Will you chip in to support our nonprofit newsroom with a donation today? Yes, I want to support My Edmonds News!
The City of Edmonds, on the heels of the largest tax increase in Washington State History, is making repeated decisions that increase costs and negatively impact Edmonds businesses.
- Move to Fire District 1: The majority of the council and city staff spent city dollars to promote a vote by the public to adopt this move that increases businesses property taxes. The Public Disclosure Commission issued a warning after ruling that the city spent city dollars to promote the vote.
- Edmonds City Council voted to install a bike lane down Main Street resulting in removing half of the available parking. (Parking is the lifeblood to businesses)
- Edmonds City Council is evaluating charging for the parking that will remain in Edmonds.
- Edmonds City Council increased sales tax by .1%, making every purchase more expensive. Edmonds is now tied four ways for the highest city sales tax in Washington state.
- Edmonds City Council has temporarily tabled a second .1% sales tax increase that would make every purchase in Edmonds more expensive. This vote will return to the council agenda after the elections. If this .1% increase was voted in today, it would make Edmonds the single highest sales tax of any city in Washington state.
- Edmonds City Council is conducting a workshop designed to assist in adopting a business and occupation tax. This tax is only based on sales, is only paid by the business and not the consumer, and is the most regressive tax against businesses that exists. Businesses will pass this on to consumers, making every purchase in Edmonds more expensive.
This is an amazing list in less than a year. All of these moves negatively affect businesses existing in Edmonds and works against new business’ evaluation of locating in Edmonds. Businesses will undoubtedly pass these costs to Edmonds consumers making every purchase in Edmonds more expensive.
These decisions by the Edmonds City Council will ultimately result in reduced business in Edmonds and reduced tax revenue. The council may not think they are anti-business, but when you make repeated decisions negatively affecting every business in your town you are anti-business.
If you spend more money than you have, you have a spending problem.
Stop spending and stop raising taxes that will run businesses out of Edmonds.
Erik Nelson is an Edmonds resident.
Erik’s right — this isn’t anti-tax rhetoric; it’s math.
In less than 12 months, Edmonds leadership has approved or proposed policies that push our total sales tax rate to 10.4%, already tied for the highest in Washington State. A second 0.1% increase is still on the table — which would make Edmonds #1 in the state for local sales tax.
Meanwhile, the Fire District 1 proposal raised property tax burdens for local employers, and the Main Street parking removal has already cut customer access by nearly half. Add a potential B&O tax, and it’s clear: Edmonds is becoming less competitive for small business, not more.
These aren’t abstract concerns — they’re real costs that get passed directly to consumers.
Mr. Reeves. Since you are a business owner, I want to ask you: what business services City taxpayers pay for are you willing to cut? Everyone needs to pitch in, either by paying more tax or cutting their benefits. Should we stop picking up litter that keeps downtown Edmonds so clean and let the businesses do their own litter clean up? What else? Give me a list. Are you willing to help pay to water the parks that bring visitors to downtown Edmonds that spend money at those businesses? What about all the events? Should Edmonds charge for any time and expense for helping with any of that? I don’t know if those would be good ideas, but I just want to emphasize that Edmonds’ citizens will have cuts to services if the levy lift does not pass, as you hope, and I want to know where businesses will step up and pitch in with those cuts. What are you willing to do? Or will you just have your hand out asking for help without pitching in? There is no free lunch.
Sure Arlene, I’ll have my hand out…
…just like the City does — except in my case, it’s to serve customers, create jobs, and pay taxes that fund the very services you’re talking about.
Small businesses already do pitch in — we clean our own sidewalks, sponsor community events, donate to schools, and support local nonprofits without asking City Hall to pick up the tab.
What we’re asking for is accountability — not handouts. Before you tell business owners to “pitch in more,” maybe you can articulate why city spending is up 45% in the last decade with no measurable improvement in outcomes?
There’s no “free lunch,” sure — but there’s also no excuse for waste.
Mr Reeves… I can tell you why spending has gone up… city costs are rising for insurance, for equipment, for Microsoft licenses (yes that place where Erika Barnett was an executive at that keeps asking for more money from their users) and for salaries. And you can’t say no measurable improvement has occurred… what is that about? Compared to what? If that money would not have been spent Edmonds wouldn’t be the very nice place it is.
Responding to Arlene here – .. and then I’m signing off, because I’m tired..11/4 can’t come soon enough..
Arlene, no one’s denying costs rise — that’s true for every city, every business, every household. The difference is that real leaders make hard choices, not excuses.
It’s time City Hall started making business decisions — not running the city like a nonprofit. That means consolidating overlapping roles, freezing non-essential hires, leveraging shared services, and demanding measurable outcomes before adding new spending.
This isn’t about slashing budgets — it’s about competence and accountability. Edmonds doesn’t need more hand-wringing; it needs leadership with the business chops to manage like the private sector does every day.
