Mayor, staff respond to questions on levy lift and budget proposals

Updated with additional details about the levy lid lift proposal.

Teresa Wippel and Larry Vogel of My Edmonds News sat down with Mayor Mike Rosen and some key staff Oct. 3 to get their responses to several recurring questions being raised by  readers regarding the proposed $14.5 million levy lift and the mayor’s recent mid-biennium budget proposal unveiled on Sept. 30. (See the full budget document here.)

“These are questions we keep seeing in emails and comments from our readers,” Wippel said. “We know that this is a complex set of issues, easy to confuse and misinterpret. Our mission today is to get the best information and put it out there for the community, the information they need to make a good decision on the upcoming levy lift vote based on their own values.”

The proposal before voters would be a permanent, multi-year levy. Under state law, municipalities are restricted to increasing property taxes by 1% annually and it requires a public vote to “lift” that levy amount. The ballot title states that if approved by voters, the levy lid lift would authorize the Edmonds City Council to increase the regular levy in 2026 up to $1.65 per $1,000 of assessed value. Exemptions would be given for qualifying seniors, low-income and disabled residents.

According to the Municipal Research and Services Center, a permanent multi-year levy lid lift allows municipalities — with voter approval — to collect more than the state-limited 1% in property taxes each year for up to six years. The lift must state the total tax rate for the first year only. Subsequent years must identify a maximum “limit factor,” which the total levy amount must not exceed — and for this measure the “limit factor” will be annual inflation as measured by the Consumer Price Index-Urban.

Once the levy expires, the levy amount does not revert to what it was prior to the lid lift. Instead, the maximum levy is used as the base to calculate all future 1% levy limitations.

Here are the questions and answers from the Oct. 3 interview:

Q: Can the city use volunteers to fill in due to budget cuts – i.e. for parks maintenance, trash pickup, etc.?

A: “Yes, the city does use volunteers for some tasks — examples include parks and stream maintenance, with thousands of volunteer hours reported,” Rosen responded. “In addition, we have 14 boards and commissions — all comprised of volunteers — who are helping advise us, and have convened special citizens panels to help with interviews and other tasks.”

He went to add that there are important limitations to using volunteers: Volunteers can’t be counted on for consistent, ongoing tasks; certain equipment and jobs are reserved for union workers; and coordination and oversight are necessary. Union rules restrict assigning certain union work to volunteers, and using volunteers does not fully replace the reliability and requirements of paid staff.

“As an example, while volunteers might be willing to come to a park for a Saturday morning to pull ivy, the weeds grow all the time,” he said. “We need reliable numbers and frequencies to do some of those things on a consistent basis.”

Beyond parks and citizen board and commissions, Rosen pointed to other citizen groups he has assembled to help provide information and advice:

• Blue Ribbon Panel
• Budget By Priorities Community Panel
• Board and Commission Task Force
• Finance Director Interview Panel
• Police Chief Expert Interview Panel
• Police Chief Community Interview Panel
• Judge Interview Panel
• Neighborhood Engagement Task Force
• Public Works Director Expert Interview Panel
• Planning Director Community Panel

“In the past, when I talk about the secret sauce of Edmonds being the people who live here and the volunteering they do, I don’t just mean those who do specific volunteering with, or on behalf of the city,” Rosen said. “I mean the real magic that happens every hour of every day when the people of Edmonds come together and make a very real impact on the lives of their neighbors and the quality of this city. Their work is the secret sauce that no city government could ever accomplish on its own.”

Q: The Blue Ribbon panel recommended formation of a citizen budget committee. Why hasn’t that been done?

A: Rosen said that the citizen budget committee recommended by the Blue Ribbon Panel has not been officially formed because the city has fulfilled the committee’s intended purpose — enhancing public oversight — through involving community task forces and advisory groups in critical areas including budgeting and hiring. He also pointed out that the city council is responsible for community oversight and that additional oversight is provided by regular state audits.

“When people talk about civilian or community member oversight, by definition that’s the job of the council,” he said. “That is their job, that is what they’re elected to do. In addition, we pay over $100,000 a year to be audited by the state. So I would argue that we’ve got a lot of eyes on this.”

Q: It has been said that the city is sitting on $72 million in various accounts that could be used to address the budget crisis. Could you explain what those funds are and what restrictions they have for use?

A: Rosen responded that the number is actually $79 million, but that almost all of it is restricted for specific uses such as utilities, capital projects, or vehicle and equipment replacement. He further said that only about $1.5 million is technically accessible, but that using it would mean delaying important replacements, putting the city at financial risk, and that city staff do not recommend using that $1.5 million amount. He stressed that there is no significant unrestricted money available from other city funds to address the budget crisis.

These restricted funds include enterprise funds (such as utilities), capital project funds (like real estate excise tax designated for parks and roads) and internal service funds (set aside for future equipment and vehicle replacement).

The mayor also said that by law and policy, the vast majority of this money is restricted for specific uses — it can’t legally or responsibly be shifted to cover general budget shortfalls or ongoing operating expenses. For example:

• Enterprise/utility funds can only be borrowed against under stringent legal conditions and must be repaid with interest.
• Internal service funds are earmarked for replacing essential city vehicles and equipment; using these would jeopardize future city operations.
• Capital funds are restricted to capital improvements and cannot be used for general services.

He reiterated that “only about $1.5 million is technically accessible but using it would create significant risks and force the city to delay critical replacements, so staff do not recommend it” for solving the city’s immediate budget crisis.”

