Will you chip in to support our nonprofit newsroom with a donation today? Yes, I want to support My Edmonds News!
I admit my headline is too long. But some only read the headline, get the message, and move on to another favorite column. My experience is as a senior manager in the financial planning and analysis department at US West Communications and a volunteer in our community. I have a degree in math from Gonzaga and numbers are my second language.
Here is what I did in this election season to advocate for the moderate-income seniors of Edmonds. I started in February at NW Civic Circle’s forum on the Regional Fire Authority annexation. Is that election outcome relevant to seniors with the exemption? You bet it is. Here’s how to connect the dots. I announced at that February forum that the seniors would pay huge new taxes to the fire authority. I advised that a better strategy was to keep fire services under contract and for the City to have a new levy, which they use to pay a fire contract and also exempt the moderate-income seniors from that new levy. That was the first time that the elected officials in Edmonds knew it was possible to raise taxes but also make those with the senior/disabled exemption not pay a dime in new taxes. I lost that battle.
When the fire district starts taxing Edmonds property owners for the first time in January, the seniors with the exemption will pay that new tax. The amount they’ll pay depends on whether their exemption is at level A, B or C. (I’m dragging you through the math.) And it’s a lot of money. Here’s the data for three homeowners who are in areas previously annexed that received the exemption starting in 2024. Focus on the top row – that senior has less than $75,000 in net disposable income and even with the exemption is paying $887 for fire taxes. They got zero discount in fire taxes in the first year. Where will the money for the mortgage, utilities, groceries and health care come from as cost of living climbs?
| Senior Exemption Level | Address | Reduction in assessed value | New taxes owed to RFA | Old taxes owed to RFA | Reduction of RFA Taxes in Year 1 | % cut in RFA taxes because of exemption |
| Level C | 8xxx 220th St. S.W,
Edmonds (note 1) |
0 | 887 | 887 | 0 | 0% |
| Level B | 2xxxx 64th Ave. W.,
Mountlake Terrace |
70,000 | 710 | 791 | 81 | 10% |
| Level A | 2xxxx 88th Ave. W.,
Edmonds |
488,100 | 377 | 943 | 566 | 60% |
Why should this levy be defeated in November? We have an affordability crisis in our region, and this levy pours fuel on that fire. Gas prices are up, groceries are way up, tariffs are pushing merchandise prices up, and we’re getting squeezed. In the 25 years I have lived in Edmonds I cannot identify a worse time for the city to increase taxes. Not property taxes, not sales taxes, not a new B&O tax – nothing. A better approach – grow the economy and change the cost structure of government.
The Laffer principle in macro economics describes the tipping point at which higher taxes/tariffs cause the economy to shrink. I talk to small businessowners while campaigning and their experience matches that econ principle. I fear Edmonds is going to suppress the small business segment of our economy. Small businessowners are advocating for themselves now. And I’m advocating for seniors who don’t qualify for the exemption. They need the help of all voters on this one. Please vote no on Prop 1.
Theresa Hollis lives in Edmonds.
Theresa, thank you so much for your work on behalf of our most vulnerable seniors, and for explaining that paying directly through property tax for fire and emergency services being beginning in 2026 will hit many of that population hard.
Our city is in a financial rough patch right now. Is the best way to solve it with a permanent huge tax increase? Thereby making Edmonds less affordable for many years to come? I don’t think so.
My own immediate neighbors represent many income levels and I don’t want any of them priced out of their homes. I agree: vote no.
I am a strong opponent to this levy lid lift. I agree with Theresa’s comment “A better approach – grow the economy and change the cost structure of government”. Changing the cost structure of government needs to be a high priority. Yes we need a strong police force, But a 61% increase in Police expenses is unwarranted. And that’s just one example. Hopefully we will have two new council members in November that will help get our city more properly managed.
As Theresa’s chart shows, the tax relief for certain seniors is beneficial but it is no solution. And taxpayers need to realize that the more relief given to some results in more taxes to the reamainder – the taxing authorities still receive the total amount of thier assessment. Please vote NO.
