Will you chip in to support our nonprofit newsroom with a donation today? Yes, I want to support My Edmonds News!
Editor:
As reported in My Edmonds News yesterday, the RFA has adopted their 2026 budget. In a February 2025 article, I explained how the addition of Edmonds assessed valuation (AV) to the RFA tax base should have had the effect of diluting the levy rate from last year’s $1.16 per $1,000 of AV to approximately $1.05/$1,000 of AV. Increasing the portion of the budget raised from the benefit charge could have further reduced that levy rate.
Instead, the RFA has chosen to take advantage of Edmonds’ annexation to increase its budget by $15.4 million, keeping the levy rate essentially unchanged at $1.15/$1,000 of AV and increasing the benefit charge amounts at the same time. In the RFA’s own analysis, the combined levy rate equivalent, which considers the total cost including both the levy and the benefit charge for an average homeowner, has increased from $1.28/$1,000 to $1.33/$1,000 despite the additional cost sharing that resulted from annexation of Edmonds (Reference page 8 of the linked document).
While Edmonds residents were always going to have a huge increase in cost associated with this annexation, the claim was made that annexation was necessary because Edmonds wasn’t paying its fair share. The implication was that residents of the existing RFA would benefit from lower costs by sharing those costs more fairly with Edmonds. This suggests strongly that the RFA’s push for annexation was never about ensuring fairness for the existing RFA residents – it was always about leveraging Edmonds property values to drive higher overall revenue to the RFA.
Niall McShane
Edmonds
Thanks for keeping an eye on this Niall, really appreciate the follow-up. Super disappointing to see this play out almost exactly as many of us feared it would. Although, somehow it doesn’t surprise me. Many of us continue to push for improved transparency and authenticity from government agencies, and then news like this just keeps trickling out. And, incredibly, it seems like some commenters (on MEN and elsewhere) are saying the calls for improving transparency are overblown. It’s so frustrating that these agencies can’t just be more authentic and responsive to their customers.
Thank you Niall. Many of us were skeptical of the need for such a huge increase in our RFA cost so it is not at all surprising that the cost is already rising.
This is an example of why the citizens have to pay attention to what’s going on in all of our government
entities, and become involved when tax increases are being proposed.
Thanks Niall for the follow up.
I don’t see why anyone should be surprised by this outcome. The RFA operated in bad faith from the start. They began by unilaterally canceling Edmonds’ fire contract, pushed through one‑sided “negotiations” with city officials over annexation terms (and yes, city leadership bears blame here too), and then ran a campaign riddled with misrepresentation.
This wasn’t about fairness or improved service—it was about money and jobs. The annexation was a calculated revenue grab, leveraging Edmonds’ property values to expand the RFA’s budget under the guise of regional cooperation and fairness.
When Edmonds residents open their property tax bills next year and see how much is now going to the RFA, I suspect the reality will set in. What was sold as a fair solution will feel more like a bait‑and‑switch, and buyer’s remorse will be inevitable. But then again, we were warned this was the likely outcome.
Great analysis. Opening our PT bills in the middle of Feb will be about the same time we will be voting on the School Levy. In the limited time the Blue Ribbon Panel met, the final report had 15 recommendations. One could argue that the most important recommendation was to continue the work the BRP stated with a Citizen Driven Financial Team. All 15 recommendations are still on the table.
This thread is about fire and citizens like Niall and others have done work that can help save more lives. More can be done.
We are also had a Permanent Levy Lid Lift election and those results need to be analyzed and discussed. CM Olsen is hosting a “listening session”. We have lost more than a year in follow up work to the BRP.
Niall’s work is a great example of how concerned citizens can do volunteer work for our community. It is time to do more. We have a lot of catch up to do.