Arelene Williams – Yes, costs are rising yet some of them are within our control. Insurance is up – why, anything to do with all the lawsuits? Rates do go up when this happens. Salaries, yes. Our police chief is paid SIGNIFICANTLY more than the state average. $265,890 is her salary! I am stunned that this hasn’t come up more.
https://www.indeed.com/career/chief-of-police/salaries/WA
Seems to me some of these increases are our own doing and not related to inflation or tarriffs, etc.
Actually, The 2025 sales tax rate for Edmonds, Washington is 10.5%. However, a new 0.1% public safety sales tax will take effect on January 1, 2026, increasing the rate to 10.6%.
And now many service businesses are having to collect/pay sales tax – the impact there could be less sales as now customers will be hit with the additional 10.5% so they may decide to pass on a class or workshop as a result.
The B & O tax feels like a done deal – the workshops seem to be how to implement it more than give us a say as to why/why not add this to our load. Since this is based on Gross revenue it will have a big impact on some of us small businesses that may have a decent Gross but not so much after all expenses are deducted.
When my business is struggling I have to figure it out – no one is going to bail me out. Sadly, with an additional $165 a month to taxes that will mean less eating out/shopping in my favorite Edmonds stores and restaurants.
Well Ms Peterson, other side of the coin is that as the city degrades, the parks get run down, there are no or few public recreation programs because the Center is in disrepair, and public safety is sketchy because there are fewer police etc.. etc… there will be less reason for visitors to spend money in your business. So your revenue will decline. I would rather we pay more for a nice city than let the city fall apart for lack of revenue. We have to dig out of the financial hole not tread water in the bottom of a pit. There is no magic wand to wave to make a pot of gold. And we won’t attract more business to Edmonds if the city looks decrepit. There is the choice to pay more or the choice to cut, no matter how Mr Reeves wants to twist it with talk of “transparency.” Voters will make that choice yes or no. And if they vote for the Microsoft Executive , Barnett, and the realtor, Krull, we have been assured by the no taxes people that those candidates are promising something they can’t deliver… money out of thin air without taxes.
Not sure I follow – as I stated, if my taxes go up $165 a month that will have to come out of my budget from somewhere. So yes, the things you say will be taken care of from levy funds will be, yet many residents will likely cut their local spending as a result. Then we will have to rely on folks from outside Edmonds to come eat and shop here since residents’ funds will be going to taxes rather than dining and shopping locally.
Also for small business owners it will be more due to likely B & O tax being implemented.
I just wish folks would take a step back and look at the big picture.
Ms. Peterson, Since you bring up the issue of lawsuits in a comment above… Prominent No Campaign backers Diane Buckshnis and Joe Scordino sued the city and settled (for what amount I don’t know, but I have heard is wasn’t zero dollars). https://myedmondsnews.com/2025/02/edmonds-environmental-council-city-reach-agreement-on-appeal-of-edmonds-critical-aquifer-regulations/ And then they complain about the city lawyer being paid to defend the city against lawsuits? It is just pure hypocrisy. Do you see why I don’t feel inclined to buy their vote NO tax arguments?
Suing the city, was their absolute right and it might have done some good, but then they use that against the city as being fiscally irresponsible? People love to sue cities for all sorts of reasons, and I am sure everyone that sues a city believes they are totally justified. Sometimes they are, sometimes they aren’t.
This group disagreed with the City, and they made a choice to sue instead of other ways to resolve it. They made that choice for some reason, okay. But as you said “Insurance is up – why, anything to do with all the lawsuits? Rates do go up when this happens.” Why don’t you ask why this Bucskshnis group why, when they went to that extreme even as they claim they are worried about spending on the City Attorney?
Thank you for that info. I was referring to a big lawsuit, Police Chief. That never should have happened.
And didn’t we recently have to resume payments for fire & emergency services after the RFA annexation? In any other world the attorney overseeing that would be out of a job, I too am concerned about spending on this city attorney.
https://myedmondsnews.com/2025/08/city-of-edmonds-resumes-payments-for-fire-and-emergency-medical-services/
Ms. Williams
Respectfully, you have your environmental litigation facts wrong. The Edmonds Environmental Council and three other petitioners filed an appeal with the Growth Management Board over the City’s current CARA (critical aquifer recharge area) code and reached a settlement with the City of Edmonds to suspend an appeal of city regulations regarding the Deer Creek aquifer after a study was agreed upon. For more information see this article: https://edmondsenvironmentalcouncil.org/deer-creek/
Additionally, the EEC has supported the Olympic View Water and Sewer District’s notice of intent to sue the Edmonds School District over PFAS contamination.
https://myedmondsnews.com/2025/07/olympic-view-water-and-sewer-sues-edmonds-school-district-over-madrona-forever-chemicals/
The Deer Creek CARA deserves protecting and best available science should be the method used for code, not the City attorney’s view which does not comply to the Clean Water Act. We are talking protecting the drinking water of thousands of Edmonds and Woodway residents. This is not a frivolous lawsuit. The City could have avoided a lawsuit altogether by simply setting CARA filtration standards that complied with the Clean Water Act. The Council chose to lower the standards, making it easier for developers to meet, jeopardizing our drinking water, and inviting expensive legal action.
