Dear Edmonds,
On May 27, Keep Edmonds Vibrant! had the honor of presenting the results of our month-long civic engagement initiative, “What Should Edmonds Be?”, to our City Council. (View our slides here.)
In just over one month, nearly 600 community members contributed a total of 43,000 votes on ideas they submitted to What Should Edmonds Be?. These voices helped to further shape a clear vision for the future of this city—and we made sure that council heard every word.
We’re excited to share with you the final report from What Should Edmonds Be?. By digging in, you’ll see how these results complement the City’s 2024 EMC survey, offering granular insight into specific ideas written by neighbors, for neighbors.
A few highlights from the report that stand out:
- 92% of participants agree they want city leaders to maintain our beloved public amenities like the Frances Anderson Center, Yost Pool, Wade James Theatre and our public parks and greenspaces.
- 78% of participants agree that public safety should be a top priority.
- 78% of participants envision a walkable, bikeable Edmonds with clean air and housing options for all.
- 74% of participants agree we should prioritize and support our creative district and arts culture.
- 73% of participants agree that we ought to hire a grant-writer to acquire millions in available state, federal and local grants for our City annually.
- 70% of participants agree to additional revenue being generated from adding school zone speeding cameras to more schools, and 55% agree to running them 24/7 like some nearby jurisdictions.
- 68% of participants agree Edmonds should promote the growth and development of neighborhoods in strategic areas of the city to allow for more homes and ground-floor retail/commercial.
- 67% of participants agree we should have city-staffing levels that are not disproportionately lower than cities of comparable size and location.
- 60% of participants agree to a modest sales tax increase.
- 54% of participants agree to the city charging for street parking in our downtown core during peak hours.
It is clear that several of the new revenue-generating ideas currently being considered by councilmembers find favor with participants, as evidenced above. This should come as no surprise to any of us — after all, the City’s 2024 EMC survey (pages 15-19) foreshadowed that the community would be receptive to them.
Edmonds can no longer afford the ways of the past, quite literally. It’s now time to take action and put these ideas into practice.
This effort has been a labor of love: a good-faith endeavor to better understand the Edmonds community in our own words. Thank you for being part of this journey, for lending your unique perspectives to this movement, and for believing in a future that keeps Edmonds vibrant.
Onwards!
Mackey Guenther is a community member and co-organizer of Keep Edmonds Vibrant
Mackey
So 600 people from wherever out of an Edmonds population of @43,000 voted on the survey! That is less than .014 percent of the Edmonds community population. Hardly a mandate on anything for the city council to take seriously. We the taxpayers cannot afforded another tax increase to bail out the council and mayors bad financial decisions for the last 8 years. The taxpayers have indeared, double diget inflation & new taxes. Our property tax will go up almost 25% alone for 2026 with the mayors proposal &the RFA. Wait till we see our 2026 assessments & hang on baby!! All of us seniors that have help build Edmonds for the last 60 years are being thrown under the bus and being forced out by these proposals. There is no affordable housing property in Edmonds, we all worked 5-6 days a week to build what we have and raise our families.
Leave our neighborhoods we built alone. I’m not moving into an adu in my backyard. No new taxes period!
The City spent the taxpayers money like a 5 year old kid in the candy store with no fiscal responsibility on how to pay for it. As a former Port of Edmonds Commissioner for 18 years we lived within our ability to pay down debt and not raises taxes!
Fred Gouge
I only read the first two sentences of that comment but I did notice he put the decimal in the wrong place. 600 out of 43000 would be about 1.4%
Kids in a candy store, thank you
I too have forgotten to move the decimal point for % calculations.
Appreciate the conversation around new revenue ideas for Edmonds—without relying on new taxes. I recently emailed Mayor Rosen suggesting we explore a digital kiosk program, inspired by what Seattle is rolling out downtown: https://www.geekwire.com/2025/seattle-digital-kiosks-city-council-vote/. This is a public – private partnership, that doesn’t rely on taxpayer funds..it’s obtainable and executable..but will require someone – or some org – to drive it.. I even offered to reach out to Jon @ Seattle Downtown Association to see if he’d come to Edmonds and talk about how this program works.
These kiosks could support wayfinding, promote local businesses and events, and enhance access to city services—while generating advertising revenue for the city. It’s a scalable, low-footprint idea that could align with Edmonds’ walkable, visitor-friendly downtown vibe.
Would love to hear what other creative, business-minded solutions people are thinking about. …and hoping it’s not ‘more taxes’…
Lee, great idea! We need to keep pushing new alternative revenue streams, KEV has some good ideas too. It can be discouraging though, as city hall seems to have adopted the ‘it’s too hard’ mentality.
Seattle Times has a new ‘affordability’ story. Highlights an Edmonds mom struggling with costs of summer camp. We need leadership to address affordability concerns. It’s important voters understand how a ‘’Yes’ vote on the property tax levy lift impacts our low and fixed income residents, really all of us (renters, homeowners, businesses).