Need to add that the 61% increase in Police expenses is for the four years between 2021 and 2025.
Theresa is it appropriate for you to be disclosing actual addresses in your comments. While taxes may be public records, they do not need to be in the newspaper. Your decision to do this shows a significant lack of judgment.
I wish you’d apply the same fine-tooth analysis to City Hall.
Mr. Oberlatz – your evaluation of a ‘significant lack of judgement’ is your opinion. And I acknowledge your right to have your opinion published. Here’s my perspective – the ability to do fact checking is important. I have given the readers the ability to do their own fact checking by publishing street addresses from public records. (then the editor removed them) There’s plenty of inaccuracies being published in this online newspaper about this topic. The ‘other side’ had their column published with the wrong metric of how many Edmonds seniors receive this exemption, and the qualifying dollar amount. (no fact checking by the editor) I’ve given up on the ‘other side’ ever grasping the notion of net disposable income instead of net income. Are they just grabbing a sound bite and then moving on to penning another column? Do readers even know that this program’s qualifying dollars were increased significantly in our tri-county area in 2024 so that many more individuals qualify? Did I have a ‘significant lack of judgement’ when I gathered up 9 other like minded Edmonds volunteers and started a workshop at the senior center to make it easier for homeowners to apply? Did I have a ‘significant lack of judgement’ when I expanded this program to the Monroe senior center this year? I cordially suggest YOU find a way to volunteer
Theresa has provided income-challenged seniors countless volunteer hours and professional guidance in helping them file for the tax breaks they deserve. It’s sad to see our seniors abandoned and to have Theresa’s good work negated by the Mayor and City Council’s promotion of the new RFA annexation tax, followed by an unjustified massive tax levy lift. The Mayor and Council are supposed to put taxpayers first and supposed to follow ‘good-governance’ principles. They have failed on both counts (except for CM Michelle Dotsch) and have ignored financial discipline, due diligence, common sense, and transparency – all of which are the hallmarks of good governance. Taxpayers have lost all trust in the City leaders. The Mayor has used taxpayer-funded 4-pg/4-color expensive mailers to ‘spin’ the tax levy as being needed to fund police and parks – both of which have been beneficiaries of excessive spending since 2021. Staff wages up by 40% in 4 years and police up by 61%. The Mayor claims to have cut staff expanses by $7M to balance the budget – but the City’s own budget documents show that employee expenses have actually decreased by only $1.5M between 2024 and 2025. Mr. Mayor – it’s time you told the truth, stop making excuses for overspending, stop making Edmonds unaffordable, and stop breaking State election laws by advocating for the tax levy. https://www.keepedmondsaffordable.com/
I wondered about disclosing what appears to be actual addresses, too. Perhaps MEN can retract those?
I’ve taken away some of the numbers to address concerns.
The amount seniors will pay for the RFA will be devastating to many, many budgets. As Theresa’s chart shows: “that senior has less than $75,000 in net disposable income and even with the exemption is paying $887 for fire taxes.”
Adding more permanent taxes associated with Prop 1 would truly make Edmonds unaffordable for years to come.
Keep Edmonds Afforable!
Thank you Theresa. I would like to add that it is not only seniors who will be hit hard by this Levy Lid Lift.
Many renters will also be significantly impacted because the tax upon the property will be reflected in their rent. The disabled who aren’t “disabled enough” for tax relief will be impacted. Those who were barely able to purchase their home based on the expected costs at time of the purchase will all be significantly hurt.
Further, most of the rest of us will see a need to significantly change our spending habits. We’ll have less money for necessities such as food, gas, utilities, clothing etc. not to mention discretionary spending such as dining out, movies etc. Charlie Harger on Komo Radio addressed the topic of out of control taxes at the State level “Record tax revenue can’t keep up with Olympia’s spending addiction”(9/25/2025). The Laffler principle is real.
Thank you Theresa, for clarification since comments provided at the ECR event on October 6th was that it was easy to qualify?!? It’s not!
