’s critical infrastructure that will improve livability for all our residents and visitors, not just people who already bike. We have so many people (children, parents, grandparents, dogs) in our neighborhood who love to get out and walk, and it’s awful to see them inching along the edges of the roads trying to get some fresh air while dodging traffic, trying desperately to remain among the living. The plan also includes vital improvements to water management, which will keep our creeks clean for salmon, otters, orcas, and the whole local ecosystem that depends on them.
I’m far from the Mayor’s biggest fan, but this looks excellent. I hope it will be enacted regardless of his electoral fortunes.
Not to put you on the spot Jeff, but out of curiosity how much do you think this is really going cost in real dollars and just where is this money supposed to come from “start to finish, full stop.”
So we can tear out miles of existing sidewalks and put in new but we can put in new sidewalks because it is the abutting property owners responsibility to put them in? How did most of the sidewalks in Edmonds come to be? I know some walks were put in by developers apartments and condos and housing development. But the majority were put in by someone else, I wonder who that was must of been the sidewalk fairy. We should spend our money on adding sidewalks where they don’t have them instead of this ridiculous proposal.
I’m no budget expert, Brian, but frankly, for a proposal like this, that would save lives and improve health and quality of life for everyone, I’d be in favor of raising taxes. Edmonds is, by any measure, a wealthy community, and if we can’t afford something simple and no-brainer like this, then we wealthy residents (and I do include myself among that number) are not paying our fair share.
Jeff, I think the point of many other commenters is that (a) our taxes have already been raised, multiple times. And (b) despite the high taxes the basic improvements that normally would be present in a wealthy high tax town like this have never been built…sidewalks in the neighborhoods. It is crazy that they dreamed up this boondoggle instead of normal sidewalks in neighborhoods that have been waiting (and paying taxes) for decades.
I’ll just give you one example: Maplewood Drive. You’ve got people walking in the traffic lanes, there are no sidewalks. When I moved there in 1997 a neighbor brought a petition for sidewalks to City council. Still waiting 26 years later…
John the irony is the mayor installs a DEI lens and promotes pie in the sky projects. When equity would say places that don’t have sidewalks and street lights should be a first priority. The hiporicrocy couldn’t be more apparent.
What is the definition of wealthy community? Does it include all residents as wealthy?
When one says raise taxes it also includes raising taxes on others as well who may not be considered wealthy under whatever criteria wealth is measured and being used here.
What about the sidewalks we need throughout the City? Why aren’t we spending the money for those safety improvements.
I’ve been biking Edmonds for 40 years. Often training for STP and other organized rides. Have put hundreds of miles riding around our area, and walked regularly as well. I have never found any issues that would require a bike path, or additional walking paths. I have, however, noticed a lack of sidewalk maintenance. Also many city streets lacking sidewalks altogether. I suggest that the City Government direct their attention to these issues, before spending funds unnecessary projects.
Not everyone in Edmonds is wealthy. Edmonds has always been a working class family City. I can say that, because I was raised in Edmonds. Have you ventured far from your bowl home.?
The Mayor said it himself in the question and answer candidate session. He gets 95% approval of what he wants from council. If the residents don’t like that 95% current approval from council the opportunity to vote is now for a different Mayoral direction if you so choose. The Mayor is the key here, sets the budget and runs the show in this town. Please study candidates and vote in this very important primary.
Amen, Brother Murdock. Unless we get a truly enlightened Mayor who knows how to be fiscally responsible; nothing is going to change here. I’ve been watching this nonsense for over 50 years now, so I think I have some perspective on it. With the exception of a couple reasonably good female mayors in the past, we get mostly personality types who lean toward wanting maximum control and manipulating the Councils and planning boards to fund their various constant “improvements to make Edmonds even better.” (Like you need to hard sell Paradise).
Just today I had to hit the brakes for an adult cyclist who blew the Dayton and Main stop sign, completely oblivious to who actually had the right of way and riding on the sidewalk. These people come across as a bit entitled and need to clean up their act in a lot of cases, if they want all these new found “bennies.” Mayors getting 95% support is the norm, not the exception. Should probably be about 50 -50.
Correction 5th. and Dayton above, since Main and Dayton does not exist because they parallel each other at that point. I’m a little slow upstairs but very tenacious. I assure all, the incident did happen and it’s a good thing I still have a few of my marbles.