Niall, thanks for reporting the “combined levy rate numbers” These numbers were available to council before they voted to have the fire vote in April. Your data posted earlier about how the Benefit Charge works was also known by council before their decision to have the fire vote. The BC shifts costs from residence to business and from single family homes to apartments. Edmonds could have agreed to pay the “parity rate” ($1.28/1000 and soon to be $1.33/1000) and continue with a new contract. Doing so would have been a benefit to our apt folks and small businesses. We also could have decided to sort out the best way to save more lives.
Your post will generate the typical “piling on” responses and “I told you so posts” but that will not be a productive use of one’s 225 words.
I think state law allows the BC to be up to 60% of the revenue of the budget. When we voted to join the BC was around 7% and it will not be greater than 10%. We should do some analysis of what if we shifted to the full 60% for the BC and lower the Property Tax levy rate?
This would be a great task for the “citizen financial team” that was recommended by the Blue Ribbon Panel.
Let’s discuss and not “pile on”.
Yes Darrol, let’s get that “citizen financial team” recommended by the Blue-Ribbon Panel up and running. In the meantime, calling out leadership resistance and ongoing questionable decisions, (AKA “piling on”) seems at least understandable.
Darrol,
I wouldn’t call it “piling on” so much as pointing out that this is yet another reminder of the danger in blindly accepting everything our elected officials tell us. Time and again, we’ve seen how polished talking points and campaign-style messaging can obscure the real consequences of their decisions.
This is especially relevant now, as we head into the final weeks of “budget season.” What some may dismiss as “piling on” is, in reality, a necessary act of vigilance. If citizens don’t understand the past and question city narratives going forward, if we don’t demand clarity and honesty, then budget season becomes little more than a ritual of rubber-stamping decisions already made behind closed doors. We’ve seen this before.
Skepticism is not cynicism. It’s a safeguard. And as residents, we have both the right and the responsibility to scrutinize the budgeting strategies being put forward.
Jim when you present data and charts and alternatives for helping the city get out of this financial situation that is not piling on. It is advancing careful analysis of our alternatives just like a Citizens Finance Committee would have done. Citizens did not fully understand the RFA vote but seemed to have done their homework before the Permanent Levy Lid Lift $14.5m vote. With that new information we had one of the largest turnouts on record and people voted in what is generally termed a landslide.
Hopefully your work will lead to a better financial plan that what has been talked about so far.
Folks, this is precisely the concern I had about the $14.5 million levy lid lift. Looking at the big picture, there will be multiple very significant tax/fee impacts coming in 2026 for Edmonds residents. It now appears the RFA impact will be even larger than was anticipated, since the RFA has now decided to raise the Benefit Charge and not reduce the property tax component commensurately—as Niall points out. And voters will be asked in 2026 to approve a school district levy of over $300 million. These things are coupled with a tax increase coming from Snohomish County and the tax package coming from Olympia (not to mention sales tax and utilities tax increases). So, the net tax/fee impact heading our way in 2026 will be shocking to many residents. It’s going to be critical for the city to clearly explain to voters how a 2026 levy lid lift proposal will fit into the overall tax/fee load and all measures the city has taken to ensure the levy lift ask is the absolute minimum needed to balance our budget. Otherwise, I’m now concerned voters may not approve the levy lid lift, since their vote is one of the few levers available to them to control their tax load.
Dave is correct. People figured out the numbers much better for the $14.5m election than they did for the was a around a $15m new tax bill. That new number may be closer to +$16m.
The voters knew more about the impact of their vote for the November election than they did for the April election. Now we all need to more fully understand what it will take to create a sustainable long term financials plan. Much of that was covered with the BRP report. Those 15 key points if followed will lead to a more complete fully transparent plan.
Even with winter coming we need to roll up our sleeves and dive in. I think the next “dive in” is scheduled for January?
It speaks volumes that this RFA management/labor coalition sold you on the idea that an aid car, Fire truck and multiple personnel are needed at every aid call now plans to add 30 firefighters. I don’t know if it’s piling on or not; but this just looks to me like more evidence that you have a governmental system that just doesn’t work in terms of transparency, efficiency and just simple common sense. There was 0 pushback or real attempt to find another way to do fire and Darrol and Jim are still having to beg just to be heard at all.
