As the Edmonds City Council Tuesday night began considering amendments to the city’s draft 2025-26 budget, it was clear that council’s efforts to close the city’s $13 million deficit will be difficult and painful. Of the 10 councilmember-proposed amendments considered at Tuesday’s business meeting, five of them would have cut programs, services or staff positions. The council either delayed action on those until next week so more information could be obtained, or ultimately voted against the proposals after learning more about their impacts.
In his Oct. 1 budget address, Edmonds Mayor Mike Rosen proposed a combination of staff reductions, job furloughs and revenue-generating ideas to close the city’s projected budget gap in 2025. City staff was asked to address half that gap with $7 million in budget cuts, which have been presented to the council in recent weeks.
Now it is up to the council to propose amendments to Rosen’s budget, which they will be doing over the next several meetings, with budget adoption likely before Thanksgiving.
Three of the proposals discussed Tuesday night came from Councilmember Will Chen, who chairs the council’s finance committee. Two of those — reducing city hall operations to 32 hours a week, saving an estimated $2.5 million annually, and restructuring the leadership of the Edmonds Police Department by eliminating an assistant police chief position to save $629,300 over two years — were tabled until next week’s meeting.
In speaking to his proposal for a 32-hour week — which would exclude the police department, courts and wastewater treatment plant — Chen said it would signify to the public “that we are all in this together, as the whole city, and we are all rolling up our sleeves, doing more with less, being more creative to help our city go through this difficult period of time.”
Councilmember Susan Paine thanked Chen for proposing the idea, adding that she plans to introduce a motion next Tuesday calling for a 35-hour work week. Whatever the council finally decides, she said, there are many factors to consider, including union contracts that would need to be negotiated. As such, she proposed tabling the motion to next week, which passed by a 5-2 vote.
Addressing Chen’s amendment to eliminate one of two assistant police chief positions, Councilmember Neil Tibbott proposed an amendment that would direct Mayor Rosen to restructure the police department “to better align to their management needs.” Paine proposed tabling the proposal until next week in hopes that Edmonds Police Chief Michelle Bennett and command staff would be able to attend and answer questions about such a reorganization. Rosen also noted that since Bennett has announced her plans to retire, he has been working on a plan for restructuring the police department along with other city departments. Paine’s motion to table the police restructuring discussion until next week was approved unanimously.
A third Chen-proposed amendment called for the elimination of the deputy director of parks, recreation and human services position — now held by Shannon Burley — which would save $456,750 over the next two years. Parks Director Angie Feser — who last month explained how she was reducing her department budget by $1.5 million — was invited to share the impacts of Burley’s work. According to Feser, Burley’s efforts have resulted both in streamlined department operations and increased revenue generation. Among her contributions: Recruiting Cascade Swim Club to operate the city-owned Yost Pool, covering the city’s costs and expanding pool operations; moving the city’s field and shelter rental process online, increasing revenue from $150,000 to $240,000; expertly managing contracts with numerous entities that sponsor signature city events, from Taste Edmonds to the Tree Lighting; overseeing the city’s human services program; and tracking revenues and expenditures in city programs.
In the end, after hearing Feser’s remarks and listening to additional council discussion about Burley’s contributions, Chen ended up withdrawing his amendment. But this particular proposal clearly struck a nerve among councilmembers and reminded them of the work ahead.
“I’m so sorry to put our staff through this, all of our staff,” Council President Vivian Olson said, acknowledging Burley’s presence in the room. “We have a very, very difficult task, and I want to commend the council, everybody for how polite you’ve been, because these are really difficult conversations, and it’s brave to bring forward some of these amendments that are known to be unpopular…but I think we have to think about the bigger picture too, of retaining our quality talent.”
Added Paine: “We are all in charge here with keeping track of the budget, and…it should never be personalized, because we’re doing our jobs too, and that’s part of what we need to do.”
Olson had proposed three amendments on Tuesday. One was to remove $100,000 allocated to do a master plan for the Johnson property — a 1.4-acre site located near Yost Park — which longtime resident Shirley Johnson bequeathed to the city. After Parks Director Feser noted that the site is secure and it would be fine to delay the project a few years, that motion was approved.