It appears the Loop connects to the Interurban at 76th and also at 228th.
I’ve got two bigger concerns, however. First, getting sidewalks into neighborhoods, as stated by commenters on many MEN articles. If we can’t make neighborhoods safely walkable, what business do we have making a network like this? Can people get to it safely?
My second concern is placement of some of these Loop segments, most strikingly Puget Drive/ 196th. That narrow, curving road requires serious focus from car drivers as it is. To add cyclists/walkers going up and down it, unless it’s going to be significantly widened (goodbye, Maplewood Park?) it’s going to both a death gauntlet for those people, and a congestion issue. You can’t put “sharrow” lanes on single-lane uphill stretches without backing up car traffic. They did that on 5th Ave S in the Bowl, and the few cyclists that actually use it have cars hovering on their tails on busy summer days – most go to 6th, but on Puget Drive, there’s no such option.
This plan will improve quality of life in Edmonds. I’m looking forward to it.
Putting any of this on Edmonds Way is pure idiocy. That is a major thoroughfare that by necessity carries a huge amount of car traffic given the presence of the ferry terminal and the access it provides to downtown Edmonds. You can’t just wish that traffic away. Adding a bike lane would almost certainly require either eliminating a traffic lane (making the backups at the 100th Ave intersection often unbearable) or eliminating the center turn lane (making access into the Westgate commercial areas materially more difficult). As another commenter said, the focus (at least as far as walking goes) should be on building complete, sensible sidewalk networks, rather than continuing with the current patchwork. For bikes, focus on roads that having plenty of room to add bike lanes (9th/100th is a good example) and don’t involve jamming up major arterials.
LOVE the idea of investing in an improved quality of life for Edmonds residents. This proposal does exactly that. I applaud Mayor Nelson for proposing this plan and encourage city council to approve. This proposal alone solidifies my support for the incumbent in our upcoming election.
Another lovely idea…but at what cost? And what will the cost be to keep it up? How many more Park and Public Work employees will be required to maintain it? Highway 99 will require more employees and vehicles to maintain that new landscaping as well. At some point, we need to reign in the spending and start maintaining what we have before adding to our wish list.
Today, I noticed the weeds are already getting a healthy start in the expansion cracks at the end of those fancy new concrete barriers just installed on 99. Growing right out of the concrete – Nice look. I’m sure miles of bike and hiking paths will be immaculately maintained too, especially after the new wears off a little. When do we get some adults in charge, that understand budgeting by priority? Darrol H; where are you, my idol of the balance sheet?
Mackey, You are wrong about the Edmonds section of the Interurban. Just because the planners designate it as a through trail does not mean that is how it is used by the people in the neighborhood.
The Edmonds section of the Interurban is not used as a “bike arterial” by about 90% of the users. The trail users are people from the neighborhood (Edmonds residents) walking dogs or infants, elderly walkers or riders getting exercise, or kids not going very far. When the connection to Ballinger Park is built next year there will be even more of these types of users.
My point is that the Edmonds section of the Interurban Trail parallels the 76th section of the boondoggle loops and connects to MLT’s trail on 228th. Very few people will choose to ride or walk on 76th when the trail is right there as a safer and quieter option. Therefore part of the boondoggle loop is duplicative and not needed. Perhaps the landscaping on the Interurban Trail could be occasionally cut back with all the money saved by not building that part of the loop?
Mackey lost me at “missing link” in his comment. Another “missing link” controversy – good grief.
Hi John, I completely agree with your use breakdown there – as I said, “great trail, and a valuable bike arterial”, referring to both uses. (I don’t mean to be pedantic, just want to make sure you know we’re on the same page there.) That’s my experience as a rider in the neighborhood, not a planner.
I don’t see the 76th section as duplicative – it creates a protected route that does not exist today. Highway 99 is more or less a “wall” for riders (especially younger and older) not comfortable navigating high-volume, unprotected intersections, and more protected infrastructure near crossings = less planning on the part of riders = more trips in the area. The most logical Interurban crossing of 104 also ends on 76th; the details of that subarea will be important to get right (a grade-separated crossing seems appropriate) but duplicity is an important feature of any successful network for any means of transport, especially with more traffic coming, as you described.
I totally agree with you on the need for more landscaping on the Interurban. As a taller rider I do too much ducking from branches.
Lots to figure out here, thanks for the critique!
