Will you chip in to support our nonprofit newsroom with a donation today? Yes, I want to support My Edmonds News!
I’m the campaign manager of Keep Edmonds Affordable , the PAC opposing the property tax levy. I have concerns about cost structure. The retired Chief of Police told me police agencies from all over the state would call him and ask how he got so much done with the budget he had. They would ask to visit and learn from Edmonds. During budget season, Councilmember Buckshnis would grill him about a $500 item. He said “we scrimped.” God bless him, because that’s the right way to spend taxpayer dollars. A retired Snohomish County Director said at a recent event: “We had to get 25 cents of value from every dime we spent.” She knows government doesn’t get to write blank checks.
We have a new mayor. Here’s my perspective on Edmonds today. His plan is to increase spending for basic services (general fund) by 40% in 2026. And then grow it every year after that. (The math: normalize the 2025 budget by subtracting the $12M fire service contract, increase it by this $14.5M levy, increase it by the assumed $5M in new non-property tax revenue. Compare that 2026 budget to the normalized 2025 budget.) I believe a better approach to growing the size of the government is incremental growth that is tied to workload growth, and don’t increase spending until increased revenues have materialized.
I did cost structure analysis when in financial planning and snalysis for the biggest private utility in the dtate. I used fund accounting when at a public university, also in the financial planning department. I know this city has money, and the funds it’s booked in.
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; change the cost structure of government. An immediate example: 750,000 tourists are expected in our area for the FIFA World Cup in 2026. Where’s the City’s plan to get their share of tourist dollars?
We have an affordability crisis in our region. My neighbors’ concern is that the price of gas is up, groceries are way up, tariffs are making the stuff they buy at Target more expensive, and we’re getting squeezed. We’re worried. The April election for fire district annexation already doubled the fire/EMS taxes; we’ll get that on our January tax bills.
“Edmonds” is not new sidewalks, regular asphalt repaving and an HVAC system in the historical school building we use as a Rec center. Edmonds is the people — the working families in apartments around Chase Lake Elementary and Firdale Village, the seniors in Maplewood and Seaview who greet every dog by name on their morning walk, the tech workers who could live anywhere in the world and work remotely but choose Edmonds, the cafe servers on Hwy 99, the family owned business that is the first taproom in Westgate, the clerks at our grocers, and the 250 volunteers at the Edmonds Waterfront Center (me included).
Their ability to continue to live and work in Edmonds is what’s on the line in this election.
The Vote No campaign is supported by a former mayor, a former chief of police, current and former city council members, this year’s citizen of the year, last year’s citizen of the year, the president of the Edmonds Civic Roundtable, and many regular people. We may not have received a $10,000 campaign donation from one of the city’s labor unions – but we’re not “nobody.” Contemplate that list of supporters. Know that this levy affects everyone. And then vote no on Prop 1 because we Keep Edmonds Affordable.
Theresa Hollis lives in Edmonds.
Well said, Theresa! Thank you.
I agree with Theresa. We all want to keep the small town feel. It won’t be accomplished by this levy. All spending needs to be accounted for. Over the years, my husband and I have contacted various city employees about real problems in our area of Perrinville where we live, including a broken and cracked curb area in front of our home that was very dangerous to anyone walking there. Last year it was finally repaired and the men who came out to evaluate it were unbelievably unprofessional and rude. Another example is that I phoned someone about speeders right on our small street. A city employee promised me that he’d mail letters to all residents on our street to slow down and obey the law. It was never done. I asked for speed bumps and was told that if we got a few, everyone else would have to get them. We’ll, Olympic View Drive near downtown got several. He was rude and unprofessional and did not even send out those promised letters. There are several more incidents. During the terrible snowstorm a few years ago, no one in my neighborhood could get out onto the streets to go to work. The snow and ice were phenomenal. Why did i have to call??? These people make around 100K to do basically nothing necessary. Vote NO.
Theresa and her husband have walked the walk and talked the talk. They’ve done hundreds of hours campaigning. I believe that their research and future predictions are accurate. We should vote know and force the city administration to live within the reasonable budget.