A second Olson motion proposed reducing parks maintenance, including less mowing and edging, which she estimated would save the city $200,000 annually. However, Feser offered a detailed explanation that indicated — based on staffing, equipment and other considerations — the savings would be closer to $14,000. Olson’s motion failed 2-5.
A third Olson proposal called for discontinuing parks department communications and community engagment efforts and instead transferring those duties to the city’s public information officer. However, after Feser explained what those department communications efforts entailed — and how many different employees were involved with them — Olson joined other councilmembers in voting against her own amendment.
Other councilmember amendments considered Tuesday included:
From Councilmember Dotsch: Adding $5,000 to the planning and development department’s professional services budget to hire a consultant at the beginning of 2025 to study department’s fee schedule. Councilmember Paine referred to an earlier planning department presentation stating that the city was recovering only about 41% of its staff costs through permitting fees. After further discussion, the council determined that more research was needed before voting on the amendment and voted to table it.
From Councilmember Chen: Removing $10,000 allocated to the council contingency fund. Approved.
Also from Councilmember Chen: Aligning the authorized positions on page 40 of the Budget Book with the budgeted wage and benefits by department. Approved.
Also during the business meeting, the council heard presentations from Acting Planning and Development Director Shane Hope and Community, Culture and Economic Development Director Todd Tatum regarding the draft Edmonds 2024 Comprehensive Plan elements for climate and economic development.
The Comprehensive Planning process (also known as “Everyone’s Edmonds”) began about two years ago. Under state law, the city must accommodate an additional 13,000 people, 9,000 housing units and 3,000 jobs over the next 20 years. State requirements also direct that new housing should be affordable to families of low to moderate income levels. Councilmembers have been receiving presentations on various aspects of the plan during the past several months.
In speaking about the climate element, Hope noted that the draft climate element would replace and update the Community Sustainability Element from the city’s 2015 Comprehensive Plan. The proposed draft — which complies with new state legislation (HB 1181) — would capture key concepts and set the stage for further additions later, when the city has more capacity, she said.
The proposed new climate element includes two sub-elements: climate resilience and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The resilience sub-element addresses adaptation to hazards exacerbated by climate change, while th mitigation sub-element identifies goals and policies addressing GHG emissions reductions
The climate element addresses strategies to mitigate and adapt to climate change. It includes reducing greenhouse gas emissions through sustainable practices, enhancing energy efficiency, and promoting renewable energy sources. The element emphasizes climate adaptation measures, such
as protecting against sea level rise, mitigating the urban heat island effect, and improving stormwater management. It also focuses on preserving natural resources and critical areas, expanding green infrastructure, and increasing urban tree canopy. Public education and community engagement are key components, aiming to foster a resilient and sustainable city capable of withstanding climate impacts.
Tatum explained that both the Edmonds Economic Development Commission and Planning Board played key roles in developing the Comprehensive Plan’s Economic Development Element. This element is intended to provide comprehensive policy direction for maintaining, expanding and attracting economic activity across the city. This objective focuses on fostering sustainable growth that balances development with environmental stewardship, ensuring long-term prosperity and an enhanced quality of life for residents. Key priorities include supporting existing businesses through resources and infrastructure improvements, attracting new businesses by leveraging the city’s strengths and opportunities, and fostering a skilled workforce.
The element aims to enhance the city’s livability by supporting mixed-use development and cultural amenities. It also promotes inclusive economic development to ensure that all residents benefit from economic opportunities, while encouraging regional collaboration and resilience to adapt to economic shifts and market disruptions.
Among the goals:
– Diversify and grow the city’s jobs and economy to build robust and differentiated key employment sectors, enhance local employment opportunities, strengthen the city’s unique identities, attract spending from nearby communities, and increase municipal tax revenues to support local services.
– Revitalize and enhance the city’s activity centers, neighborhood centers and hubs through integrated, mixed-use placemaking and destination development approaches, in recognition of the needs for housing, commerce and economic development.
