Will you chip in to support our nonprofit newsroom with a donation today? Yes, I want to support My Edmonds News!
The Edmonds Economic Development Commission (EDC) was called back from its budget-imposed hiatus to consider and develop recommendations regarding two potential revenue-generating strategies: paid parking and imposition of a business and occupation (B&O) tax.
As part of its effort to address the city’s budget deficit, the Edmonds City Council recently agreed to place a $14.5 million levy lift request on the November ballot. This was done with the understanding that the council would — through a combination of further budget cuts and revenue generation strategies — come up with an additional $5 million in non-levy funds to close the budget hole.
The City Council has tasked the EDC with developing recommendations on two potential sources of new revenue – parking fees and a local B&O tax – to help meet the $5 million goal. These recommendations need to be presented no later than early November to provide time for the Council to consider and act on them before the budget is finalized in December.
In a two-hour meeting Wednesday evening, the EDC heard testimony from audience members and received background briefings on both issues from Community and Economic Development Director Todd Tatum.
Public comments predominantly focused on the potential negative impacts of both proposals on local businesses and called for careful, data-driven decision-making.
Dawn Malkowski expressed concerns about paid parking, suggesting a parking garage and warning against tight time limits that could inconvenience visitors. She said it would be a “nightmare” for those coming to town for dinner or a show if they were required to interrupt their activities to feed a parking meter.
Roger Pence recommended updating the city’s 2003 parking survey, noting changes since COVID, and suggested using license plate-scanning technology to understand parking usage.
“It’s very possible now, with modern technology, to take a license plate scanner and scan the plates of all the cars that are parked out in each block and tell very quickly, very easily, where they’re registered and what address they are registered to,” he explained. “That way we’d know how many are local and how many are visitors. I would like to have that kind of information if I were a decision maker trying to craft a parking scheme and rate structure that makes sense in today’s environment.”
Julie Johnson said she opposed the B&O tax, arguing it would hurt small businesses and ultimately burden consumers, especially those on fixed incomes.
“This tax doesn’t just stay with the business,” she said. “It’s spread around and passed down to us. It means higher prices on groceries, services, dining and everything, which would disproportionately impact people on fixed incomes, veterans and working families already on a tight budget. And if prices keep rising, many will just quit shopping in downtown Edmonds.”
Erika Barnett, owner of Salish Sea Brewing and a city council candidate, strongly criticized the B&O tax as unfair to small businesses, particularly those with thin margins recovering from the pandemic.
“I’m here tonight on behalf of my own business and dozens of other small businesses in Edmonds who are shocked and frustrated that the city is even considering a B&O tax,” she began. “A B&O tax is based on gross receipts, not profit. That means a small business making $2 million in gross receipts per year with 30 employees, operating in commercial real estate, paying insurance, and dealing with the rising cost of goods and utilities would pay the same as a consulting firm with almost no overhead. That’s fundamentally unfair and disproportionately harms the businesses in Edmonds – the mom-and-pop restaurants, salons, retailers and tap rooms that provide the jobs.
“Many of these are still recovering from the pandemic and are now facing inflation and other rising costs,” she added. “The absence of a B&O tax isn’t a missed opportunity: it’s a competitive advantage. Let’s use it to grow smart, sustainable revenue through business expansion and attraction, not erase it with a short-sighted tax that punishes our businesses unfairly. Let’s protect what makes Edmonds great and help to promote those businesses and help them thrive, versus penalizing them with a B&O tax.”
City Councilmember Vivian Olson also provided testimony on the issue of paid parking, acknowledging that she was initially opposed to it but after doing some personal research has “really come around on it,” and now sees it as an opportunity to “actually generate more revenue for businesses, as opposed to being a negative for your consumers.” She compiled her research findings into a written document that she presented to the commission for consideration.
Additional comments came from Mary Jane Goss, who challenged the commission to think creatively about revenue generation and consider broader economic opportunities, and from Windermere Real Estate’s Greg Hoff, who raised questions about the net economic impact of paid parking and B&O tax. Hoff also emphasized the need for a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis.