An ordinary 5-foot concrete sidewalk costs something in the vicinity of $7 million per mile to build. The much wider and more elaborate Greenway would have considerably higher costs. I’ve read the city’s press release and their project webpage, and neither one says anything regarding estimated costs. Surely somebody has some ballpark figures they could share with us, so we have some grasp of the cost magnitude of our mayor’s proposal.
Rodger I think you could triple that at a minimum I think with planting buffer we are looking at about 15 feet wide plus to do something like this along Puget drive would be a huge infrastructure cost requiring massive walls to make room for a path.
Great point Roger. The “professional’ city planners addressed funding for this as, “various funding sources.” In normal people language this is short for ” Grants.” The only “Grants” that are tax free come from rich people and rich people foundations that are trying to avoid taxes and control the narrative with their gifts. Our “professional” city planners and Mayors with a “vision” are long on ideas and short on how to pay for them.
A lot of commentors are saying that the proposed route needs more work for their area. I agree. Please talk to folks, and then bring back a real proposal if you really want to do this. (This proposal may be designed for the VERY FEW who commute by bike to local employment, not for our youth or our older folks.) For my part, living near Hickman Park, most do not walk/bike to Sherwood Elementary, City Park, downtown or the waterfront via Edmonds Way or Firdale/100th/9th. We go over toward Sherwood, and cut through Woodway, and down 3rd. Such a route actually connects destinations, is much more enjoyable than the proposed routes, and in some places could benefit from safety imptovements. Even if you made the proposed routes “safer”, they would still be nasty with noise, and they don’t actually “connect” to Sherwood, or City Park. Even if the destination is Westgate, on foot we cut through the old Woodway HS property if we are healthy enough to manage the stairs/hills. The other routes to Westgate already have sidewalks or vaguely adequate verges (yes, we are lucky). Odd proposal.
Lora, what is odd about this proposal is anybody with any sense would take it even semi -seriously. This is obviously a pre-election ploy by the mayor to suck in the gullible, (apparently some of his main constituents) because of lacking any financial sense of where the money was going come from or how much it would realistically cost.
While I can’t blame the administration for thinking bold, I would like our government focus on practical solutions. This project would likely cost north of a $1billion to construct; then the ongoing general fund $$$ for maintaining the landscaped medians would be eye poppingly massive! This, against a backdrop where much of the city has no sidewalks. Conspicuously, areas listed in the map already have sidewalks. So, instead of solving the equity issue of neighborhood walkability, we’re focusing on grandiose ideas that do nothing to solve the current problem?
Instead of focusing on pie in the sky ideas that lack practicality and without a realistic opportunity to be completed, our efforts with walkability should be focused on getting sidewalks to all areas of the city and improving safety in areas in this map that are already safety challenges (e.g., Puget Drive/SR524, among others). I’d like to give the mayor the benefit of the doubt but when a proposal like this gets released the week of ballots are dropped for the mayoral primary election… Lets just say it raises my eyebrows about the real intent of the proposal.
This is election season ‘fluff’. The mayor hired a Planning Dept Director from Seattle’s transportation department, and now we have a dearth of ideas about sidewalks from that department. But none are connected to the reality of funding sources. Mr mayor- don’t you dare put a dollar in the CIP/CFP to widen an existing sidewalk before you construct a new sidewalk from Hwy 99 to SR 104 for the Madrona School students. There are other routes that need sidewalks also. The administration tells us they are late in working on the 2024 Comp Plan, but they spent time on this concept that Edmonds would financially struggle to build out over 20 years. And why haven’t they hired a grant writer to get our fair share of the federal infrastructure funding?
My concern is 228th SW to SR104, which in reality ends at 95th Pl. West. 228th SW is a very rural road from 80th Ave W. with ditches, no sidewalks and limited parking space for homeowners. Cost for what is needed per the Loop map will be far greater than other options. Has anyone even talked to the people who live in these neighborhoods, surely not? How many of you have driven this road?
Bikers could use this street as is to traverse to and from the new transit center as the traffic is lighter than other routes. Still these people need to be on board this change, as it will be huge; More traffic, noise and loss of privacy and I understand that there was/it a plan to put buses on this street. (I see big issues here to where 228th meets 95 Pl. West.)
Unfortunately the lack of communication with residences does not mean you can just go ahead with the changes.
