Five days after Edmonds Mayor Mike Rosen revealed the extent of the city’s financial woes, the Edmonds City Council Tuesday night heard a plan for ensuring the city is on the path to a more resilient fiscal future.
Financial consultant Mike Bailey — chair of the mayor’s Blue Ribbon Advisory Panel — provided a brief overview of the sobering information shared by Rosen during last week’s State of the City Address. The bottom line: Edmonds is $12.5 million in the hole due to “unbudgeted impacts” in which expenses outpaced revenues and the city’s forecasted revenues missed target estimates in three out of the last four years, from 2020 to 2023.
“There were a number of things going on at that time,” Bailey said. “The pandemic, economic disruption, lots of reasons why that may have been the case (including) supply chain issues. Nonetheless, rather than recognizing that those revenues weren’t being realized and recommending the council take some sort of action at that time, my understanding is no recommendations were made and as a result we just under-collected revenues,” with city fund balances used to make up the difference, he added.
Last year’s deficit was significant enough to prompt the council to declare a fiscal emergency.
“How do we find our way through this?” Bailey said.
The city has a balanced 2024 budget, thanks mostly to one-time fixes like using $6.25 million from Edmonds’ federal American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) allocation to cover the city’s fire and emergency services contract with South County Fire. The 2025 budget will prove to be more of a challenge because the one-time fixes are gone and ongoing obligations continue, Bailey explained.
“Developing a strategy to bridge 2025 is a big part of the Blue Ribbon Panel’s discussion at this point,” he said. An added challenge is that the city is set to shift this year from annual to biennial budgeting, so the budget this year would cover a two-year period.
One major financial question remaining is how the city will be providing fire service in the future, Bailey said. In December 2023, South County Fire put Edmonds on notice that the agency intends to terminate the current interlocal agreement for fire and EMS services effective Dec. 31, 2025.
South County Fire in 2017 reorganized into what is now the South Snohomish County Fire and Rescue Regional Authority (RFA). As a fire authority, the agency can be funded directly through property taxes rather than receive payment from the individual jurisdictions that contract for fire and EMS services. In essence, this means that property owners would fund the RFA directly, rather than pay taxes to the city, which would use these funds to pay for emergency and fire services from the RFA. To move from an individual contract to being part of the RFA, voters in each jurisdiction need to approve this change. So far, the cities of Lynnwood, Mill Creek, Brier and Mountlake Terrace have voted to join the RFA.
During its budget deliberations last fall, the Edmonds City Council approved $44,500 from the council’s 2023 contingency fund for a fire services feasibility assessment conducted by Fitch and Associates. The intent is to evaluate the current fire service delivery models and the efficacy of the RFA proposal, an evaluation of the creating an internal fire department, and potential contractual relationship with another provider.
“It will have a lot of financial implications,” Bailey said of the council’s future decision on fire service delivery. “How do we factor that in, when it’s an unknown at this point and it’s a signficant part of the budget?”
The city currently has a general fund budget of $50 million, and the $12.5 million shortfall represents 25% of that amount. The council needs to decide what the appropriate budget size should be, and community members needs to be involved in that discussion, to share their budgeting priorities, Bailey said.
This includes finding efficiencies “and making sure we’re delivering as much value as possible for the dollars that are being spent,” he added.
Since the city’s budget planning process will be starting soon, one thing the council needs to consider is the relatively short time frame it has to address the issue for 2025, Bailey said. One option would be to find a way to develop a 2025 budget using a combination of expense reductions, internal borrowing and/or seeking voter approval for tax increases — to provide “breathing room” to develop a more thoughtful future budget based on community input.
Among the four strategies Bailey presented to the council Tuesday night:
1) Reduce expenses by 25% to balance subsequent budgets, which “would be difficult to do without significant impacts to the community,” he said.
2) Seek voter approval for tax increases, possibly for a limited number of years.
3) Borrow internally — using one city fund to support another.
4) A combination of the above options.
“I feel as to our public and those who support this community, really we need to take a hard look at our expenditures first,” Councilmember Michelle Dotsch said. “Unless we really tighten our belt and we ask the community to tighten theirs, that’s just going to go fall on deaf ears.”
Dostch also asked about the status of the city’s contingency reserve funds, which the city drew from to balance last year’s budget. Replenishing those funds will cost the city an additional $8 million, bringing the total budget hole to $20.5 million, Bailey replied. Since reserve fund replenishment can occur over time, the Blue Ribbon Panel’s recommendations focused on addressing the $12.5 million needed for city operations, he added.