– Support and enhance the community’s quality of life for residents of all backgrounds and incomes, workers, and visitors to sustain and attract business and investment and enhance economic well-being.
– Ensure a predictable and efficient regulatory environment that facilitates economic development, via the city’s zoning, permitting, business support, and investments.
Staff is still working to revise the draft Comprehensive Plan, with a public hearing planned for Dec. 10 and city council adoption of the final plan set for Dec. 17.
The council also by a 6-1 vote approved a six-month contract with EcoRemedy — at a total cost of $894,000 — to cover wastewater treatment plant staff training while the city enters the operations and maintenance phase of the city’s new gasification system. Councilmember Will Chen was the lone “no” vote. (More information about this will be coming in a future story.)
During a special meeting at 5:30 p.m., prior to the business meeting, the council:
— Approved the work plan and budget for the Edmonds Downtown Alliance.
— Approved the staff recommendation for the 84th Ave walkway, which would install sidewalk on the east side of 84th Ave between 238th and 234th Streets Southwest.
Next step is to complete the 30% preliminary design for the project, which will be followed by a public meeeting. Grants and funding options will also be purused.
— By Teresa Wippel
One of the things that stood out to me most last evening was the lack of a presentation for the Public Hearing on the Proposed 2025-2026 Biennial Budget and the fact that not a single citizen participated in the Public Hearing.
Ken, you’re correct. There was no presentation because the Council hasn’t done anything yet. So I wasn’t going to waste my time making a comment until they actually try to do their jobs and have something to present to the public. The Councils discussions really didn’t start until last night after the public hearing. This was solely a “check-the-box” public hearing timed before any deliberations about the budget have really occurred.
And I thought prior years were bad. I was wrong. This budget cycle is worse from both the administration and the City Council.
Mr. Reidy, I echo Jim O’s comment on the public hearing about the 2025-2026 budget. That hearing was premature in my mind. Because the Council has had no debate on the dais and made no decisions, there was nothing to comment on. I spent those couple hours on Tues at the EWC at a performance by our local symphony that presented a chamber music program. The venue was perfect – as a classical music fan in the front row I was treated to an intimate connection to the musicians. Frankly, it was a welcome break from the seriousness of the municipal governance issues in Edmonds now. There was even a trombone trio that performed 5 short pieces. When was the last time you could make a choice between a trombone and a city Council meeting? Note: it was ‘standing room only’ at the EWC’s large meeting room. I wasn’t the only one escaping from city business last night. Thanks for your comments above, Ken and Jim.
What arduous tasks Council and the City face. Such decisions are not easy. I would like to suggest that the Johnson property be dedicated to the Wilderness/Day Camp(s), so that they can stay away from the more environmentally sensitive areas along Shell Creek and the previously quiet Northeast section of the park. On the south side, there is already noise from the nearby pool, tennis/pickleball court, and Bowdoin Way. The Johnson property, having been previously developed, would not incur as much biological, riparian, and acoustical impact as continued use of other parts of the park for such things.
We are all cutting our budget.
City is selling us out! Giving away $6M in fire stations to South County fire, at same time fire & ems cost increases range from 56% to nearly double!
Mukilteo will pay 45% – 49% less per resident in 2026 than Edmonds with SCF. Possibly higher if we go the RFA model.
All to make city councils budgeting, easier. Easier to ask for new taxes.
Not a good look when our Police department and other city agencies are working through cuts.
Edmonds Police functioned very appropriately for many decades with a Chief and two Assistant Chiefs. What we didn’t have, and don’t need now, is the position of Commander; let’s now eliminate that position.
Ron, great observation based on your long residency and past public service. Mayor Rosen says he’s working on reorganizing Police and other Departments which is his job as our Municipal CEO. Good on him if he follows through.
The ongoing budget debate among council members and department heads is largely unproductive in savings. The most effective approach to achieving genuine budget reforms would likely involve an external commission similar to a DOGE type. Alternatively, it is up to the citizens of Edmonds who vote against a levy to enforce the issue.