“I think it’s important to keep in mind the differences between the general fund that covers things like salaries and the enterprise funds,” added Acting City Administrator Todd Tatum. “When you think of things the enterprise funds support — stormwater infrastructure underneath our streets, wastewater treatment, etc. — $79 million is not a huge amount. Just imagine tearing up streets and replacing everything underneath for thousands of feet. These are huge, huge projects with huge, huge costs, and they’re not as much in the public eye as general fund expenditures. These are multi-million-dollar projects, big infrastructure projects that those funds support.”

Q: What about funding some these big projects through debt – like selling bonds?

A: Rosen and staff responded that funding large projects through debt, such as selling bonds, is a common approach for cities and is specifically suited for major capital projects like infrastructure upgrades or new facilities.

“Edmonds is already carrying about $90 million in debt,” Rosen said, “but we anticipate using bonds again in the future for major needs such as wastewater treatment plant upgrades.”

He went on to clarify that bonding is not a solution for ongoing, day-to-day operating costs or to fill general budget gaps — it is designed for one-time, long-term investments. Bonds must be repaid over time, and increasing debt adds interest costs and financial obligations. In summary: selling bonds can help fund large projects but does not address structural operating budget problems or ongoing expenses.

Q: What about the $8 million in budget savings, of which $7 million is staffing? Several of our readers question that it doesn’t match up.

A: “The staffing cuts affected some 100 employees,” Rosen said. “It happened through a combination of furloughs, eliminating positions, unfunding positions and leaving positions open.”

Rosen referred to the full list that identify in detail a total savings of $7,728,522 in staff savings. That spreadsheet was provided to My Edmonds News and we’ve linked it here.

“Some of the discrepancy might come from people being paid in different cost centers,” added City Finance Director Richard Gould. “So sometimes it’ll be outside the general fund. If you say you had $8 million in cuts, sometimes only $7 [million] of it will be in the general fund, so it doesn’t match up exactly like you would think.”

Q: In 2023, the average salary for City of Edmonds employees was around $98,977 and the median was $106,667. This is approximately 32% higher than the national average for city government employees, and 31% higher than the average WA state employee. Why is Edmonds’ pay scale so high?

A: Rosen referred to a salary study the city conducted in 2021 to determine why Edmonds was losing staff and having difficulty hiring. The study revealed that across the board, Edmonds that was not being externally competitive.

“My personal feeling about salaries is you need to be internally equitable and externally competitive,” Rosen said. “And there is also the reality of geography. This area is more expensive than most others in the country.”

He went on cite as an example Edmonds’ efforts to hire a stormwater engineer, pointing out that the field “isn’t exactly sexy” and isn’t as attractive as many other career choices. This has limited the pool of potential applicants and put the city in competition with other agencies for the few available qualified applicants. He also cited King County’s recent offer of a $40,000 “lateral” signing bonus for officers working for other agencies.

In summary, Edmonds’ salaries are higher than those in many neighboring cities for several reasons:

• A city-commissioned salary study found Edmonds was not externally competitive and needed to raise pay to attract and retain qualified staff.
• Edmonds is part of the higher-cost Seattle metro area, so staff salaries must reflect local living and housing costs.
• There’s strong competition for skilled workers: staff with experience are often recruited (“poached”) by other cities or the private sector, who may offer higher salaries or bonuses.
• The city needed to ensure internal pay fairness (“equity”) across job levels, not just boost entry-level pay.

Following up on this question, Edmonds Finance Department staff member Keisha Post explained that comparing Edmonds to other cities is challenging because the results can vary greatly depending on which metrics are used. She pointed out that even when different approaches are used to “normalize” for differences, Edmonds often comes out as more efficient, sometimes even stronger when compared to other municipalities.

She emphasized that there’s no perfect “apples to apples” comparison, since every city has different reporting procedures, unique characteristics (for example, population and per- capita income) and needs. She also noted that the analysis was done conservatively, and that while such comparisons can be informative, they have limits and should be interpreted cautiously.

“The purpose of comparing is to inform and show general indicators, not to claim precision,” she added.

Q: Why is Edmonds’ police budget about a million dollars higher than comparable cities with similar populations?

A: Rosen responded that the Edmonds Police Department covers a wide range of functions. Other jurisdictions might spread these functions over other departments, so it’s “hard to make an apples-to-apples comparison,” he said. Rosen noted specifically that:

• Edmonds’ police budget covers more than just police officers — it also includes positions like a domestic violence advocate, social worker and emergency manager, all housed within the police department.
• Some costs, such as technology upgrades (body cameras, staff to process public records requests), add to the budget.
• Other cities may report their police budgets over multi-year periods or distribute costs differently among departments, making direct comparisons difficult.
• When budgets are normalized for differences in reporting and responsibilities, Edmonds’ police spending is very similar to that of other comparable cities.

“While Edmonds’ police budget may seem higher at first, much of the difference is due to broader responsibilities and accounting differences, not unnecessary spending,” Rosen added.

Q: What do you say to low-income and senior residents — especially those just above the threshold for property tax exemptions — who say they sincerely cannot afford higher taxes and are concerned about being priced out.

“I am very sympathetic, especially for those who are retired, on fixed incomes, or just above the threshold for exemption programs,” Rosen emphasized. “Of course, we would prefer not to be asking for more money but ultimately deciding whether to support the levy is an individual choice. I strongly believe that the city’s responsibility is to present the facts and pursue a sustainable budget for the future.”