I am a retiree on a fixed income and part-time substitute teacher. I did the math and my property taxes would be three thousand dollars A YEAR MORE if Prop1 passes. Please vote a resounding NO!
My gosh JaneAnne that’s horrible! Thanks for speaking up.
Regardless of the particular size of the increase that we could be billed- this tax levy affects everyone. Renters, homeowners, small businesses (and their loyal customers) can vote No on their ballot- and come to the new town hall about City Finances at the public library at Noon on Oct 21 to learn exactly where the City books their extra money. As City Council person Will Chen famously said- The City Has Money.
Certainly more than the less than candid $0.53/day the Yes campaign keeps trotting out.
Thank you Theresa! Well explained.
There was an article in the December 9, 2024, My Edmonds News entitled “Edmonds Police Officers Association: We’ll take more cuts to maintain our department”. In that article, the association president, Will Morris, was quoted saying “We don’t feel great about our department’s spending & want to be the ones to step up & say we should cut more”. Further, he states that there are currently 54 officer positions, including chief, assistant chiefs and three commanders, plus 15 support staff. He believes (at that time) that the department could cut 10-15 positions & still provide services at their current level, with some duty changes. Finally, in this article, Mr. Morris states that they were told at one point in time that there was plenty of money in the budget so the buying began. The department purchased bicycles for a bicycle unit rarely used & dive equipment with no member of the force being dive certified. Interesting how in December 2024, the EPOA was admittedly saying that their spending was flawed & that they could cut staff & still provide the same level of service. Yet the Prop 1 folks are threatening cuts in staff & service if it doesn’t pass. And of course, the EPOA is supporting Prop 1. Imagine what they can do with $7 million dollars allotted to them. Mind blowing.
I live Edmonds but feel it is becoming elitist and catering to the new residents with high paying jobs who might be able to easily afford much higher taxes at the expense of long time residents who have helped make Edmonds so great. Will making Edmonds “Yuppie Town” be what you want? I love the mix of old and new, low, middle and upper income people but fear we may be driving out low and middle income people for the sake of yuppifying our town. Please vote NO and ask the city to resubmit a levy lift that protects all citizens.
Holy Smokes Batman, did the city’s labor unions really donate $10,000 to the campaign? Interesting.
Thank you for your willingness and energy to take this on, Theresa. You represent a large portion of Edmonds residents who are feeling baffled, betrayed, and bullied by the actions of our city government.
There are a lot of residents (myself included) who fall between the $76k tax exemption level and the “What’s another two or three thousand dollars in taxes” affluent.
Of course we love Edmonds. My husband and I purchased our first home in 1981. We raised our son here. Now, he visits from Brooklyn with our grandchildren. They love to come back to their dad’s hometown.
After decades, we don’t want to be forced out by the city’s fiscal mismanagement and monied Johnny-come-latelies.
There has been a lack of transparency and openess to explore feasible options in this escalating $14.5M ask. However, most distressing is the lack of compassion for those being threatened with “Pay up or get out.”
Those being told they don’t love Edmonds enough.
Instead of seeking affordable compromise, Our mayor has used his bully pulpit to cause division based on income. Middle income residents are feeling coerced.
Thank you, Theresa, and to everyone voting NO to slow this proposition down. Let’s Keep Edmonds Affordable for those who’ve invested their lives (not just money) toward making it ‘An Edmonds Kind of Day’ for everyone.
I’m with Teresa….. Don’t forget that first the mayor suggested a $6 million dollar bond I think it was, now it is $14 million or so…. (don’t remember the exact numbers or care to spend more of my time searching for them – but it happened). No one seems to want to mention why. I’m concerned for myself and all the people like me. 30 year resident.
I simply cannot afford what it would cost. We are definitely voting NO and praying the majority does as well.
We are a NO on this levy. But we are finding our neighbors are unaware of how much this is going to raise their taxes. (Ours will be considerable and unaffordable). And the unretired group around us seem to not know of the previous mismanagement we have lived with and are buying into the threats made by the city. We need to get the word out everywhere what is going on. More signs. More flyers. Thank you for all your work. Keep Edmonds affordable.