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/seattle-area-costly-child-care-strains-family-budgets-during-summer-break/
Nick – have KEV team reach out via email. I will gladly ask Jon to visit Edmonds. Non-tax increase ideas and execution are what will get Edmonds out of the hole it’s in..raising taxes won’t.. the city doesn’t have the luxury of time, unfortunately. Show the taxpayers how to get from -$13M to $0, and from $0 to surplus.. they don’t have the line of site.. better put together a plan…
Lee, I don’t have your contact, but here’s KEV’s email. I’ve heard they’re responsive and willing to listen (I’ve been critical of their push for a property levy, much higher than what the city originally proposed).
team@keepedmondsvibrant.org
Mackey, thank you for this article. I wish you would have included a key statement from the KEV survey report in your article which is that the information is not representative of the whole city of Edmonds. As you know, self selected surveys are never representative of a whole population. There were 598 responses to the revenue prompt, and 313 responses to the vision prompt. Do you have any idea why the Mayor refers to the KEV survey results as the message of what the community wants? I’ve also done a self selected online opinion survey in Edmonds- had over 800 responses in one week’s time. That survey collected info on the respondent’s census tract. And household income and owner/renter can be extrapolated from that. In contrast, your survey changed after it was launched and collected only the age demographic on 376 respondents. So I’m left asking myself – who are the respondents? Owner/renter? school aged children? Household income range? Neighborhood? And how do you know the respondent lives in Edmonds?
Mackey, interesting results.
A couple of other metrics which would help highlight the representativeness of your opinion poll would be to show us:
1) A Pareto diagram of the number of responses per user. This would help determine if only a few users provided the majority of “votes” – equivalent to the loud voice in the room.
2) A timeline of the number of new statements added to the poll for both the vision and revenue.
3) A Pareto diagram of how many times individuals reengaged in the poll since its inception.
Fairy tales! How much will it cost? KEV data scratches the surface. Their conclusions on staffing & compensation don’t match their data. Take a look at their report, below.
https://keepedmondsvibrant.org/slides/5-27-25.pdf (page 33 – 36)
Take Police for example, only Lynnwood surpasses staffing & compensation. Lynnwood 911 call volume was 57% higher than Edmonds (I support EPD, but don’t believe we need additional officers).
Nuanced issues, comparing number of employees & total budgets is not sufficient.
http://sno911.org/public-records/annual-report/#2022-2023-annual-report
School zone cameras – ” 55% agree to running them 24/7 like some nearby jurisdictions.” This is a terrible idea, you can see the public backlash in Lake Forest Park & Kenmore forums. It creates a false sense of security at the expense of residents & visitors. Residents are now taking residential streets to avoid these cameras. Residents report multiple tickets in single day. The camera’s trigger for 1 MPH over the speed limit, a cop wouldn’t pull you over at that speed.
Preventative measures are needed, better lighting, signage, speed bumps, devices that force cars to slow down, not take a picture after they sped through the zone.
We should always be very skeptical of surveys, how they are worded, and who is preparing them. Asking value-rated questions like: how important are the police; beautifying the city; building new sidewalks, supporting the environment, etc. will result in a guaranteed response. People will want all these things! The real question is what would their priorities be, based on how much the public is willing to *pay* out of their own pockets for these wonderful things? For example: how about a survey based on how much I am willing to pay out of my own pocket? If I were to have my taxes increased by $500/year, $1000/year, or even more, would my priorities be the same? I doubt it. I believe strongly that this group is doing their best to give the Mayor and City Council justification for the maximum tax levy lift. It allows them to keep on spending at the same unsustainable levels, and just say the public wanted it…look at the surveys. Would you keep upping your child’s allowance knowing they have no idea how to manage their spending? As a city, we have no fiscal discipline.
I know a 1.4% sample in any scientific study would be statistically unreliable and I flunked Statistics the first time I took it in college. If you managed to sample a 10% cross section of all the population in all the areas of Edmonds (4300 of 43000) you might have a study you could put some faith in as to POSSIBLY being scientifically significant. When you consider loaded questions like – what do you feel is the most important city service – results become even less meaningful in a small sample. “Dah, I don’t know, maybe the Cultural Manager’s annual Block Party.” Come on, people just aren’t gullible enough to believe this KEV study has any real meaning beyond some more not so clever PR originating from your Mayor’s office.
Hello Mackey- are you moving onwards or are you just dropping an article and then going silent? Please respond to the reader questions in this column. One of the strengths of My Edmonds News is that a conversation happens in the comment thread.
Thank you
Theresa,
I agree with you. There are issues that need deeper thought before we simply accept a significant levy lid target. For instance, I have a concern that recent surveys have asked our residents whether they place a high value on “walkable, bikeable” neighborhoods. Those are certainly good things. However, asking survey questions this way suggests respondents place equal value on “walkable” and “bikeable”, which will drive the city to place a high priority on funding both of them. In reality, our residents may want to focus more on better sidewalks during this time of severe budget constraints and less on creating new bike lanes (at least until our budget is solid again.) So, we all need to be cautious about making budget allocation decisions based on responses to surveys without fully understanding what the respondents actually want and are willing to pay for with tax increases.