Hello Arlene,
Let’s not conflate a lawsuit with an appeal to the Growth Management Board; Rimmer filed a lawsuit with the City and won over the “takings rule”. This concept brought forth to Council by citizen for over a year. Yet, Administration ignored us about fixing the tree code to eliminate the “takings rule”. Now five years later, the tree code is remanded back to the attorney despite the firm costing the City at least $400K for the lawsuit loss to Rimmer and appealed without Council approval.
Petitioners such as myself and Joe filed an appeal and after mediation, settlement has us in limbo as the PFAS issue is being investigated. It was clear during mediation, that our attorney does not understand environmental law/critical areas. Hundreds of thousands of dollars have been spent on environmental appeals (CARA code and Perrinville SEPA appeal) because our attorney can’t even use AI and understand the importance of critical areas or the Clean Water Act.
For Perrinville, five days spent by the hearing examiner, acting public works director, staff, and experts on City’s dime: hearing examiner remanded the case back to the City?!? A citizen spent over $50K appealing this Perrinville environmental issue as the City plugged the Creek killing off salmon migration to spawn.
This no vote is about mismanagement of money and no common sense or oversight.
Thank you, Erik. Very well stated. Edmonds needs to stop the spend, get back to basics, and think about all residents and businesses in the city vs a narrow view based on a specific vision crafted by a few. I wrote about this recently. Neither the Beacon nor MEN agreed to run it despite permission from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/prop-1-levy-lift-will-make-edmonds-unaffordable/
Just to be clear, the only reason we didn’t run this is because it was after our deadline of no opinion pieces once the ballots drop.
Just to be clear, you made Erik revise HIS opinion many times over several days to be more palatable to YOU. We have the receipts.
Tamara — we have been diligent in fact checking all opinion pieces during this election season. I was not comfortable doing this on my own so created an editorial review committee of staff to provide feedback. All of those submitting opinions have been subjected to the same scrutiny and no one — regardless of political affiliation or “side” on an issue — gets a pass. — Teresa Wippel, publisher
Mr. Nelson- you are right. Thank you for your column. You have regularly taken time away from your busy car dealerships to participate in the public process at City Council meetings and let the Council and the Mayor know how much their policies have added to the price of a car purchased in Edmonds. I follow your comments closely. We know you compete regionally for a customer’s business. People will drive from Fife to Marysville to save $500 on their next set of wheels- all Honda or Mazda dealers- where the City’s sales tax rate is the deciding factor on signing the purchase agreement for their next vehicle. The City’s own heat map showing sales tax receipts identifiable by location shows our automotive businesses on Hwy 99 ARE the sales tax engine of City of Edmonds. How will the City of Edmonds not just protect that tax base but work to grow it? Please spell it out to City leadership Mr. Nelson. Then the people of Edmonds who believe as I do that the way out of this financial quagmire is to grow the economic activity in town will actively support you. If 100 people will show up to save that postage stamp called Hummingbird Park, we can certainly pack the Council chambers to support the automotive industry on Hwy 99. In solidarity-Keep Edmonds Affordable
Legislature should amend sales tax law so the tax rate is determined by the registered owner’s mailing address. That would cure the disparity problem; all dealerships would charge the same tax rate, regardless of which city they are in.
That’s how it works with online ordering~ Amazon and other firms calculate sales tax based on the address (zip code) where they are delivering the product.
Roger — bless your heart, but that’s not how local economies work.
You want to fix “disparity” by taxing based on where the buyer lives instead of where the business operates? That’s not reform — that’s a death sentence for local economies.
Dealers like Lynnwood Honda or Campbell Nissan invest millions into their facilities, hire local workers, pay property taxes, support youth sports teams, and fund community programs — all inside the cities where they’re located.
You’re comparing a storefront that employs 75 people to an algorithm. The Amazon model works for clicks — not communities.
If you want to “cure disparity,” try reforming how cities spend what they already collect before rewriting tax code that keeps local businesses alive.
Roger Pence – Not to mention a logistical nightmare. That would require our local retail businesses to require all customers to provide addresses when making a purchase and all their software would have to be updated to accommodate this. If they are busy this would really slow things down and software would have to include ALL taxing authorities in and out of state! This is not feasible for our small businesses.
Hi Karen,
The topic I was responding to was the sales tax rate for automobiles, not for all merchandise. Auto dealers need to acquire the buyer’s mailing address in order to put it on the title. Quite different from routine over-the-counter purchases we make every day, which would continue to be taxed normally.
Mr. Pence, I like this idea, it’s what you call, thinking outside the box.