Councilmember Will Chen said he wondered if the panel was able to determine the drivers behind the increased cost, and Bailey replied that a significant part of that can be attributed to more staffing. The panel is also looking at professional services contracts.
Council President Vivian Olson asked if the current $12.5 million budget deficit includes any additional capital investments the city may be considering, such as the Landmark 99 property, and Bailey said that would be an additional expense. In addition, he noted that the city is facing financial deficits in its street fund, which is also not included in the $12.5 million figure.
Bailey then explained why he and the panel are recommending the council look at zero-based budgeting by priorities. This means “not being encumbered by the way we’ve always done it” in terms of budget preparation and also to “recreate that connection with the community” by finding out what residents value, he said.
The council is planning a series of community meetings — the first one is at 7 p.m. Thursday, April 18 in the city’s public works facility — to discuss budget priorities. Among the questions that will be asked during these meetings:
What services do we want from government?
What are our service priorities?
What metrics will we use?
How do we ensure quality?
What amenities do we need?
What assumptions do we use to anticipate the future?
Community input during these meetings will be compiled into a framework for priorities and strategies that inform the budget process, Bailey said.
Olson reminded the council that it is has limited window — by the end of May — if it wants to explore the option of seeking voter approval for tax increases this year. “We have very little time for decision making and getting it on the agenda,” Olson said.
Bailey advised that the secret to success for passing such measures “is good communication with the community, which it takes time.” He suggested councilmembers may want to look at other funding options for 2025 so they can “have that rich conversation with the community and make better decisions together.”
In other business Tuesday, during a special 5:45 p.m. meeting prior to the regular council meeting, some councilmembers expressed resistance to an eastbound bike lane proposed as part of the city’s Main Street Street Overlay Project.
Planning for the project has been underway since 2020. The projected cost is just over $1 million — most of that from grants.
It will include compliant pedestrian ADA ramps at 7th and 8th Avenue, plus bulb-outs aimed at improving pedestrian safety at the crosswalks.
Main Street’s current lane configuration provides a traffic lane in each direction and parking lanes on both sides of the road. Staff is proposing to narrow the traffic and parking lanes to add an eastbound bike lane from 6th to 9th Avenues to support cyclists traveling uphill. 
The graphic shows the proposed lane reconfiguration.
While Councilmembers Chris Eck, Jenna Nand and Susan Paine expressed their support for the project, Councilmember Dotsch reiterated her belief that congested Main Street was a poor location for a bicycle lane and poses a safety risk for children riding their bikes there. She stated it made more sense to place the lane on the less-traveled Dayton Street, which is located a block south. Councilmember Neil Tibbott said he has ridden his bike frequently on that stretch of Main Street and he concurs with Dotsch that Dayton would be a better place for the lane. He then asked City Engineer Rob English what it would take to eliminate the bike lane from the project, and English replied there would need to be additional discussion with the council and the granting agency to see whether such a change would impact the grant funding.
Eck suggested to staff it would help if the council could better understand the funding sources and how flexible they are, as well as any safety studies that have been done.
Construction is scheduled to begin on the project this summer, with completion in the fall.
The council also:
– Heard annual reports from Edmonds Municipal Court (also during the 5:45 p.m. special meeting) and from the Edmonds Economic Development Commission (at the 7 p.m. meeting). This was Municipal Court Judge Whitney Rivera’s last report to the council, as she has been appointed by Gov. Jay Inslee to fill an upcoming vacancy on the Snohomish County Superior Court. It was also the last council report from Economic Development Commission Chair Nicole Hughes and Vice Chair Kevin Harris, who are stepping down from their leadership positions as of the next commission meeting. Harris pointed to two highlights of the commission’s 2023 work: A commission-sponsored tour of the Landmark 99 property, aimed at helping them better understand the neighborhood, and work on the Edmonds Business Booster website, a joint project with the Edmonds Chamber of Commerce.
– Unanimously approved an amended resolution supporting the efforts of the downtown Business Improvement District (BID) to hire a consultant to review current BID operations and prepare a workplan. Two amendments offered by Councilmember Neil Tibbott were approved: One of them expanded the procedural steps available to reestablish the BID to include “a fixed term of duration, method of membership ratification, applicable fee structure, etc.” The other inserts language requesting that the BID Advisory Committee provide the council with an outline of their work plan by July 2024.