As an employee of the City for almost 10 years, reducing the City Hall staff full-time workers to 32 a week is scary. We have reduced our staffing over the years & have had more work assigned to each of us. We are overworked & constantly behind on our tasks. This will make it impossible to do our jobs. Delays in services will slow the whole City down. Financially this will force employees to leave for other jobs. I am the sole breadwinner & cannot afford this type of cut. This is unfair, and the council needs to understand that this would create hardships for most. Find the money somewhere else please!
Brian mentions a DOGE type commission. When the US set up what then was called the Base Closure Commission for sorting out how we needed to save money for defense that commission made recommendations that congress could not amend but could only vote up or down. It took politics out of the equation.
We are not the only nearby city to have these financial issues, and we need to creatively think about how we can work with other cities and consolidate the management of govt functions. Parks, Police, Fire, EMS (should it be part of Fire Svc?) Waste/Storm water and maybe more. We need to reinvent what services we want govt to do and how can we deliver it more cost effectively.
The govt funding models are running out of Gas, ops we are switching to Electricity, ops renewal will not produce enough. Hopefully a smile for a raining day .:)
Time to rethink what we want govt to do and who do we fund it.
This is nothing but a bandaid to try to fix a broken bone. Without additional revenue, inflation will eat out any savings a few years. Inflation, which is forecasted to soar under new tariffs wars, more shortages as imports plunge, and local manufacturing poised to raise prices as foreign competitors are tariffed out, will hit again even stronger.
This plan is hollow of any ideas to transform Edmonds into the vibrant and fiscally sustainable place it should be. One that is based on commercial and sales tax income that’s Shoreline and Lynnwood build right next to Edmonds while Edmonds subsidizes the infrastructure it’s residents use to shop elsewhere and leave the sales tax out of the town they live at. Why are we doing the same things and expecting different outcomes? Rosen is clearly not up to the task and it seems neither is the council.
It would be wonderful to gain commercial and sales tax income to help balance the books. Creating takes time, and unfortunately, city planners seen to lack expertise. Local and regional governments are captivated by the idea of affordable housing, striving to create an imaginary egalitarian utopia that will ultimately lead to a negative cash flow in public finances in addition to the unavoidable environmental degradation. While local leaders in government and media are distracted with the notion of controlling the weather, the city’s finances are dwindling, edging closer to inevitable bankruptcy.
Darrol, very astutely put. Just like we expect our schools to be all things to all people no matter the cost, we expect our cities to be totally safe, secure and meet all the people’s various needs for entertainment, the natural environment and the good life. But “who” is going to pay for all that? The state keeps putting mostly unfunded requirements for things like 20 year planning, housing and protecting the environment on the cities and counties and then threatens the local government’s meager state funding if they don’t comply. When I think about all this dysfunctionality I just come to dead ends in terms of any sort of solutions to suggest. We need to cut city staff spending drastically and figure out some sort of bare bones Fire/EMS service but the public safety fear mongering and emotion rendering about people losing their jobs is already ramping up. People don’t want to have their pay and hours cut, but if the city does go insolvent at some point, there will be zero hours for many of them. If these huge asks for prop. tax hikes pass, my pay is going to get cut substantially but I’m just supposed to say OKAY for the good of the order. I say more taxes on Trump, Musk, Buffet, and Gates and less on me! NO!
Jimmy Carter’s zero base budgeting comes to mind…
Dear Mayor and City Council,
I appreciate your work on behalf of the city and its residents. What a difficult job to fix a $13 million deficit!
I’m not sure how we got in this pickle but hope you can figure it out.
None of the amendments to the budget that the Council is considering sound desirable.
As for the Mayor’s proposal to reduce and furlough staff–why punish our city workers? They are not the ones who created this mess!
I must strongly object to balancing the city budget errors on the backs of city employees
Cutting employee salaries (that’s what we mean by “furlough”, isn’t it?) will not not be supportable for many of them, I think.
The city will likely lose many loyal and talented staff members. A 32 or 35 hour work week should be off the table.