Citizens should thank Ms. Hollis for starting this program and the Edmonds Rotary Club for funding supplies for her. Everything needs copying and it is a very detailed process that takes about an hour or more. All source data (revenue data, capital gains, trusts, property statements, medical expenses, etc.) need to be analyzed and BTW the group that helps Hollis all have numbers as a second language. The stories we hear would make everyone vote no on this $14.5 levy. It is not justifiable and the threats of closures and going broke will change with new combination of Council and poison pill Resolution 1570 can be rescinded.
So, please, do not fall for these bullying tactics and vote no.
The Explanatory Statement (page 52) provided by the City reads like seniors and disabled homeowners qualify easily. Instructions to see if you qualify for the property exemption can be found in sections RCW 84.36.379 through 84.36.389 and you can sign up with Ms. Hollis if you think you qualify.
I know of many seniors that rent; and yes, landlords will be hit hard with this large levy amount if passed, so plan on a seven to ten percent rent increase yearly.
Thank you Theresa for all you do to help Edmonds seniors and disabled! We’re seniors on a fixed income that’s just barely above the limit for the property tax exemption — so we don’t qualify. And most seniors in Edmonds don’t either, since the limit is based on gross income with hardly any deductions. On top of that, the new RFA tax is coming in January 2026 — a totally new tax that everyone will have to pay. So even if we did qualify for the senior exemption, we’d still be paying around $900 a year for the RFA alone. Now Prop 1 wants to add another $800 to $1,000 a year in taxes. Between the RFA and Prop 1, that’s a huge new burden for those of us living on fixed incomes. What are we supposed to do — move? We can’t just make more income. Prop 1 supporters keep saying seniors and disabled “may” qualify for exemptions, but conveniently never mention that most won’t. They keep pushing that message, ignoring reality. Everyone’s already feeling squeezed — gas, groceries, utilities, insurance, HOA fees, all going up. Now RFA and Prop 1? That’s just too much, too soon, and too painful. Please vote NO on Prop 1 and stand up for Edmonds seniors, renters, homeowners, and local businesses. And let’s get two new council members.
Well said, Charlie. I’ve come to suspect there are some who want a certain portion of the population to leave so they can have their vision for Edmonds, which clearly doesn’t include long term, middle income residents, or others who don’t make enough money in their eyes. I’m still flabbergasted by a certain Port Commission candidate who is incapable and/or unwilling to understand how “someone who lives in a million dollar home” might have trouble paying the added tax. I didn’t purchase a million dollar home 25 years ago! And I don’t qualify for the tax exemption, either, which is income at or less than $75K. Add up all the other increases mentioned and it’s just too much! We need to protect the diversity and character of Edmonds, and protect our precious environment from those who don’t care or understand the huge responsibility we have here. Please, vote No on Prop 1!
It never ceases to amaze me what people will believe. For example, the idea that approving and implementing a massive tax hike is going to do anything to promote more affordable housing and more efficient city money management. This huge tax hike is just a re-distribution of wealth from those who can afford the tax to cover the portion that can’t come from people who can’t afford the tax hike. Landlords are going to pass the tax hike on to their tenants as much as possible. Tenants who can’t afford the rent hike will move elsewhere. People like me who are tired of financially supporting city government run by opportunistic over development oriented Mayor “Saviors” and part-time well meaning but mostly unqualified rubber stamper CM.s will just leave. Teresa’s tax program is a great service for helping those who need the Prop. tax exemption but that program does by design place the cost of those exemptions on those Prop. taxpayers who do have the income resources to keep paying. This Mayor needing to create an Administrator/Assistant position tells you he either doesn’t know what he is doing or he wants to have someone else take the heat. Addresses and home values are public records and have nothing to do with good or bad judgement as far as anyone being able to know them.
Theresa is due acolades for her work, effort and time to inform the community of the issues and concerns of the RFA and Prop 1, along with her dedication to those who want to apply for the senior exemption. She has done so without injecting politics or scare tactics. To those who cannot accept that she is an accomplished professional with the acumen to analyze the numbers reported by the opposition, by throwing mud to try to discredit her work, I say, do not doubt Theresa’s integrity and examine your own.