Thinking outside the box? Maybe Mr. Pence could explain why he and other tax levy lift supporters agree with the Mayor and Council deciding not to support the Blue Ribbon Panel recommendations for an overhaul of the budgeting process starting with wholesale reforms for good governance, fiscal discipline, accountability, transparency, common sense, zero-based budgeting, priority-based budgeting, and putting taxpayers first? It seems the only way to get those changes is to change the Council by voting for Erika Barnett and Glenda Krull, and to defeat the tax levy and force the CVouncil to adopt good governance and spending control. The #1 priority should be to Keep Edmonds Affordable and put taxpayers first. https://www.keepedmondsaffordable.com/
Mr. Nelson- you are so right, and have made excellent points that all Edmonds business owners should consider as they vote on Nov 4th. The tax levy lift not only adds unexpected costs to businesses and renters, it actually will reduce business revenues since taxpayers will have less disposable income to spend in Edmonds (or anywhere) due to the 300% increase in taxes from the levy and the RFA annexation. What is needed is not more taxes, but a major overhaul in good governance – and that includes an about-face in City government with innovative thinking and special focus on fiscal discipline, accountability, transparency, common sense, and putting taxpayers first. There are too many examples over the past 5 years where the City has wasted millions of dollars in litigation for employee terminations, unsafe storm water toxin specifications, illegal abuse of property owner tree rights confiscation; faulty waste water treatment technology; uncollected hospital transport fees from the RFA; misdirected spending on Federal government ARPA grants; 61% increase in police spending; and failed land development projects. The City government needs major overhaul as was pointed out by the Mayor-appointed Blue Ribbon panel : https://cdnsm5-hosted.civiclive.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server_16494932/File/Memo%20re%20recommendations%20and%20conclusions%20final.pdf Sadly, the City ignored the Panel’s recommendation. Spending control, good governance, and trust are needed – not more taxes. https://www.keepedmondsaffordable.com/
Ok if you don’t want an increase in police spending should Edmonds businesses be responsible to hire their own security services to respond to burglaries? And if you don’t like lawsuits against the city from people hired for any city job then don’t allow volunteers to do anything under the city’s authority because if they get hurt doing something they aren’t trained for or make choices that are bad for the city then there could be even more lawsuits. There has to be extensive background checks for more important tasks with volunteers and that has to be managed by paid staff. Volunteers are much harder to manage than paid employees. There have been arguments that volunteers should take over city tasks but that leaves the city vulnerable to liability. So it costs money to buy insurance against lawsuits no matter what.
Your idea of what is waste is different than mine and how do we decide what is waste then? I think anyone advocating for less taxes should step up first and explain what they are willing to give up themselves in City services. I don’t see that from the No campaign.
Arlene, I’m all for pragmatic solutions — but the “either raise taxes or lose everything” narrative is misleading. No one is saying eliminate police or stop providing city services. What we’re saying is that spending accountability has to come before another tax hike.
The city’s budget has grown nearly 45% in the last decade, and we still haven’t seen clear performance metrics tied to outcomes. Before asking residents and businesses to pay more, we should be reviewing vacant positions, departmental overlaps, and nonessential consulting contracts — the same way any well-run organization does when facing a gap.
This isn’t about being “anti-tax.” It’s about being pro-results and ensuring Edmonds remains affordable for the people and small businesses who make this city work.
Lee-
You make good points, but the actual City revenue growth is far greater than you stated. In this chart City revenues have exceeded COL, inflation, and population growth since 2005, and have accelerated since 2020: https://d38u6hukd4et5m.cloudfront.net/growthrateVCpi.png
What has caused the current budget crisis is the fact that City spending has outpaced revenue growth by a wide margin. For example, staff salaries and overheads actually increased by 37% and police budgets grew by 61% since 2022.
https://d38u6hukd4et5m.cloudfront.net/laborexpenditures.pn
Clearly this rate of spending is unsustainable and exactly why the City is in financial crisis.
Increased taxes are not the solution. The Mayor says staff has been cut to the bone with $7M in cuts. The chart above shows only $1.7M in cuts between 2024 and 2025. Why is he misleading citizens? Wholesale reform and rebuilding trust in city government is desperately needed. Fiscal discipline and spending control are the solution. Focusing on accountability, transparency, common sense, and putting taxpayers first is the solution. That will only happen if taxpayers defeat the tax levy, elect Glenda Krull and Erika Barnett, and force the Mayor and Council adopt a permanent citizen’s financial oversight committee that includes independent, non-partisan financial experts like Teresa Hollis, Jim Ogonowski, Becky Brauer, Diane Buckshnis. In addition, the electeds must adopt the Blue Ribbon Panel’s recommendations to immediately implement good governance principles. https://cdnsm5-hosted.civiclive.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server_16494932/File/Memo%20re%20recommendations%20and%20conclusions%20final.pdf
Good Morning,
The City has had a volunteer coordinator for years and volunteers have shaped our City parks for decades. Please don’t conflate the rhetoric you are hearing from this Administration and that of what is reality.