– Also approved a motion directing the city attorney to prepare resolutions with appropriate language regarding draft growth alternatives recommended last week by the Edmonds Planning Board. The city council has scheduled a special meeting at 7:30 p.m. April 9, during which the only subject will be considering the alternatives. Council President Olson said that the council anticipates providing direction on the growth alternatives at the April 9 meeting, although it could be delayed.
The council agenda memo states that the council’s direction on the draft growth alternatives is not an adoption of these alternatives, rather guidance for the purposes of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) analysis. The council will make future decision on whether to adopt a preferred alternative in the final EIS.
In a related matter, the council voted 4-3 (Councilmembers Chen, Nand and Dotsch opposed) to limit audience comments during the April 9 meeting to growth plan alternatives only.
— Story and photos by Teresa Wippel
Thank you Mr. Baily for an review of our situation. We are now 12.5million in the hole without including the costs of the Landmark/99 project. Now we need to decide how to significantly reduce expenses and/or increase our taxes.
It’s time to let the Landmark/99 project die.
Why does Mr. Bailey advise that community meetings are needed to discuss the city’s general fund budget priorities? Didn’t anyone give the Blue Ribbon panel a briefing on the community input during the set of meetings that Council had last year in every major neighborhood on that same topic? The Council had a workshop in 2023 on budgeting by priorities. The results of that were allegedly used in the development of the 2024 general fund budget. But it’s reasonable to re-do that priority setting process after the city hired so may people in 2023, and revenues continue to underrun the forecast. I have been a corporate budget manager in a fortune 50 company and seen all the techniques – zero based budgeting, top down target budgeting, activity based budgeting, priority project overlays to a business as usual base layer, adding CPI to a base layer, etc. It’s not the budgeting technique that’s the critical success factor to good financial management. It’s the work effort of the Finance Director who’s job is to analyze historical trends and predict future trends; the right level of detail and timeliness of the management reports, and the quality of decision making by City Council when making course corrections. I look forward to reading about a future public safety bond issue for Edmonds.
Everything Mike Bailey has said has been known by many of us in the financial world, CM Chen, Teitzel and myself included.
I wanted to write a resolution to go to Annual Budgeting but Tibbott and Olson did not support the action and response was – from what I’ve read – it’s better. Many of us support annual because of the fiscal crisis/leadership?”
I’m surprised he recommends jumping into BPO as technically it should go through a rigorous public process as when working at Redmond he hosted some us to talk BPO and he said it’s about a two year process with lots of public is involved.
Lastly, no blame – but what about trust? Many of us are awaiting answers or footnotes or reconciliations of numbers that were changed. While no one cares to blame the past – with numbers it basic mathematics; and when published reports suddenly show significant changes with the pompous reply “- I’ve given you the answers already” or no answer at all – well, I’ve lost all trust!
Council approved budget and amendments were manipulate without transparency AT ALL and if Mayor Rosen condones these actions by inaction, how will trust be restored? Is it okay to spend $700k over $900k budget? Corporate world – no!
To pass any levy or RFA – you need the public to trust!?!
It is shown above that the city missed budgeted revenue by a total of $7.6 million over 3 of the last 4 years. I believe it to be unusual to miss revenue expectations. It would be interesting to see which specific revenue sources were missed. It is very disappointing to learn that our city council was spending more money than budgeted even when less revenue was being taken in.
Watch finance committee as Will on numerous occasions told the Administration to rebalance its investment portfolio. And Ron, the simple majority had control of the budget for two years – so yes – Council is to blame but as you know I’ve worked with four other Directors. Administration was at faulty with goofy numbers and projections were not vetted properly; and the Administration was including unearned budget in 2021 and 2022 calculations and when we made them take it out and footnote – the strategic number to remained static forcing bizarre percentages like 1% growth in labor??? so the budget process has been confusing at best under the previous administration. Budgets should have a super majority vote!
Yes Diane, you did your best but were out numbered. I wish that you were still there.