Please look elsewhere for addressing the budget issues that face us. Don’t take it out on city staff.
Where should the 13 million come from? Additionally, where will the millions more needed to replenish depleted reserves originate? Further, there are needed millions more allocated for fire services. And what about the millions required for the repair or maintenance of public facilities, roads, and sidewalks? I would love to hear answers.
I truly feel sorry for all of our city employees who have been caught up in this public debacle of a budgeting process. The unfortunate truth is that where we are now has been in the works for the last three or four years.
Year-after-year our Council has spent more than they can afford, even when presented with the facts. Not only have they spent, but they’ve also given money away. Two-hundred fifty thousand dollars to the Edmonds School District, $100,00 to the Landmark property (plus other unknown costs for consultants and staff work), land a building to the Boy’s and Girls Club, squandered ARPA money, to name a few. All money that we could use now to save a few jobs.
This story is far from over. Our city is about to give away two of our fire stations (valued at over $6M) to the RFA in exchange for nearly doubling what we pay for fire and EMS services if we join the RFA. I’m really curious how they try to sell us on this as a good deal.
The next few weeks will be interesting. When is the next Public Hearing on the budget?
The plan is to ask to raise all our property taxes exponentially to keep all the Fire Persons, Police and other city employees in their rather well paid jobs with little to no accountability for how our money is actually spent. Count me a NO vote. I’m already paying $750 a month for the mere privilege of living in Edmonds and Snohomish Co. and that’s enough. Most people don’t know how taxed they are because it’s hidden in the Mortgage payment or the rent. It’s high time for a property tax revolt by the Peons.
13 million is what about 10% of the budget the taxpayers have had to cut their spending by at least that to cover the increased cost of needs as a result of inflation. I would think the city could do the same but they don’t want to feel the pain the rest of us has had to. Look at all the fuss over about 5% I am sorry but try harder cry harder but get the job done, I for one will not support any tax increases until the city gets lean. We could probably save a couple of million by just getting rid of the people at the top and just focus on the basic day to day operations.
The City feels obligated to pay out $118K for severance to Susan McLaughlin and severance for other fired directors ($84K Dave Turley).
Maybe HR should look at keeping effective staff and sacrificing some dead weight.
Severance is usually paid in exchange for a release of legal claims. Cheaper than litigation. And with more lawsuits coming , and one current lawsuit in federal court approaching trial, saving money on lawyers and avoiding potential adverse judgments is a good thing.
What would be even cheaper than severance pay or litigation, would be hiring qualified people who can do the job right in the first place and don’t have an agenda beyond just taking care of running the city business as efficiently as possible. What we get are people who’s specialty is throwing away tax money in every way possible then blackmailing us for severance when they have to leave. Unfortunately many, if not most, of the Mayors we choose aid and abet them in this process and heads roll on every Mayoral change. This all costs money we don’t have so they always ask for more. Just say NO! (RFA and General Fund levy’s in 2025)
Yes, totally agree avoiding these situations is the best, but there’s also potential exposure based on prior acts that has to be dealt with. And the reality that even if a plaintiff has a weak case, it doesn’t stop them from suing and then the City has to defend. Severance in exchange for a release provides certainty and some employers go that route versus waiting until the statute of limitation runs to see if they get sued. It’s a tough call for employers to know what the future will bring and a business decision. I have some corporate clients who roll the dice and cross their fingers and others who pay severance. Also, there are potential lawsuits on the horizon for the city that don’t have to do with employees, so that’s another issue.
Logic must prevail. I hate to see people lose their jobs I really do BUT there are people all over our county think Boeing for instance. They too probably have friends and are very sad to leave and many will miss them too I am sure of this. We can’t let our hearts get too up into all of this. We must do what is good for our entire city and these reductions in staff and or layoffs or even part time offered is probably our only really fair way out of this. It’s a start anyway. I loved my job too. I was a great performer and when I lost my job it was for Federal Budget cuts only. Broke my heart and many crying employees were sickened to see me have to go. THAT too is gonna start happening in WA. We all know why, or we should know why. SO yeah, sad and I wish any and all who Edmonds does have to let go the best of luck and thank them for their work. Mayor and CC use your heads not your hearts. It’s part of the job. It is so sad, but it is necessary. So, you must do it and pull that band aid fast the longer you wait the harder it will be for you and them.