The Off-Leash Area Edmonds celebrated its’ 20th year of stewardship and 20 years ago, P&R Manager Rich Lindsay said yes to volunteers despite not having a volunteer program in place and liability release forms became a normal practice as volunteers removed tons of debris. The Dive Park under Bruce is another example of historical use of citizens to keep our parks clean. The City Council used to involved itself in many volunteer clean-up programs that occurred at many parks.
Unfortunately, the City Council not only suspended all volunteer programs that many of us old-timers created (Tree Board, Youth Commission, Economic Development Commission, Diversity Commission) because staff was too busy?
This is a perfect example of Council ignoring the valuable insight of volunteers and their expertise. Look at what Citizen of the Year, Joe Scordino has done with volunteers at the marsh in WSDOT right-aways. The negativity from the City towards this project did not go unnoticed.
Fear of liability issues from dedicated volunteers is plain wrong and since we have a full-time volunteer coordinator on payroll, why not use her?
Vote no on Levy as mismanagement is prevalent.
Thanks for the background and reality check Diane. Why are taxpayers paying for a volunteer coordinator when council has suspended the duties of the position? It would be comical if taxpayers weren’t paying for it. Stop the madness Edmonds.
Ms. Buckshnis: Staff was too “busy” because they were understaffed since they didn’t have the money to hire more staff. This is the consequence of taxes not keeping up with rising costs. I worked for the Governor’s Commission on Volunteering in another state, so I do understand issues that surround volunteering. There are indeed volunteer tasks that volunteers can be very helpful with, but there are also areas where it is better to have those volunteers under a non-profit instead because of liability issues. And a skilled/expert volunteer can give advice to a City, but they cannot set policy because they are not elected. Sometimes the City will agree with the advice a volunteer gives and sometimes it won’t.
As far as the legal issues go, what makes me cringe about your action against the City for the CARA is not that you took the action, but that you complain about how much the City Attorney is costing when you drove up that attorney cost with your own action. Your action contributed to that cost for the City, so don’t blame them. Cities get sued. They take positions that people don’t agree with. You didn’t agree with the City. That’s okay, but don’t be so hypocritical that you criticize the City for needing an attorney when people take legal action against the City.
Point of fact, the city Planning Board had recommended to the Council that they vote to deny storm water injection wells (drains from roofs) directly into the CARA (providing actual drinking water currently to Edmonds and Esprance) until Best Available Science indicated that it would do no harm in terms of PFAs or other contaminants. The city attorney advised the Planning Board and Council that they were opening up the city to lawsuits by developers so that recommendation was negated and Council voted to allow the wells. Neither Diane Buckshnis or the EEC had any control over whatever that legal advice as to policy cost the city at the time. It’s just wrong to accuse Diane B. and the ECC of purposely trying to make the city spend money on litigation and there is no hypocrisy involved at all. That is a figment of Alene Williams imagination. Full disclosure, I’m still on the EEC board and was an Edmonds citizen and on the EEC Board when we met with the Mayor for settlement talks. No one on the Council took part in the talks for what reason I do not know.
Correction to my comment: It should have read Diane B. and the EEC, (not the ECC or Edmonds City Council). Not out to confuse anyone.
Thank you Erik. Fortunately, we have a chance to significantly change the make up our city council by electing Glenda Krull and Erika Barnett.
The current Edmonds City Council policies seem disconnected from the realities of the negative impacts their decisions can have. Some members appear to believe that large taxing increases of small businesses will lead to nothing but positive outcomes, like rainbows and unicorns. Hopefully, the upcoming election will bring some changes with several new members.
The facts simply don’t support the author’s claims: either that Edmonds is anti-business or that our city is unique in pursuing these types of policies.
What’s conveniently omitted from the author’s piece is that Edmonds currently has neither a city B&O tax nor a payroll tax, unlike many neighboring cities in our region. Many cities in our region employ the use of one or the other. For instance, Lynnwood has a payroll tax on businesses. Shoreline has a B&O tax. Bellevue has a B&O tax. Issaquah has a B&O tax.
Mr. Nelson is highlighting the “anti-everything” position that is becoming abundantly clear amongst this “NO solutions” group as time goes on:
-NO to Parks and Public Safety Levy
-NO to moving to Fire District
-NO to public school levies/bond
-NO to neighborhood centers and hubs
-NO to bike lanes
-NO to red-light cameras
-NO to a city B&O or Payroll tax
-NO to paid parking
-NO to sales tax increase
-NO to hiring a city grant writer
I wonder if the author realizes that many surrounding cities are pursuing several of the same policies he considers to be “anti-business.” Would he consider all of these cities are “anti-business,” too?
Here’s a full list of cities with B&O taxes, including Mercer Island, Renton, Des Moines, Bellingham, Bainbridge Island, Everett, Olympia and Tacoma. Are these cities all anti-business, too?
https://wacities.org/docs/default-source/resources/bando-taxes/botaxrates.pdf
Seattle, Redmond, Bothell, and Kirkland all have head/payroll tax on businesses. Are these cities anti-business?