We are a No as well on the levy. Is there a way to see where our current tax dollars are going, dollar for dollar?
Theresa has shown extraordinary empathy for financially challenged seniors and has worked hundreds of hours every year to help them file for tax exemptions. She has no self-serving goal to expand her career or make millions in development like the YES pro-development leaders do. She has worked hard to provide objective data and analysis to help the Mayor and Council understand what good governance is and how their actions (and inactions) have cumulatively resulted in taking their eyes off the ball and engaging in strategies that put taxpayers LAST. She always offers evidence based, factual analysis combined with a plan to improve things going forward. She knows that ‘affordability’ is not in the Mayor’s, nor 6 of the 7 Council members’ vocabulary. The Council has stonewalled professional accounting managers like Teresa and others who have offered alternatives and a path to good governance and affordability. The City was found guilty of violating State election laws in their advocacy of the RFA annexation. They face another State case for illegally using government resources to advocate for the $14.5M tax levy. When you see all the failed governance combined with disregard for the State election laws’ fairness and equity guidelines, you realize why the Trust crisis is even bigger than the Budget crisis. They don’t deserve a blank check. Keep Edmonds Affordable. https://www.keepedmondsaffordable.com/
Can’t want for all these No voters to come back and bitch about how bad the city is after they win the No vote. How once the city continues to cut services and police. Given they show zero interest in solving the budget shortage. Enjoy your moment, the bill always comes due
Don — if the levy doesn’t pass, you should come down to City Hall and have the mayor and council show you the real numbers. You might find that a smaller, targeted levy could still protect essential services and give residents a year of breathing room without overtaxing them.
For many of us voting No, it’s not about ignoring the budget challenge — it’s about demanding fiscal accountability before writing another $90 million check. Edmonds needs sustainable reform, not scare tactics.
Lee, I get a kick out of all your detractors who cry and moan that running a city is totally different from running a small business and shouldn’t be compared. Logically speaking a city should be much easier to run than a small business, because a city doesn’t have make a profit, it just has to break even. In a small business, just breaking even, means closing the door and starting over with a better plan. The mayor and his vote yes Pals first said 6M was the break even point, then they said 19+M was the break even point and now it’s 14.5M for multiple years. If that doesn’t tell you, you are being stroked, I don’t know what would. It’s sure more fun to visit a resort town with a long history of poor use of available public funds than it was to live there and underwrite all the wasted public spending year after year.
Hi Don,
Did you attend any of the meetings to learn about the monies and where they have gone/go?
Jim’s ability to follow every city council meeting , every single policy, and the budgets!- Bill has done a PHENOMENAL job and he has offered his time to all of us in Edmonds- to no avail by the city council members! Seems the mayor and many council members just ignore him. So disrespectful!
Hi Don, when we win on Tuesday night with a No majority, there is no plan by the many campaign supporters to complain about the lack of services. We are supporting the Alternative budget for 2026 that transfers the needed $6M back to the general fund. (That money was transferred From the general fund in prior years, but never spent). Did you read the resident satisfaction survey report ? Things are actually going fine for those living here. It’s only an act happening down at City Hall about how dire the financial story is. And the experienced professionals like the City Engineer and City Clerk have resigned and taken jobs at what they think are better run Cities. This city gov’t gave a 22% raise to the police support union, and a 12% raise to the police union in 2023, and then followed that up with CPI-based raises every year after that. They spent $18M in savings in the 2022-2024 period. Please read the budget reports. Pay attention to facts. This city blew a wad of cash on the police department, and now they are expecting every property owner to pay not the 1% increase allowed by law, but a 130% increase in the city’s property tax. You can find those union contracts for 2023 via a Google search. (I am the ‘No’ campaign mgr)
The Seattle Times has published an Op-Ed that expresses the sober truth about this situation:
‘Far beyond historical spending patterns, Prop. 1 would render Edmonds one of the highest property tax jurisdictions in Snohomish County virtually overnight.,,This is not affordable. Rising property valuation and inflation outpace earnings for all but the wealthiest Edmonds residents.’
https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/prop-1-levy-lift-will-make-edmonds-unaffordable/
Give it a good read, then read it again.