The remainder of the meeting was taken up with a background briefing by Todd Tatum laying out the scope and expectations, followed by a discussion among the commissioners.
“Today’s session is an overview,” Tatum said. “We won’t be making any decisions or recommendations today. We’ll look at the previous work on paid parking and get an understanding of what a B&O tax is and how it works. The goal is to get ourselves up to speed so that we can then organize ourselves and work towards some recommendations to city council.”
Part of the overview was looking at the 2003 parking study and the subsequent 2019 parking survey included in the online meeting packet
Tatum pointed out that these previous studies didn’t focus on paid parking but rather parking availability, including whether the city has enough parking capacity and if not, how does it create more and where should that be located.
“This is a great place to start, but again, it hasn’t been about paid parking but rather on parking management,” he said.
During the ensuing discussion, commission members touched on a range of topics, including the ratio of residents vs. non-residents using downtown parking, the availability of data on parking volume and occupancy, the need for revenue analysis to understand the potential impact of paid parking on the city budget, the importance of considering the broader impact of parking policies and the need for accurate data to inform decisions.
Moving on to the B&O tax, Tatum introduced the concept, explaining how it’s defined and the framework imposed by the state-mandated model ordinance. Developed by the Association of Washington Cites (AWC), the model ordinance addresses concerns about potential lack of uniformity when jurisdictions impose a B&O tax, since each jurisdiction makes its own rules and the tax is not administered or collected through the state Department of Revenue. The model ordinance sets limits on how the tax can be imposed along with other details. See the full document here.
Tatum went on to provide an overview of the potential revenue from a B&O tax, including the need for additional administration to ensure compliance and conduct auditing procedures.
The subsequent discussion touched on potential costs of implementation, the need for accurate data, the potential for disproportionate impact on various sectors and types of businesses, and the need for comprehensive analysis to understand the potential revenue and costs. Most important, the ECD discussed the need to make B&O tax compliance easy for businesses.
The meeting concluded with EDC Chair Matt Cox appointing four commissioners each to two committees to explore and develop recommendations on these two issues.
Tatum reiterated that recommendations need to be presented to council no later than early November to provide the necessary time for consideration and inclusion in the city’s mid-biennium budget modification, which must be finalized by the end of December.
Data-driven is the key word! And share that data to a public website. Great to see members of the Edmonds business community in attendance. Heart & soul of Edmonds.
We don’t need to spend money on camera’s to read license plates, that’s a privacy & security nightmare & another contract Edmonds can’t afford.
Add the Chamber of Commerce to the parking commission, deploy a couple of small pilots and show us the results (Proof of Concept). While you’re add it talk to the city of Kirkland & their Chamber of Commerce, pro & cons of paid parking?
B&O tax – why on gross revenues? Does the city have ability to modify, tax on profit?
The big question, what does the city plan to do with this money? For the second time in 5 months the Mayor has hired a Public Relations firm to market an election outcome, to the tune of ~$110,000. How many ‘buddies’ of our electeds benefit from increased costs?
Since this has been mentioned a couple of times now — the city hiring a PR firm to market the election — I checked with the city and that is not true. The city for several years has had a public information officer, recently hiring a new one to replace one who left, and that person handles general city communications. — Teresa Wippel, publisher.
Appreciate the fact check. Maybe we’re talking about different things. I’m talking about the Liz Loomis contract & now in last month’s financial reporting another PR firm was hired.
Referencing MEN articles:
Public Disclosure commission – Edmonds violation
https://myedmondsnews.com/2025/04/wa-public-disclosure-commission-issues-warning-to-city-of-edmonds-over-rfa-election-communication/
-$64,000 – Spent on Liz Loomis
https://myedmondsnews.com/2025/03/city-denies-accusations-of-misuse-of-public-funds-in-rfa-communications-contract/
The current PIO is on contract rather than being a payroll employee so perhaps that’s the confusion.
That could be it. I’ll stick to the $65,000 number until I flush the new spending out. Thanks Teresa!