Again, Edmonds employs neither of these taxes.
When you consider that many of these cities also use tools like paid parking, sales tax increases, and regional fire models, it becomes clear that the facts simply don’t support the author’s exaggerated claims.
In fact, evidence suggests Edmonds is actually one of the most PRO business cities in our region.
Adel, that’s exactly the point — those cities you listed have major economic engines, strong tax bases, and the population to support those tools. Edmonds doesn’t.
Comparing us to Seattle or Bellevue is apples to oranges. Our downtown businesses operate on razor-thin margins, depend on foot traffic and parking, and can’t absorb new taxes or red tape the way larger cities can.
Calling Edmonds “pro-business” while pushing policies that make it harder to do business here isn’t leadership — it’s spin.
Adel — I heard you were out doorbelling. Swing by — I’ll pour you some boxed wine. Better yet, why don’t I open up our books for you? You want to see what this levy will do to small businesses? The numbers don’t lie.
You’re right that Edmonds doesn’t yet have a B&O or payroll tax — and that’s exactly the point. Many of us in the business community are working to keep it that way. Edmonds can absolutely support parks, public safety, and community programs without adopting every tax or fee structure used by larger cities.
Publisher’s note: While the commenter provided a home address, we deleted that for privacy concerns.
That’s a long list of repressive taxes on Edmonds’ businesses. Without strong business revenue, more taxes fall onto property owners. Driving revenue streams away will have severe consequences.
This election Edmonds citizens have an opportunity to elect two Edmonds business owners Erika Barnett and Glenda Krull, who each also have experience as Chamber of Commerce Presidents. They are tapped in to the pulse of our business community. I look forward to having more council members with this real-life experience making better choices for our city, including responsible, accountable spending.
“ These decisions by the Edmonds City Council will ultimately result in reduced business in Edmonds and reduced tax revenue.” – exactly! By burdening businesses with increased taxes, which are inevitably passed to the consumers, the city is only damaging their own revenue source. Support businesses to lift up the community as a whole. The City Council needs to remember that while the dollar and cents on their budget spreadsheets may be anonymous, those numbers represent the hard-earned dollars of their constituent citizens and businesses. Be efficient with our dollars and stop overspending and then asking for more. Taxpayers are not bottomless piggy banks.
Thank you Erik Nelson, Theresa and others. Well stated facts that confirm my ‘no’ vote. I’m surely glad we didn’t buy the $37 million Burlington property the council entertained for quite some time.
Lower tax rates are a fool’s panacea. I have lived in a pro-business low tax southern state. Minimum wage, less than $8 per hour. Right to work laws which make it impossible to form Unions for collective bargaining. They provide the bare minimum in medicaid and unemployment compensation. Low State and local taxes.
The result, no services. No protection from greedy businesses. People working two jobs yet still do not earn a living wage. No preventative medical care so conditions wait until they are emergencies and then people are taken to collection for the unpaid bill damaging their credit. It is a system that only works for white upper class families. Working class equals working poor. Ask the Boeing employees in South Carolina.
I moved to Washington for 2 reasons. First while I am not native to the PNW, my parents were, UW class of 1960. Second, Washington has a great standard of living and a reputation of treating everyone fairly. The PNW rivals New England, another tax and spend region, for great services and livability.
Edmonds is a special place. It reminds me of Westerly Rhode Island where Taylor Swift has her gigantic oceanfront estate. Both may have high taxes. Both are also special and remain that way because the towns have the funds to maintain their charm but Edmonds gets less snow.
Hi Mark, We both have had the same experience of living in low tax states. I can remember one winter after the city in my low tax region sold their snow plows to save money, we had six feet of snow and people, especially the elderly, were stuck in their homes for a week, cold and hungry. The schools there were always overcrowded because no one wanted to vote for school bonds, but the developers could do whatever they wanted, since there wasn’t a strong planning department, so they built further and further out where land was cheap and caused a lot of congestion. The roads could have potholes that took out your alignment. Fun place.
We won’t get six feet of snow here, but balancing the budget by cuts instead of tax increases could have poor outcomes in Edmonds too. The one single thing Edmonds has going for it is a cute downtown next to the water that makes it desirable to visit and live. We can throw that away and save money, but that will bring unwelcome repercussions. Everything costs more everywhere, because of rising costs for goods, for salaries, for insurance, not just in Edmonds. The city can’t make that go away. Plain and simple, it needs the taxes.
Arlene:
You are so stuck on not believing that our elected officials have contributed to our city’s financial problem I have to wonder if you are an independent thinker? Are you connected in some way to the city or its staff?