Councilmember Dotsch and Councilmember Neil Tibbet, if you think that Dayton Street would be safer than Main Street for a bike lane, then you haven’t been paying attention to the “Dangerous Dayton” petitions that have been proposed by the residents, for years, living on Dayton Street. Dayton is the only street in the bowl that has NO STOP signs or speed control for 3 ENTIRE BLOCKS! It’s gets even more concerning when you add the fact that the Frances Anderson Center, owned by the City of Edmonds, and houses a Daycare drop off on Dayton Street and several childrens activites thoughout the year, putting kids in harms way. Main Street at least has a blinking Stop sign at 7th to slow the traffic, Dayton has nothing for 3 entire blocks! We have requested that a Stop sign be installed at 8th and Dayton, or speed reduction devices, to slow traffic coming down the hill before it reaches families at Frances Anderson, although the city has chosen to leave Dayton an open fast street with no speed reduction. We need a Stop Sign on 8th and Dayton, or speed bumps, to protect children before we need a bike lane. Let’s put kids safety first before Bikes!!!
Talk about a no-win situation for Dayton Street residents. Congested Main Street traffic encourages drivers on to Dayton with inadequate speed controls. Main Street bike lanes will just make things worse on Dayton too. It is confusing why the city hasn’t made Dayton Street a higher priority with speed reduction. I guess the city has to prioritize the special interests of 1 to 2 percent travelers on bicycles going up the hill. Based on the obvious traffic and/or congestion of both streets I’m astonished that any responsible parent would let their children ride there because of the obvious questionable safety measures.
As a very frequent visitor to Edmonds, I wish the downtown sidewalks were safer and easier to navigate for pedestrians and those of us needing to use mobility devices.
Well when we do stupid stuff like pay 7000 to rent a lot to park 4 trucks it is no wonder we are in a hole. Cutting expenditures would be great but it seems there is no appetite to do so. My guess is they put fire and paramedics on the ballot resulting if it passes with millions of dollars being saved and spent on stupid stuff like the above rental lot. I for one will not vote for that or any other tax raising measure unless the city tightens its belt first. Personally except for many new or improved crosswalks the city hasn’t really improved anything noticeable to me. But yet every year they find a way to spend a ever growing amount of revenue that they spend that doesn’t seem to benefit its citizens.
Mr. Baily is basically a another paid consultant who is telling us the obvious. If you are spending more than you take in as a city or an individual or a family, you have three choices: Cut costs as necessary, raise taxes as necessary or borrow money. There, where’s my $10,000? Mayor Rosen, Darrol Haug could have told you essentially the same stuff for free. Of course we can’t hope to balance our budget without buying some more expensive software programs to tell us we are spending more than we make. Why should city budgets be roughly the equal to rocket science? Human beings just love to make relatively simple stuff as complicated as possible.
Bike lanes down Main Street? Have we already forgotten the concept of “Needs versus Wants”? How about we see if more than 10 riders per year use that dangerously weaving bike lane down 9th? Also, pleeeze, don’t spend $100K ‘studying’ the concept of another bike lane. We have serious budget issues!
The bike lanes was a Sound Transit Grant. It would have been better spent for a boutique parking structure.
Were the destruction of our intersections a grant? I can think no other reason for installing these traffic obstructions. The pedestrians, rule, in Edmonds, and seldom bother to look up from their phones!
Parking is already challenging…!! What are they thinking ..or are they?
Please, please be sure those bike lanes are wide enough for rickshaws, pedal cabs and man powered food vending rigs. None of those dinky and disappearing bike lanes like we got up on Ninth. Let’s make Edmonds a world class overcrowded magnet for as many new citizens and tourists as possible. Heaven knows we need the tax revenue. Sewers be damned, we’ve got plenty of fast fresh storm water to dump raw human waste directly into the Salish Sea just like they do in Victoria B.C.
Adding bike lanes to an already congested Main Street seems like a potentially dangerous idea. It makes me wonder if the push to do so happens to relate to the other push we’ve seen in past years, which is to close Main Street down to cars altogether?
Regarding the budget disaster, I’m glad that the city is taking serious action on this, and the minor bit of money spent on Mr. Bailey’s expert advice seems warranted. I’m impressed with Mayor Rosen’s leadership on this.
I’m a voter who usually approves bonds and levies, but in this case, asking citizens to pay increased taxes to bail the city out seems like a hard ask, given the money they’ve spent to consider the landmark property proposal and the Edmonds Greenway Loop.