The city is playing a high-stakes game of chicken with its own residents—pushing a $14.5 million permanent levy lid lift while knowing full well it has a fallback plan if the measure fails. The city is betting that voters will blink first, fearing cuts to essential services. But behind the scenes, they’ve already mapped out a contingency—one that mirrors the very plan proposed by those opposing the levy.
That’s the quiet part they won’t say out loud. The city has options. They know it. Their financial staff knows it. And yet, they continue to frame this levy as the only path forward. It’s a calculated move: present the most extreme version of the ask, stir public anxiety, and hope urgency overrides scrutiny.
But I hope our voters aren’t blind. Many have done their homework and recognize the bluff. The real issue isn’t just the size of the levy—it’s the lack of transparency and the manipulation of public trust. When city leadership pushes a narrative that ignores viable alternatives, it’s not governance—it’s gamesmanship. The stakes aren’t political points—they’re the savings of Edmonds seniors, the reduction of discretionary income for young families, the stability of renters or those on fixed incomes, the viability of small businesses, and the erosion of trust in local government.
Let’s fix what’s really broken before we ask for more money.
A few predictions:
1) Regardless of the outcome of the levy ballot measure, the City Council will likely vote to approve an incremental sales tax increase to benefit select nonprofit art organizations instead of improving city streets and sidewalks with the tax increase.
2) If the levy ballot measure fails, the city will pivot to many of the same budget alternatives already outlined by those opposing the measure—options that preserve essential services and keep community assets like the Frances Anderson Center and Yost Pool open and operational.
3) If the levy ballot measure passes, the city will continue with business as usual without the structural changes or fiscal discipline needed to prevent this same crisis from recurring. It will cost us all a lot more than necessary.
Jim:
I believe you’ll agree that the city council will take much more rational actions, as well as doing a much better job of keeping the mayor in check, if candidates Barnett and Krull are elected.
Absolutely, Ron. Both Glenda and Erika are much more aligned with good governance (fiscal discipline, accountability, common sense, transparency, performance metrics, and putting taxpayer first) – than either the Mayor or 5 of 7 council members. If they win, they will help usher in the good governance reform that is needed, but I believe citizens have to make their demands known after the tax levy is defeated – and provide a ‘MUST DO’ lit of reforms that must be accepted and delivered by the Council before any other tax levies are considered. Without having such a quid-pro-quo following the tax levy defeat, the Mayor and Council will simply continue on with their fear mongering and selective budget cuts that affect the most high visibility, and popular services of park maintenance, FrancesAndersonCenter, Yost pool, splash zone, etc. They must be forced to prioritize and fund the essentials, and truly cut back the bloated staff and salaries that have accumulated since the $6M ARPA/pandemic Fed gov’t funding. They must be forced to accept the BlueRibbonPanel recommendations, and form a permanent citizens’ financial oversight committee that has power to prioritize budget alternatives and financial due diligence that will assure good governance reform and make Edmonds more affordable for residents. https://www.keepedmondsaffordable.com/stay-informed
I see that Citizens of Edmonds for Good Governance has donated $500 to the Keep Edmonds Affordable campaign, per reports submitted to the PDC. https://apollo.pdc.wa.gov/public/registrations/campaign-finance-report/110324970
According to the PDC website, however, CEGG was a single-election committee, for the 2021 election. https://pdc.wa.gov/political-disclosure-reporting-data/browse-search-data/committees/co-2021-29741
Can anyone shed any light on this? Is CEGG back in business? (apologies if links don’t work; PDC site can be clunky, and I understand some state govt offices have had tech issues the last couple days and may not be updating as frequently as they should)
The PDC shows donations in late October. Probably those pesky glitches. That CEGG looks like it hasn’t been updated since 2021. That is odd.
Hi Kim, your question is valid. Although my Prop 1 opposition campaign was sent a donation, I expect that PAC’s officers to reply to your question. I’ve never talked to them. I just opened the mail that contained their donation.