Will you chip in to support our nonprofit newsroom with a donation today? Yes, I want to support My Edmonds News!
Edmonds deserves a balanced, transparent and forward–thinking approach to its finances. Before our city commits to a modified biennial budget, residents deserve comprehensive financial analysis and responsible alternatives.
This commentary is submitted from our perspectives as individual councilmembers, and our views are entirely our own. We are offering more reasonable solutions to begin to achieve long-term financial sustainability through a combination of short-term bridge funding and disciplined cost management and oversight. Edmonds has untapped resources that can buy time and stability right now, if used responsibly:
- Approximately $5 million in Internal Service Fund reserves can be reallocated to support the general fund.
- Around $4 million Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) funds can now be used for a broader range of purposes under updated state law. (SHB 1791).
- About $4 million is available in the Parks Gift catalog, including a $1.8 million donation received in July 2025, that could free up resources for other uses.
- Strengthening council’s responsibility for spending oversight by establishing a Finance Oversight Committee of 2 to 3 councilmembers.
- A more reasonable amount of a levy in 2026 is to be determined after these and other steps outlined below have been taken to demonstrate our transparent fiscal stewardship of our city budget.
These immediate resources, combined with necessary cost controls and financial transparency, would provide the short-term stability necessary for a more measured and sustainable long-term plan.
Building long-term fiscal strength will come from solutions and include non-property tax revenue sources and economic development that broadens our city’s revenue base. The Citizens Blue Ribbon Panel tasked the City Council to clarify the policy goals regarding economic development, which we agree is critical to gain an understanding of our future growth and economic opportunities that exist right here in our community, such as:
- Improvements in local commerce, small business retention and mid-size business growth incentives.
- Explore long range annexation opportunities, such as Esperance.
- A potential Transportation Benefit District 0.1% sales tax that would go directly to the general fund and directly to needed transportation projects, including sidewalks.
- Look at growing our revenue mix using strategic economic development planning for our Highway 99 corridor.
Responsible growth can produce sustained benefits that make any future tax proposals more accountable and less burdensome.
But none of these strategies will succeed if we lack financial transparency and discipline. Council should be reviewing our existing budget line by line to identify opportunities for fiscal discipline within the resources available to us.
A primary diagnosis by the Citizen Blue Ribbon Panel was that forecasting is essential. We could not agree more and advocate, along with the Blue Ribbon Panel, for the creation of a volunteer Citizen Budget Advisory Committee. Without addressing these issues, it makes it difficult to assure residents and businesses that their money is being managed responsibly.
Without accurate projections, consistent reporting, and adherence to the Council’s adopted December 2024 Financial Policy, Edmonds risks spending more than it takes in. This approach is not fiscally sustainable. City leaders must realign priorities to reflect both short-term prudence and long-term planning — ensuring that today’s decisions strengthen, not jeopardize, Edmonds’ financial future.
Our city has the tools to stay financially healthy without exhausting reserves or relying heavily on any one type of income source. With transparency, cost control and forward-looking fiscal discipline, Edmonds can protect essential services today and secure the community’s economic stability for years to come.
Michelle Dotsch and Will Chen are Edmonds residents who serve on the Edmonds City Council.
Thank you council members Chen and Dotsch! Transparency and reality are key going forward. Appreciation for your speaking out
Wow! I’m impressed. This is what I’d call a ‘do-able’ plan to get this City back to fiscal stability with public involvement.
Three cheers for Michelle and Will
If you truly don’t trust that our city staff is not behaving in a way that is fiscally disciplined, fire them. Otherwise, maybe trust them and listen when they explain how they are each doing the jobs of multiple people and take their recommendations for how to fix the issue that they are very uniquely qualified to evaluate. I really am also sick of hearing how “transparency” and more task forces and commissions of lay people are the path forward. Prove it. Prove to me that more people sitting around tables looking at papers is the way to solve this just because the recommendations you already have make you sad. Less talk. More rock. Do your job.
City Council cannot fire City Staff. City Staff work for the mayor and the City Council must respect separation of powers.
City Council has one employee that works for the Council, the executive assistant to council.
As for transparency, holding public meetings, hearings, and ensuring transparency in decision-making is critical.
Thanks Michelle and Will for writing this excellent Reader View as individuals who are residents of Edmonds.
Chris – to ‘prove it’, requires ‘trying it’.
From Mayor Rosen’s Blue Ribbon Panel experts -, page 5;
“11. Develop a communication plan to achieve a high level of transparency of this work and the
implementation of recommendations
a. Consider establishing a standing City commission or committee to observe and
advise the City on financial matters,
b. Rebuild public trust in the City’s ability to manage fiscal health.”