What serious action has been taken so far except for a hiring freeze and then hiring an “expert” to talk about the three totally obvious options available? If you listened closely last night you heard that the various city funds are loaning money between each other and the borrowing fund pays the lending fund some sort of interest. How does that work or accomplish anything? Unless the interest is somehow coming from outside the house there is no new revenue in that scheme as far as I can see. The “expert” says we need another expensive software program ($80,000/yr. give or take) to keep track of those in house transactions apparently. One option presented by our “expert” is to “borrow” rate payer utilities funds to cover shortages in the general fund. That sure sounds promising. One thing you can be double damn sure of is you are going to get asked to approve a public safety levy or bonds just to maintain the level of service we have now with fire and police. I’m not knocking the Mayor for what he has done so far except I don’t think we really needed to pay this “expert” , and we are at just the beginning of the beginning and nowhere near any real solutions. We have basically recognized we have a big problem.
Well said. Look inward and do EVERYTHING you can before coming back to us for more money. They haven’t even come close to scratching the surface of everything they can do. Hard, hard no personally from our family on raising taxes as a bailout to the city.
Make Main even more congested and complicated with unused bike lanes? Idiocy.
– How many people would actually use such lanes, especially given the age of many Edmonds citizens; the steep, long hill; the weather?
– What will protect (both) bikers from the speeders and those who don’t believe in stop signs?
– Where on earth will we park? And does this mean even longer walks for those of us who need close-in parking due to mobility issues?
– Will there be an apparently drunk line painter putting in wobbly (and vanishing) lines?
What a truly stupid idea!
It is time to stop doing things for a minuscule number of our residents and abide by the wishes and needs of the vast majority. Do not make any more bicycle lanes. 100th and 9th have been messed up – do no more. Just because things can be done with grants doesn’t mean that they should be done.
Do we really need bike lanes in Edmonds? We have limited parking like in some areas of Seattle and bike lanes make it worse. I have a handicapped sticker due to an injury but sometimes I cannot even find parking in downtown Edmonds. I cannot imagine putting small children into this mix on the streets in downtown Edmonds. with cars and other traffic. The City of Edmonds was just not set up for additional bike lanes no matter where you put them.
I always drive down that stretch going E and W. The other day I noticed in the area proposed that a fairly small deliver truck was parallel parked on the N side it was against the curb and at least 10 inches of it were over the parking line and into the street. I saw not one bike in the whole bowl Main and I drove around all of the streets looking around and looking for parking. I noticed that this area proposed was packed with cars parking there. I assume they were shopping etc. I saw a few places between 5th and 3rd. I after someone moved found a place on 4th next to a gallery and parallel parked there. I think the deal is that many who want this think as has been stated on Social Media that they think cars are murderers. So, it’s the mindset and everyone is entitled to their own opinion. However, in my opinion a very small percentage of people is not a majority by far. I also drove all around every street in 5 corners and N of 212th and S of 220th took 80th and 99 to Shoreline. I didn’t see one Bike. I did see walkers and strollers on the few sidewalks and in the streets. So, there you have it. Truth.
No new taxes period!!!
Looks to me that the last years of the council approved budgets and reckless spending got us here. Who was looking at the cash reserves and cash flow. The buck stops with those Council members that approved those years of spending that put the citizens of Edmonds in this deep hole. Build a new budget that does not require any tax increase. Remember “We The People ” aka the taxpayers of Edmond, deserve nothing less. Start with a top down budget. Public safety, water/sewer repairs, street/sidewalks maintenance, building deferred maintenance and replacement . These are the things that the tax payers have been funding for years. Make a balanced budget with reserve balances replenished. Live within your taxpayers means, time to cut the rest. Time for tough love to gain the taxpayers trust again.
I thought Mr. Baily was concise and patient and very informative. I don’t think his small amount of pay is too much for something so important. He gave options and the subject of cutting positions etc. seems to be a problem for many. No one including me wants higher utilities. I agree that a combination of all of the cost cutting measures suggested would help. If you qualify you will get a substantial reduction on utility costs so there is that. We already passed the school levies many voted out of the kindness of their hearts. That is an increase for citizens. I personally think we may be a bit top heavy with Departments Positions and Wages, but I don’t know. We do have a lot of selfless volunteers in Edmonds. So yeah, a combo. I can take another slight increase in utilities. It doesn’t seem wise to borrow and as said pay interest instead of receive interest $$. So, no fluff for a while Edmonds. And no Fluff means no Fluff for anyone or org etc. Private donations I think for our many events is a must and keep spending money on our businesses and with your sales tax. Good Luck. Our nice weather is here so our utilities will be less for the next 6-7 months.