No, I am not connected to anyone. I think I am a very independent thinker compared to many people who have lived here a long time and are very stuck in the past and they can’t move forward. The City is not a monolith. It is us, and who we vote in, and that changes over time. Coming from a conservative, no tax region, I have seen the other side, and I recognize many of those same conservative arguments against taxes used there is being made here with the Vote No tax arguments. If I disagree with the City I will say so, and I have done so. But Edmonds is a nice place to live, and I think we should not create more fiscal havoc by depleting the city of funds. I feel very strongly about that.
Arlene- I appreciate you continuing to put yourself at the mercy of these folks. I’m just about tapped out at being able to try to communicate with any of them. If you stick around too long, they’ll accuse you of being connected to the city or somehow financial gaining from your yes leaning encouragement. Not to mention being called a “liar” over and over as they have done with so many people who use the same set of facts regarding our problems, and come to different solutions.
It’s quite clear that they are ok with the city taking a downturn. They don’t want business paying a dime more in taxes, they don’t want property owners paying a dime more. They want no more growth, they want Mayberry, with two deputies strolling down 5th. They want a giant cake, but they also plan to eat it. They hate the assessment but love the equity come sale time.
Unfortunately, if this levy fails, this same group will be the loudest complainers about the quality of life and state of the city. They’ll claim it’s some type of revenge plot (even from the new council members that they prematurely adore, will be quickly turned on and essentially called criminals).
Wow, this has really gotten nasty. At the risk of having Roger Pence tell me to mind my own business, I can tell you, Sheryll, you are right about one thing, if nothing else. We were really happy with the “equity come sale time.” Since your town High School is named Edmonds Woodway High School I would think you could cut Bill K. a little slack for involving himself since the two towns are and always have been joined at the hip.
Every individual has the right to their own opinions and to rely on trusted experts. Personally, I align myself with Councilmember Will Chen, who is against the proposed $14.5 million tax increase (which totals over $90 million over six years). Chen is a certified public accountant with extensive knowledge in financial matters and a strong understanding of municipal financing. As I often express, it is essential to evaluate the source when developing your position on issues—some sources are reliable, while others are questionable, ready to accept harmful ideas as if they were beneficial.
Hi Sheryll, I am not worried about whatever any who disagree with me will say. I speak up because I disagree with them. I won’t change their mind, but they have to know that others do not share their opinion, just as they don’t share my opinion. They are as passionate about their view as I am about mine. It is hard not to take it all personally. I do my best, which is easier for me because I don’t have long standing roots in the City. My perspective comes from living in other places that have given me reason to be alarmed by their opinion, and question their motives, but we can all speak freely in this country. It is part of the political process, at least at the moment. I hope it stays that way. Of course, I hope they don’t win the vote. I think, like you, it will be very bad for the City.
Sheryll, I don’t think anyone wants to see Edmonds “take a downturn.” What many of us are asking for is a smarter, more innovative path forward — one that doesn’t default to higher taxes every budget cycle.
There are real, actionable ways to strengthen Edmonds without another levy:
Daycare license fee reductions to help create at least five new childcare facilities in Edmonds. It’s doable — we have vacant commercial space, strong demand, and a workforce that desperately needs local options.
World Cup 2026 activation — the Sounder runs right through Edmonds, yet there’s no coordinated plan to capture tourism or small-business revenue from one of the world’s largest events. We’re missing the play entirely because we don’t have the right team on the field.
Small-business recruitment incentives in underutilized corridors like Highway 99 and Perrinville. It’s basic economic development — but it takes business acumen, not nonprofit management.
Public-private infrastructure partnerships modeled after Bellevue’s “Bellhop” eco-mobility program — creative solutions that improve service without new taxes.
Edmonds’ general fund spending has grown roughly 45% in the past decade, far outpacing inflation and population. Asking how to manage smarter isn’t obstruction — it’s leadership. Sustainable cities innovate; they don’t just tax and hope.
I have never met Bill Krepick, but I certainly greatly appreciate and welcome the massive amount of very informative work he continues to do for all of us.
Good luck Edmonds! I grew up there and lived there when neighbors were friends, you could sleep with your front door open and Dorthy ran the best tavern in the the USA. Ì still drive by our old street and see that big beautiful maple tree that my dad planted in 1961 95th ave w and Bowdoin . Hope you all can come together and figure it out, good luck
Thanks, John. That sure is a beautiful tree.
Arlene our city is far from decrepit. No reason why Citizens or even visitors here can’t pick up a piece of paper their animal waste and they don’t have to be volunteers to do so. Secondly you are trying my last nerve! Thousands of people have ‘worked or work for Microsoft for years and years. Nothing wrong with that. Are they union? Yes, partially they are now and in other states and countries. Salaries up probably yes that is what happens when companies unionize. I’m sure those tech gaming folks are enjoying higher wages and benefits that’s good. Glenda Krull is a licensed Broker with Windemere for years probably the best Real Estate company around. She has been here forever as has Erika unlike your candidate Alex who is not ready to be on our City Council. Glenda and Erika are ready and able, and both know finance and have for years. If you think your comments Arlene are helping me or folks with a more Centrist mind set to vote yes instead of NO for this Levy Lift… You are not. Infract just the opposite. Glenda Krull and Erika Barnett have my trust, my vote, my business support and my respect. I know they will be fair to all in Edmonds It is in their best interest to do so. They would anyway.