So let’s add this up the coat factory for 37 million plus development and this pedestrian bike path at 140 million minimum more like 400 million all to serve the few not the majority who will foot the bill amazing that a mayor running for reelection puts these pie in the sky proposals out in a time when many are struggling and wants to commit us to about a billion dollars in increased spending. Is this guy insane? Please vote for sanity.
Maplewood Drive would love sidewalks please. Even if it is on one side!
I think there’s a limit on how many pets we can have in our households, so maybe Nelson could should have a limit on how many pet projects he proposes.
Great point Denise. Can you imagine what a mess we would have been in if the construction of the defunct Connector would have been allowed and overlapped with the Civic Field project that was so problematic and over budget in it’s completion? Do you think some of that funding for the connector wouldn’t have fallen thru with how national politics changed suddenly at about the same time. We the people are supposed to tell the elected leaders, who work for us, what we need for a livable town and they are supposed to make it a livable town for us. Pretty simple.
What really happens, is we have leaders who are continually tripping over their own egos, and “we know what’s best for you attitudes,” while promoting their make Edmonds even better pet projects to attract more tourists. And the sad part is, if we just stuck to basics of running a town, the town would be much more livable and the tourists would still flock in. They’d just drive in and leave slower because we would actually enforce our speeding laws again.
For those who talk about raising taxes here are some data points. If we want to raise $15m then the additional tax for a $500,000 home would be $500 for one year. If we were to finance the $15m by selling bonds the total cost for a $500,000 home would be $900. Yes, it would spread the payments out, but we would pay more. Elected like to finance things to keep the payment lower but they never tell folks the full cost.
When we build a school, we generally use bonds, but using what are called Construction levies we can save all the financing charges. The levy method would cost us $180m to build a $100m school. Some districts are moving toward Levies vs Bonds to build schools.
Darrol Haug, Ken Reidy, and Joe Scordino might arguably be the smartest men in our town. It would be really smart to start listening to the three of them in their relative fields of expertise. Diane Buckshnis arguably might be the smartest woman in our town. It would really be smart to start listening to her in her relative fields of expertise – finance, banking and the workings of Edmonds’ city government, both legislative and executive.
Clinton, I agree that Diane Buckshnis has answers. But do the other mayoral candidates even know the important questions when they have others answer for them?
Good point Shirley. I keep hearing what a great professional manager and facilitator of cooperation that one of the other candidates will be; but he never says anything much, or gives us much indication of how he is going to be such a great Executive and why we should all take such a chance on essentially a great unknown at this point. He is great at raising money from past city politicians who can’t seem to give up their influence. Another candidate who wants our support is nowhere to be seen the entire month of July ahead of the Aug. 1st, Primary. The incumbent has a track record he’s running on. A really nice man writes a long LTE (campaign ad) in favor of the Kumbaya executive guy and signs it off as Former Council Member which he was. I notice he didn’t use his other title of ECR Chair which he is now. ECR, you know, that UNBIASED think tank organization. Only in Edmonds.
I agree, Clint. There has been much radio silence from most of the mayoral candidates on important topics. I would have expected them to provide at least a comment or two on MENs. It may be an indication of those who have been silent on how they would govern.
Recently when I open the four page newsprint ad, I thought I might see details on the long list of things the “Kumbaya executive guy” said he’s concerned about, but there was nothing there….nothing other than generalities and large font lists of his endorsers.
You are far too kind Clint.
I hope all voting will consider who is best suited to perform the codified duties of the mayor:
“The mayor shall be the chief executive and administrative officer of the city, in charge of all departments and employees, with authority to designate assistants and department heads. The mayor shall see that all laws and ordinances are faithfully enforced and that law and order is maintained in the city, and shall have general supervision of the administration of city government and all city interest.”
It is critical that the mayor of Edmonds also follow all our laws and ordinances. For example, a full salary commission of five commissioners was required to appointed and approved by July 1, 2021 and was not.
The mayor of Edmonds is also subject to the Edmonds Code of Ethics which includes the following:
We shall:
“Keep the community informed on municipal affairs and encourage communications between the citizens and all municipal officers. Emphasize friendly and courteous service to the public and each other; seek to improve the quality of public service, and confidence of citizens.”
Key words: “between”, “friendly”, “courteous”, “confidence”.
Please vote!
After 50-plus comments, closing this thread.