You are a super nice person Deb and I hate to disagree with you on anything but our CITY utilities are not going to go down for the next 6 to 7 months or probably ever again. Our heat and electric will go down until Winter but our city water and sewer will jump substantially when we have to start watering our plants. We are very careful and don’t water any grass anymore but trees, flowers and small shrubs take a ton of water. Our sewer bills are very high as they are driven by the water usage measured. There are already annual hikes in rates for city water/sewer in the works for at least the next three years and probably beyond. This budget deficit is going to get brutal and that should not be sugar coated in any way. It is going to get a lot more expensive to keep living in Edmonds.
Thank you Clinton I appreciate the statement that you think I am a nice person. But ha. I am not always nice at all. I want everyone to feel free to disagree with me about anything. I believe we learn from others’ opinions and even others criticisms. You are correct in everything you say about our utilities. I remember too when our water bills were based on mainly the amount of water we used. My husband and I have discussed whether we personally can afford the ever-increasing costs to live in this city and this state. We quit watering our grass a few years back. Dormant grass rules here in summer. I do know it is very hard for so many and I hate that too. I guess positivity can come across as sugar coating and there is no sugar on this, I agree with you Clinton. My husband does a little spreadsheet on paper ha every year with percentages for cost increases. We will stay as long as we can and well if we can’t sustain, we will move back to the Midwest. It seems we are pretty powerless as a city to stop increases in cost. I don’t like frivolous spending by our city broke or not ha. So yeah, buddy please let me have it anytime you think it is prudent. XO
Is it too late to stop screwing up our streets?
It’s what I have been saying for years…
Fix the freakin’ potholes…
It is a metaphor for putting the commonsense basics first. If money is left over, then go for the fluff!
…just sayin’
When a cyclist is hit by a car door because a passenger or driver fails to check if the way is clear, this is referred to as dooring. Because of the narrow-proposed bike lane this is not IF dooring is going to happen, it’s WHEN it’s going to happen. A bike lane on this street next parked cars is ill conceived.
Yes, that’s why in the packet you will see feedback to stripe it as an all ages and all abilities parking-protected bike lane.
Luke, a stripe isn’t going to protect an inattentive driver or passenger opening their door into what is essentially the bicycle lane close to parked cars Surprisingly, as a bicycle advocate, I think you would be more concerned about “dooring” which is one of the most common serious bicycle accidents, instead of just rationalizing.
I think you misunderstand. Please see the comment from me and others in the Council packet. Here is what some of us asked for: https://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/gallery/cycletrack_3dgallery/onewaycycletrack_street.jpg
Luke,
I went to your link, below, and although your request to put the bike lane next to the side walk is a better option, the design shows the bike lane running on the driver’s side of the parked cars.
I agree with other commenters that this proposal is a bad idea, for the many reasons stated. Safety should be the first concern, and this design wouldn’t be safe for anyone, would cause more congestion and more accidents. I also agree that just moving the project to Dayton Street is a bad idea.
Seriously?? Is there anybody involved in decision making in Edmonds have any common sense? WE NEED PARKING for residents who already have homes. We need safety on our streets. I live on 9th Avenue and am in my yard a lot and walking along our streets. I see a couple of bicyclists a week on 9th Avenue. There have already been two serious accidents on 9th because of the path the bike lanes use. This is a huge monetary liability for the city and has endangered pedestrians and drivers.
Dear Administration and City Council, Please STOP the madness of adding more bike lanes. The plans of adding more in the bowl need to be put on the back burner. Please listen to your residents and remove bike lanes from the Main Street project at your next CC meeting. I can look onto 9th Avenue which is fairly flat and for the last two weeks, with our Spring weather, I have not seen a single bicyclist using these confusing bike lanes so why would we spend our tax dollars (and time) adding more to our hilly streets in desperate need of parking spots?
Save Our Streets!! No more bike lanes. And especially not on Main St/Dayton. Stop the Madness! It’s not safe for anyone.
*As currently designed and implemented.
I find it incomprehensible that when we are OUT OF MONEY, the mayor and council are still considering new project. What don’t you understand?????