Hi Brian, yes it is understandable to talk About our leadership. It is also helpful to talk To our leadership. But sometimes we get a bit off the thread so maybe we could use some shortcuts to save words. Bike Lane, Grants are our money, Heat Pumps, EV Cars, Save the Whales, and many more but let’s be efficient and save some word for new ideas and/or facts.
It may be too late for a CFT to help council with creating a balanced budget for 2026 but next up will be more work to find create the 2027-28 budget.
Outlined above are the numbers for fire and the initial comments about how the BC will impact our business community. We need to understand that and decide what our options may be. That will be a major piece of work and will require input from all of us.
I would help Edmonds if Mukilteo and Everett were to join SCF. The analysis Niall about the impact on SCF to have Edmonds join should be “quietly” updated to see how we would be impacted if they join. Looks like it would help us.
Time to continue the work so many good folks have started in an effort to help us all.
I’m getting very nervous about my 2026 property tax bill!
Thanks for the heads-up Niall, even though it does not come as a surprise. Anyone paying attention and observing how the RFA and its cronies in the Edmonds’ council and mayor office lied, deceived and even broke the law to push the annexation could expect this outcome.
The individuals dressed as firefighters showed that they are anything but that and lost all respect that institution once had. Nowadays I keep my eyes on my wallet and stay alert watching my back anytime I hear a firetruck siren. The RFA and Edmonds’ council and mayor just keep demonstrating why WA is the most corrupt state in the US.
It is pretty sad when some of the people who are most respected in the community (firefighters, EMTs and their administrators) take advantage. I think most of us have always voted for what they asked of us, but in the future we need to closely scrutinize anything they say.
I want to thank all the activists who fight to keep Edmonds affordable: those who dug deep and did the math on the RFA, as well as on the levy lift: you informed so many people (including me) in the realities. Thank you for taking the time!
Page 45 – a 37% increase in the ‘Public Information & Education’ line item. 2026 spend of $955,414. Talk about misaligned priorities.
https://www.southsnofire.org/home/showpublisheddocument/3492/638979383020900000
I’d prefer not to receive this 6 page color mailer, this information could be uploaded to a website.
https://d38u6hukd4et5m.cloudfront.net/SCF-Pamphlet.jfif
Waste of the communities $$$ & bad for the environment.
Absolutely agree!
Is anyone surprised? Exactly what many said would happen. The Mayor and City Council sold us out with this annexation. They tried with the failed levy and it appears after a mandated NO vote on the levy their first order of business is to find other ways to tax instead cutting costs that artificially ballooned during the Nelson/ Council/ Covid drunken spending era.
There was a resounding NO vote on the Levy yet people voted in an incumbent on the council instead of a fresh face for change. How does that make sense? The incumbent that was voted back in will be a solid yes for any and all future tax and levy discussions. When you work for your party in a non partisan position you will follow the party orders and not the citizens you supposedly represent. We have two such CM’s and their votes are predictable. Before the Purple shirt, No Kings, TDS gang weighs in save your breath I would say the same if they represented the other party. City governance is the last potential for non partisan governance and we are slowly losing that too
Make no mistake we have 2 solid yes votes for any future tax increases. Higher taxes are coming unless there are at least 4 CM’s with courage and conviction to address the spending problem first.
Thank you so much Niall for paying attention and informing us. Now is the time to start engaging with the elected officials on the Fire Commission and finding a good candidate to represent our district and concerns.
Good point Janelle about getting a good candidate to represent Edmonds on the Fire Commission. That’s a challenge, however, because regardless of the boundaries of an Edmonds commissioner district, all candidates must run at-large in the general election (earliest opportunity will be November 2027).
The fire district is huge, the size of a Congressional District. Edmonds candidates will also need to campaign in Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace, even Mill Creek, to get votes. It’s a daunting system, one not designed to encourage thoughtful people to run for office.