I agr with R.Pence For once lol I think license readers is a
great idea TO CUT DOWN TIME walking.
Much of the ‘cost’ anxiety in this community (felt by businesses, property owners & renters) is brought to us by Keep Edmonds Activated. As many of us have called out the data they used to push a $6M levy to a $14.5M levy is flawed.
We need a leader to unite Keep Edmonds Vibrant, Edmonds Activated & a citizen led budget committee (recommended by the Mayor’s Blue Ribbon panel, see links below) to come up with a ‘balanced’ short & long term budget plan, using reliable data, published to the community.
Unite the clans please!
KEV Flawed Study – (Data in comments, showing flawed study, mis-representation of picture in article).
https://myedmondsnews.com/2025/06/reader-view-opinion-edmonds-is-at-a-crossroads-why-city-council-made-the-right-call/
– Mayor’s Blue Ribbon Panel – references need for a citizen budget committee
https://cdnsm5-hosted.civiclive.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server_16494932/File/Strategic%20Approach%20to%20Fiscal%20Resilence%20for%20the%20City%20of%20Edmonds%20Final.pdf
– Overview of Blue Ribbon Panel
https://www.edmondswa.gov/government/city_budget/blue_ribbon_panel
I am retired and not a small business owner, but I have always been against a B&O tax which is based on gross receipts rather than profits. It can be devastating to the small businesses which make our town special.
On the other hand, parking meters would would capture money from our out of town guests who are able to enjoy our town.
Regarding paid parking do NOT forget the numerous elderly who live in the downtown area and have family members and/or caregivers who must park and often stay for extended periods of time. Any paid plan must include exemption placards/permits for residents and their guests.
The shared aspect of all these proposals is the suggestion that another party will bear the expenses, leading to what would effectively be free funds for Edmonds, which is a rather questionable simplistic and short-sighted notion.
Not everyone can walk several blocks to get from their parking space to a restaurant. We need some way to inspire people who are more fit to park farther away and leave close-in spots for others. Parking meters are a great way to get people who are happy walking several blocks to keep their cars out of spaces in front of stores and restaurants.
Certainly, this approach will likely congest the nearby neighborhoods with vehicles, and I am confident that it will be poorly received by the local residents on those streets.
We deal with the farmers’ market, ICA events, and Anderson Center events all the time.
Given those circumstances, those streets would also be suitable for exploiting individuals through parking fees. My argument is that, regrettably, there are no complimentary options, and every choice carries repercussions, many of which will be unpredictable and may adversely affect nearby neighborhoods in the downtown area.
Providing free parking and lots of free or very low cost entertainment (parks and beaches) for the masses who live both in and outside of Edmonds and then bilking the property owners and utility rate payers for the maximum amount possible to finance all this has been the recipe for municipal economic disaster. Last year we had a $1000 water/sewer bill with no leaks, just watering plants and cleaning the deck and cement areas. The B & O tax is probably a real bad idea but some paid parking and public use fees for the good stuff are long over due in Edmonds. Just spent two days in Chelan which is now more like Ballard but they sure don’t give away parking and access to the water there. Couldn’t wait to return to Driftwood Key.
With any paid parking approach, I am concerned for the impact on those with handicap parking placards. Anyone with handicap placards/plates who has parked in a municipal lot “managed” by Diamond Parking knows that Diamond Parking does not honor the municipal exemption for those placards. So, that means folks with mobility issues who can find one of the few remaining handicap spots in downtown Edmonds to park would also have to pay for the parking. Less than a good solution. IF Edmonds goes to paid parking, then please mark all the downtown parking spots as handicap spots with no parking payment required so that folks with mobility issues can still access downtown businesses.
I’d like to know who will be enforce the parking downtown. The city laid off the Meter Maid! Add that salary back into the mix.
Alison, not to worry. Since the town will soon be flush with Levy lift funds, and your Mayor now has a city manager under him to order the Directors around, he can issue parking tickets as he makes his rounds doing all the much neglected Mayoral PR work. It sure is more fun to watch all this Edmonds dysfunction when you don’t have to help pay for it.