There’s a reason our Mayor’s experts mention ‘trust’ & ‘transparency’ multiple times in their report, our electeds spent a record ~$18M in a 2 year period, from the general fund alone.
https://cdnsm5-hosted.civiclive.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server_16494932/File/Memo%20re%20recommendations%20and%20conclusions%20final.pdf
Few are alleging mal-intent, firing is extreme. We’re asking for our electeds to balance city spending with the affordability concerns of residents (not an easy task, lately it’s been 1 sided).
Thanks,
Nick
Is council not already reviewing the city budgets? What is preventing this basic minimum level of responsibility? Are there some other barriers for why you haven’t already done all of the suggested ideas you outlined above to prevent us getting to where we are? Didn’t you both ask for the city council job because of your special talent of looking at finances and fixing stuff? Have we not already deployed multiple citizen volunteer groups to also evaluate our finances and provide suggestions over the past 5 years? Have you not already begun adoption of most of the blue ribbon panel suggestions? What’s holding any of you back from magically fixing the budget issues using these “immediate resources” and methods outlined? How is any of that different today than it was 6 months ago? What exactly is creating any perceived “lack of transparency” and what has been keeping you from getting “transparency”? Who exactly are the people you have in mind who are involved in any of the city finance and budget work that you feel are NOT “thinking forward”? Did you hire them? This all just feels like more rhetoric and no real action. And who is this letter supposed to target or persuade? YOU are the ones who are supposed to do this work. JUST DO IT
Chris raises fair questions — and they cut to the heart of the issue. The City Council already has the tools, data, and authority to review budgets line by line and demand transparency. What’s missing isn’t another panel or policy statement — it’s execution.
Edmonds needs leadership that turns analysis into action, and process into measurable progress. Let’s stop outsourcing responsibility to committees and start implementing the fiscal discipline, economic development planning, and revenue diversification strategies that have been discussed for years.
At this point, it’s not about identifying the problems — it’s about actually fixing them.
That said, it’s time to disband the Blue Ribbon Panel, in my opinion. Without access to comprehensive financial data or real economic metrics, the group simply can’t produce informed policy recommendations.
Let’s put that energy into a dedicated Economic Development Committee with the tools and expertise to actually move Edmonds forward.
Thanks to CM Dotsch and Chen for stepping up and giving starting points to correct the dysfunctional Mayor and Council governance issues. I say ‘starting points’ because there is much more to be done to REFORM the Council’s lack of fiscal discipline, accountability, transparency, performance focus, common sense, and putting taxpayers first, all included in Good Governance principles. The citizens’ Blue Ribbon Panel (BRP) report suggested this reform, but it was ignored by the Mayor and most of the Council: https://cdnsm5-hosted.civiclive.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server_16494932/File/Memo%20re%20recommendations%20and%20conclusions%20final.pdf Dotsch/Chen’s Budget Advisory Committee comprised of Council members is NOT the way to correct the Council failings. The BRP should be replaced by three Citizens’ Oversight Committees that have the power to define, execute, and expect Council to implement their budget and services recommendations using zero-based and priority-based budgeting methodology. One committee for the 2026 budget, one for police services, and one for park and economic development are required. The KeepEdmondsAffordable group has many qualified professional volunteers who are willing to do these jobs. Before pursuing another tax levy lift, the Mayor and Council must address all taxpayer demands: good governance reform; citizen oversight committees; adopting a ‘can do’ attitude and stop spreading fear and doubt for essential services; addressing the 27 unanswered questions about the budget; vetting Jim Ogonowski’s alternative budget proposal- https://www.keepedmondsaffordable.com/stay-informed?lightbox=dataItem-mh56q1f8; Prop 1’s defeat demands wholesale good governance reform.
Chris- the short answer to most of your questions is ‘no’. the mayor presented the mid- biennium budget adjustment to the city council in a budget retreat in mid- September that included $14.5 M of new property revenues. when Will Chen asked for another scenario to be presented that assumed the levy lid lift failed, the mayor said he wouldn’t do that. he had only that one set of amendments. (think poker game strategy). Now the mayor has to present another set of budget amendments that has no change in prop tax rates. Then in Council debates it, modifies it, and approves a mid-biennium budget amendment by year end. The City already has a 2026 budget. they approved it in Dec 2024. And it assumes $6M more in property taxes from a levy rate increase. (We don’t need these poker games. this isn’t a competition for who has the most power in running the City.) The Blue Ribbon Panel made an important recommendation to get residents involved to advise the Council on the budget details.I never expected a new advisory group to be created if the levy passed.But The mayor and 5 council people didn’t get the result they wanted at the polls. Now we’ll see what the 2025 Council does; and what the 2026 Council does differently.
Bravo! Another important step is to return to annual budgets. We had annual budgets for over a decade but then Council President Tibbott and the Administration convinced Council it was necessary for the new “Open Gov” software that was later mothballed. It’s obvious this biennial budget was a disaster and the 2026 modified budget should never have been accepted by Council as $10 million was added plus dozens of new jobs. Additionally not all funds were included or graphs and projections.