Bill, I’ve lost count of your comments about Edmonds, all your advice on how we should manage our money, vote on our levies, what our issues are or should be, whom we should elect to City Council, etc. etc. You are a resident and voter in Woodway! I can’t grasp your interest in Edmonds. It makes no sense to be so absorbed in a different city~ you have no skin in our game. I think it’s time to to apply yourself and your energies to your own town for a while.
Roger- My interest is simple. Help taxpayers get more bang for the buck out of their tax dollar, reform bad governance, increase transparency, empower voters to stand up to unjustified RFA annexation taxes and outrageous tax levy lifts. Woodway pays 3X as much per fire/ems 911 call as Edmonds does -after RFA annexation. That’s been my battle for the last 4 years. When my Edmonds neighbors asked for help with the RFA annexation, I was glad to offer my knowledge and experience tracking and analyzing the broken RFA fire/ems business and service model. Taxpayers have suffered from excessive RFA tax bills due to RFA mismanagement, lack performance focus, and failure to deliver any economies of scale or innovative business models. I saw the same thing with the Edmonds’ Mayor and Council failing to deliver fiscal discipline, transparency, accountability, common sense, and putting taxpayers first -which are the foundation of good governance. I am motivated to make a difference and help taxpayers. I’m not in the self-interest game. Not making money; not running for office; not trying to grow a business – just motivated to make a difference, promote affordability, and help bring more efficiency in government. The RFA annexation brought me into the Edmonds community, and the tax levy lift keeps me motivated.
Thanks; I think I get the picture now~ We poor benighted souls in Edmonds can’t possibly manage our affairs without frequent doses of wisdom from the oracle of Woodway.
Roger and Adel — You keep your eyes on Bill, we’ll keep ours on the numbers.
Mr. Krepick,
Two years ago, you and Theresa Hollis (the “NO on Prop 1” campaign chair) accused me of having ulterior motives when I helped lead the “Yes” campaign for the ESD School Bond. You claimed I would personally profit if the bond passed and new schools were built. Two years later, that conspiracy theory has proven baseless.
Now, two years later, you and Theresa are leveling the same accusation, suggesting that I have something to gain financially from supporting a Parks and Police Levy. You imply that my background as an attorney, and work in development, make me untrustworthy, even though several developers are publicly aligned with the NO side of this very issue.
If I’m fortunate enough to live as long as you have, I sincerely hope I’ll choose to spend my time encouraging and empowering the next generation to get involved in their communities, not disparaging them or questioning their integrity.
And finally, Mr. Krepick of Woodway, since you’ve taken such a strong interest in the affairs of a city you don’t live in, I genuinely hope you find a more constructive hobby than patrolling the comment boards of My Edmonds News to attack residents who actually call Edmonds home.
Good day, sir.
Thanks for your snarky attempt to divert attention from your own profession. With your glib and slippery narratives, I’m sure you are and will be a super successful developer and make tons of money. Neither Woodway nor Edmonds deserve to be Ballardized or Kirklandized. As far as me accusing you two years ago of ulterior motives, your memory is bad or you are lying to gain advantage in your comments. I didn’t know Theresa Hollis or any of the KeepEdmondsAfforadable upstanding citizens two years ago. I only met you in March/April of this year! In 2024, I fought for Woodway taxpayers to avoid an unjustified 78% tax levy increase that was ‘sold’ by the Town as being necessary to double the police force and increase traffic patrols to stop speeding. They did this with no data on historic speeding or the effect more police would have. Woodway’s Mayor and Council used the same PR playbook that you and the City are using to scare residents into voting ‘yes.’ My constructive hobby and passion is to protect taxpayers from bad governance and unjustified taxes. The more I can help, the better. When you, and some Council members, and other ‘yes’ supporters disrespect long term residents and show no empathy for their personal financial stress, you challenge me to make a difference.
So here’s a question Adel, that was brought up in comment above. What if Prop 1 is voted in( and our portion would be approx. $1000 per year. ) add it to our $900 2025 assessment hike, and soon to be implemented RFA fees of approx. $900 per year and all of a sudden we’re looking at $2800 more per year since 2024. That’s a 35% hike in just two years & a 98% hike since 2022. Now what if a future school levy appears on a ballot and us seniors on fixed incomes have to make a choice…..BTW my wife is an employee of ESD and we have voted for every school levy that has come up…………..until……….
One thing is sure, we have some really good minds in our community and there are high passions for the good of Edmonds. Let’s try to honor desires for good and try to be collaborative and kind to one another. The enemy of freedom wants to divide and destroy. Do not let that be the end. Refuse to divide and hate. Insist on honoring whether you agree or not.