Any council person who votes for paid parking in downtown will be voted out of office is my prediction ( take note Vivian). Your political legacy will be destroyed for trying to put a few extra hundred thousand dollars into a budget deficit That’s +$10m, driving visitors and seniors away from enjoying our downtown and young families visiting to enjoy our parks on a budget is short sighted and simply intellectually lazy.
I’m tired of hearing the business community complain without offering their own ideas. Besides, I believe the city is approaching this all wrong.
The city should take the $5 million non-property tax revenue target and allocate it among several different ideas. For instance, paid parking, B&O tax, increased sales tax, and increased business license fees, among other ideas. If they don’t like it, let the business community rally and propose an alternative that reaches the $5 million target. Give them until the end of September when the new budget process starts. If they can’t come up with something better, then everyone knows what the situation will be.
In my opinion, giving this assignment to the EDC is a waste of time for several reasons. First, they don’t have skin in the game like the local business owners do. Second, the scope is too narrow, limiting it to two possibilities. Third, the EDC is being led by our new city administrator who has had years to address these issues before, so why should we expect results now?
Let’s make the business community part of the solution, not just another obstacle to overcome.
I’m all for smart economic growth, but I’m not interested in another B&O tax on top of already high fees. Before asking businesses and residents to pay more, the city needs a concrete development plan that doesn’t rely on squeezing us for revenue.
We need investment in tools that drive real growth—like digital kiosks to promote local shops, streamlined permitting (maybe with AI assistance), and targeted tourism campaigns—rather than simply raising rates. Let’s focus on creating new opportunities and efficiencies, not just finding new ways to tax our community.
I’m hosting Jon Scholes from the Downtown Seattle Association on August 19th from 4:30-5:30pm – and a few of his colleagues, for a small, invite only happy hour at Vertical Wine Collective in Downtown Edmonds, to explore how programs like the digital kiosks could be adapted to help cities like Edmonds—especially as we face a significant budget deficit and look for scalable, revenue-generating solutions. It would be a casual and focused conversation, where we’d get a chance to hear from Jon and his team and foster some ideas for future discussion. Reach out directly if interested in attending.
Thank you for covering the B&O tax discussion. While I understand the city’s need for new revenue, I worry that raising the B&O rate now will further strain our downtown businesses—many of whom are still rebounding from the last few years.
As a local entrepreneur, I’d encourage Edmonds to explore creative, low‑cost alternatives before adding another tax burden. For example, partnerships with Visit Bellevue (like their BellHop shuttle) or event‑driven pop‑ups can spark foot traffic, showcase our arts and dining scene, and expand our tax base organically.
By investing in targeted mobility solutions and collaborative promotions—rather than higher rates—we can support small businesses, bring more visitors downtown, and keep Edmonds both vibrant and financially healthy… park at the ECA and Bellhop shuttles around the downtown core…
The City of Mukilteo instituted parking meters in their small downtown by the Mukilteo ferry which do not take cash. The system requires payment via an app. There is a 3-hour limit, therefore discouraging walk-on ferry riders. Perhaps the City of Edmonds might consider allowing the use of licensed golf-carts for street use in the downtown and other similar type smaller vehicles for commercial hire or rent, especially on days where there are big events.
Shoreline has a city B&O tax; Lynnwood does not. I wonder if Shoreline’s model is one to look at. Here’s more info on that city’s website: https://www.shorelinewa.gov/government/departments/administrative-services/tax-licensing/business-occupation-tax
I’ve also been wondering about the city of Port Townsend. They are much smaller than Edmonds population wise but have a similar downtown core with lots of local businesses. They have a B&O tax: https://cityofpt.us/finance/page/business-occupation-tax Bainbridge has a B&O tax too: https://www.bainbridgewa.gov/1135/Business-Occupation-Tax
I run my own consulting firm and I’m not really that opposed to a B&O tax in our city. I think businesses benefit from all the services the city has, and it’s clear the City needs to raise more money somehow to fund all this stuff/has been underfunded for years… this seems like a pretty logical tool that other cities have benefited from.