Paid parking in downtown would be a disaster for our small businesses, That’s a horrible idea. We don’t need to copy Seattle. Part of being a welcoming community is not charging people to visit and support us.
Mike makes a valid observation here about paid parking downtown (or anywhere else in town for that matter). We need to accept that Edmonds businesses compete with other suburban centers, all of which provide abundant free parking. Do we really what to risk chasing away some portion of our customer base, urging them to shop and spend their money elsewhere?
Yes, Edmonds is unique and special and some motoring customers will accept the additional burden, but how many will not? How many, what percentage of our motoring customers will take their business elsewhere?
If proponents of paid parking are serious, they owe us some solid analysis on expected impacts on Edmonds businesses. Just saying “our survey says many people support paid parking,” that’s not analysis, and it’s way short of convincing.
Agreed. I would hope business owners would speak up. Doesn’t the city need business revenue, why drive customers away. They also need parking enforcement. That position, that actually generated some revenue, was cut.
I live downtown so I would not be negatively impacted if paid parking was implemented. However, I totally agree that all of the statements opposing it are very valid. Let’s scrap the idea of paid parking right now.
Seattle, Kirkland, Bellevue, many cities have implemented paid parking. It can be done in a sensible manner. The business community should be involved. If we keep killing off revenue streams, we’re right back to the property tax burden.
We should not implement any imprudent revenue stream. The city did scrap a prudent source of revenue when the traffic enforcement position was abolished. Revenue and expense were in balance for this position as well as parking being controlled.
Well, hard to argue with that. Don’t disagree.
The brutal truth is that if you don’t charge outsiders something for all your “specialness” and their use of it, it’s your residential property owners who will keep footing the bill for more and more of what that “specialness” really costs. It all adds up and you have current leadership that just can’t resist wasting your money. Personally, I decided to quit subsidizing restaurants selling $30 hamburgers and then adding a mandatory sir charge gratuity to the bill. That’s why I patronize the Boat House where they have Friday 20% Happy Hour and let you tip what you want. You just aren’t generally as “special” as you want the rest of the world to believe you are. Vote for Erika Barnett for city council!
As someone who now lives out of town, I can assure you all that I would happily pay you a non-resident annual park use fee of as much as $50 to walk on the beach, walk a trail in Yost Park or have my dog use the worlds most high class off leash dog park. I’d do that because it helps the environment that makes your town a special place to live and visit. If I park in public parking in Kingston to walk on the ferry, they charge me a mandatory $11.00 fee for 12 hours of parking- no option whether I’m there two hours or 12. The city gets their share of that take as well they should. Your parking is becoming a more and more rare commodity and you need to start charging for it before you ask your home owners to pay another dime in property tax. People who can afford to shop, eat and drink in Edmonds can afford to pay for parking. When I lived near FAC I let a guy park his classic corvette in my driveway during the art show and he insisted on giving me $30 in return and would not take no for an answer. You simply have to stop letting your elected officials just give away your town.
Please, no meters1 But I’d be happy to pay for an annual parking permit to display on the windshield. Out-of-towners could download and print permits, and the city would do well to locate some sort of municipal parking area, though goodness knows where.
But please pay attention: we are woefully low on disabled spots: there is not one on Main north of the fountain, though there is a useless one hidden on the corner of Dayton and sixth – too much up/downhill and too far for any seriously disabled person to manage.
Mackey,
There have been repeated requests for clarification regarding the results of the poll conducted by KEV, yet no response has been provided. Why is that? Are the questions too challenging to address, or do the answers not align with the narrative that KEV and the city wish to promote? Without transparency, your poll is little more than a drive-by or hit-and-run—attention-grabbing, perhaps, but ultimately lacking substance. While this approach may satisfy an uncritical city council, many community members can see through the smoke. To suggest that your Polis poll represents anything more than a collection of opinions is misleading. As stated, “Polis is an open-source, free to use, online conversation platform.” It may serve as a conversation starter—much like MEN—but it is not necessarily representative of the broader community.
As pointed out previously, it’s also worth noting, that KEV appears intent on dividing the community by age, as that was the only demographic data collected. Why not gather information on income, gender, homeownership versus renting, employment status, student or retired status, or even city of residence? There are countless other relevant demographics that were ignored. This selective approach further highlights the lack of objectivity in KEV’s position.
A few answers to the questions posed may help alleviate some concerns.
Mackey,
In the past I thought we had some good back-and-forth exchanges on MEN. You would ask a question, and I would answer it, often citing references to support my comments. I would hope you could now extend the same curtesy and answer some of the questions I’ve posed. They’re not difficult questions and the answers are readily available through analyzing your Polis results.
Thank you in advance.
Mackey,
Your silence suggests that you cannot justify your poll. Was it manipulated or fabricated to achieve a predetermined outcome? This undermines the credibility of KEV if these are the tactics being used to justify your position. Honesty and transparency, please.