Did anyone watching this presentation at City Council catch the recommendation that the city pay for A SECOND software license for budgeting – specifically the one that Mr. Bailey has a business interest in? The City licensed Open Gov’s budget module and began the work of populating the data base with the budget a couple years ago. Then there was some staff turnover and Open Gov never went live. It’s painful to review the check the city wrote for the license, the Finance Committee meeting minutes on this topic in 2022 and 2023, and then watch Mr. Bailey tell us that we have to spend even more money to budget for staff and services that we can’t afford. Ironic, huh? Edmonds can do their budgeting in Excel if they have to. (I am not exaggerating) Mr. Mayor – just say no to licensing more budgeting software in 2024 or 2025 until you have a better functioning Finance and Admin dept that can get their jobs done without running out to license more software every few years.
The city budget can absolutely be done with excel and the basic Microsoft software suite. Thanks for mentioning the Open Gov software debacle. If the software is so great why would some staff changes put it dead in the water? Like so many massively expensive failed software launches I’ve seen over the years; it seems they had a really great salesman who is now nowhere to be found.
I drove by the proposed bike lane on mainstreet. I have a few issues one it is such a short distance and where is the connecting route? And if installed as Luke suggests it will fill up with debris and the few if ever riders won’t ride in it, how do we propose keeping it swept so the few if ever riders will use it? I didn’t see a detail but just how are the riders going to deal with the bulb outs for crosswalks? And last if there ever was a rider how are they going to deal with people getting in and out of there cars crossing or standing in the bike lane will they stop bike riders hate to stop will they jump the curb and ride on the sidewalk sending pedestrians scurrying or dart out into the traffic lane? Nothing about this short piece of bike lane makes any sense.
I don’t know Mr. Baily and I have a feeling that he probably doesn’t need to benefit from anything he might suggest. I figure he is pretty well healed already Ha. I also do agree that we do not need any more computer gismos for accounting. I remember when computer systems were being discussed and thinking wow how much for that? Waste is unacceptable. I think maybe before Edmonds knew it was broken that we tried to be every one’s savior. Sure, we can afford this for them and that for those and all of it. Nice but to me it sort of sounded like we are rich here so sure here ya go $. Envy us? Praise our entitlement. Now we are paying the price for too much gilding I am sorry, but it is true. Some still want more stuff while the rest of the city just wants sidewalks and potholes fixed and traffic calming, I love the Bowl, but I watched it and I saw how much we spent to gild, and it could have been done for much less or not at all. Beach, View, Waterfront parks, Retail and Restaurants are our real strengths. Civic was too much $. That too was questionable in many ways. It all must change now for years to come is how I hear +C it.
I forgot to add that we do have a wonderful Marsh and a wonderful bunch of Art Gallerys here too. They are both also very important to our city’s economy and just for the thrill of the Arts. And remember Edmonds we still have wonderful territorial views all over our city and we must continue to preserve them and build responsibly.
Great point Theresa. The mayor actually hired and is paying a software salesman to make a low key, almost hidden, sales pitch to the city to purchase his product with a recurring cost to the city. This when we are supposedly righting the ship and watching every penny? I’ll be kind and chalk this up to being a rookie mistake as we all want Mike and his BR committee to be successful, but one should always question how something is going to appear in practice as well as on paper. I would have been much more impressed with Mr. Baily if he was serving us pro bono like the rest on the BRC. 10K might seem like chicken feed to some in town, but to me it’s a lot of money to spend if you are essentially going broke.
Theresa, Clint,
I expressed the exact same comment about the software in an email I sent to City Council before they met on Tuesday. Besides, the Finance Department still hasn’t implemented the new Open-Gov financial software they purchased over two years ago (and I thought it was to help in budgeting too)! CM Chen pointed that out too in his remarks. Sure, the new software will create pretty and fancy charts. But at its core it is nothing more than a glorified spreadsheet. The Council likes pretty, not practical so I expect them to go for it. I just wonder who is going to be tasked to implement it? If past is prologue, we can already anticipate the results.
O.K. Mr. Baily, It’s time for you to do the right thing and make a public announcement that you are giving Our Mayor (who’s trying desperately to find answers to our problems I think) that you are giving him our money back for the good of the cause. Symbolic of course, but symbolism goes a long way in gaining hearts and minds. Go ahead – I dare yo to do it. If you do my request, I just saved the city 10K. I bet that would be at least two pot holes fixed with money left over to buy a stop sign perhaps.