But who will do our jobs? We serve the City & without us doing our jobs the City will suffer. We have already reduced staff & cannot do our 40 hr a week jobs at 32 hours per week. It’s more than just cutting hours, it’s cutting services. It is making the citizens suffer from huge delays in things they expect and deserve in a timely manner. We are not Boeing. They have tens of thousands of workers, we have a few hundred. Reducing our hours to 32 will cause huge distress. We will not be able to supplement our income appropriately, with 1 day a week to get a p/t job. We did not cause the issues, we do not spend City money. We work hard for each and every citizen.
Yes, Denise the city will suffer it has been suffering for quite a long time now. Our parks will not be mowed every week for awhile. Our potholes will again be put off as well as pebble paths or sidewalks in most areas. All departments will experience issues, I am sure. I don’t know what your salary is but I imagine it is pretty high compared to many who are suffering in Edmonds. I don’t think you personally caused these issues but well someone did so tell that person what their irresponsible behavior did to you. It wasn’t the citizens. I think you who are left are trying that is clear to me. I know you probably work hard. Increase those walk in hours for citizens. In the interim keep your 32 hours a week and find a job for that one day a week. At least unlike many other citizens you will still have your health insurance and all your perks. To make yourself whole $$ how much do you need to make in the one day you now will have available? Maybe some in Edmonds would help you out or pay you to do some tasks for them?? Thats what I did every year for 3 months I was layed off. I adapted. I didn’t quit I made it work. U can 2.
This is an out of touch and insulting response.
A large number of staff that are being told to take a furlough day and pay cuts possess a Masters Degree. I can confidently say the City will continue to lose knowledgeable, dedicated staff members if council votes to reduce staff hours and enforce a furlough.
You would be the first person to complain of your permit isn’t reviewed and issued in a timely manner. You’re the first person to complain if policy changes and outreach don’t include you. You expect everything from staff but you don’t have any constructive recommendations, only that city staff should ask around town for additional work.
City Staff shouldn’t bear the brunt of the former mayor and Council’s financial mismanagement.
Ya know there are many things I could write in response to this comment from Amber Brokenshire. I assume she is talking to me as I am the only one in the comments that suggested maybe they could find work for one day a week around Edmonds. Maybe helping people who NEED help. I first of all would be happy to give our city time to issue a permit to me If I applied for one. I have never complained much at all about taxes around here. I have never asked for any help from any org or outreach program. And I won’t. I have been told by many that I am helpful and do have constructive recommendations. I am certainly not out of touch in any way whatsoever. The only reason I am writing this at all is to inform my fellow citizens in Edmonds that these statements about me are simply untrue. Thing is too that to insinuate that because someone has a Masters Degree its somehow more important than a HS or CC or just a regular BA are somehow less important to me is well a pretty elitist attitude.
Ok everyone should hate me after all of this, but I am willing to sacrifice being loved in Edmonds. So here goes. Perhaps Denise you should look at who got all or a huge amount of our city money and yes even with grants its city money. Grants are helpful but they don’t pay it all. While I agree that exercise is important, I know how much has and was spent on Bicycle lanes in a city who thinks that probably ha there will be everyone biking here. Again, on my drive thru many residential areas and the main drag and downtown and uphill I saw one Bicyclist. ONE. This has been the case every time I go out to look. SO maybe that should have been better thought out and maybe some of it could have waited and maybe that would have helped keep your job 40 hours a week. The money this city has spent just for Edmonds on signage for Edmonds is a lot. Every new bench costs a lot. Our city did this to our city. Or maybe there is someone who has 13 million dollars to donate to Edmonds?? Anyone out there that wealthy? Or that giving. The only one I know of is having his own difficulties at the moment. God Bless him.