The Council should no longer “trust” the Administration and exercise leadership and require complete financials as per policies.
The Council should require a multi-year general fund reconciliation and require an explanation for the $4.M+ discrepancy that happened in late 2023; and file charges against members of the former administration who made significant changes to fund balances without Council knowledge or approval. Attorney Scott Snyder provided the necessary legal requirements that staff should follow as these funds are taxpayer’s money.
Citizens deserve this Council oversight so I’m hopeful that the two authors of this roadmap are elected Council President and CP Pro Tem.
It’s time Council regains citizen trust; it’s should not be two or three CMs making all the decisions without public knowledge or following the laws.
Citizens deserve knowing what’s draining our cash like the sewer plant, professional services, attorney, and certain staff.
Bravo! And hats off to both of you!!
Excellent! Thank you CM Dotsch and Chen for diving right in and doing your due diligence for the electorate.
Nick Lopez, thank you for your comments. I echo them.
As a career economic development and investment promotion professional who has worked for and with various cities, counties, national and overseas governments and promotion agencies, this is absolutely the right approach and I am so heartened to read these words from Council members Chen and Dotsch. Economic development is core to a city’s revenue strategy and going forward it must feature as a primary pillar in Edmonds, while of course retaining the charm and feel of the Edmonds we all love. Edmonds is my hometown, but I’ve seen economic development efforts thrive in communities from small town USA to large cities like London, Washington, DC, Seattle, and San Diego. I personally am excited about what’s next for Edmonds. This vote by the people of our city sends a clear message to elected officials regarding what next steps we need to take. And Council members Dotsch and Chen are listening and responding. Let’s roll up our sleeves to help them and get going. I’m up for it, and I’ve met many folks out canvassing that I know feel the same and want to contribute to solutions too. Onward together.
Thank you Councilmembers Dotsch and Chen for your message and intent. Given the election results, I imagine that “line-by-line” scrutiny of expenditures will occur. However, without strategic forethought, the City will scour the budgets of all General Fund operating programs and services. The result will be anemic/dismal levels of service across the board, which over time, will take its toll on the livability of this fine community. Alternatively, Priority-Based Budgeting principles call for funding our most important services and jettisoning less-critical services/programs in their entirety. Our most-important municipal services should be given the resources needed to maintain efficacy. Since the City’s incorporation in 1859, there have been civic, social, faith-based, sport, cultural, and business organizations, community groups, and volunteers that collectively make Edmonds great. Last year’s list of City-funded services need not be the road map for our future.
I don’t think there is a need to do a line by line ‘scouring’ of the budget. Start with the fact that Mike Nelson recommended an unprecedented increase in police dept spending (his language in the budget transmittal letter) . That is the most expensive department in the City. It used to be $11M, and now it’s $19M. I am no more safe @$19M than I was at $11M.
We’re on the right path here – thank you both.
A Council majority could create the new volunteer citizen budget advisory committee this month. Will they do it?
It should be troubling to every Edmonds property owner and renter that Edmonds has existed for as long as it has without a taxpayer budget advisory committee. Most responsible City Charters include this provision. Of course most responsible cities went away from the strong mayor/council form of government decades ago as well. So there is that.
Thank you to Councilmembers, Chen and Dotsch. Your ideas are pragmatic and forward looking. Former Councilmember Buchshnis also has excellent suggestions including back to see if some moneys were used incorrectly. I am heartened to read all of these ideas.
I think this a great idea and Thank you Will and Michelle for trying to help all of Edmonds and help transparency reign. Will the CC pass this Theresa Hollis? It will be interesting to see. Obviously Will and Michelle will vote yes. I am thinking Erika and I hope Vivian too will vote yes to this. That’s 4 votes. It will be very interesting to see what happens with this. 27 we will have more CC seats coming up. I think that one is Paine and maybe Vivian. Nand maybe too I haven’t looked. But I will. Again thank you to Michelle and Will.
Thank you, CM Dotsch and Chen, for advocating for transparency and fiscal responsibility. You’ve outlined a reasonable, practical approach. Diane Buckshnis, I agree with you 100%. I hope the CC creates a budget advisory committee and appoints you as a member. You are uniquely qualified to help the City get back on track.
Well, I’m curious to know before reallocating or repurposing restricted funds, if the council should first publish a detailed analysis showing exactly how much of each source is legally and practically available, and how using those funds now won’t simply postpone a deeper structural correction later…
jeremy- are you overthinking this with the term “ restricted funds”? if you attended either of the budget town halls supported by the Keep Edmonds Affordable campaign or watched the recorded version on you tube you know that 80% of the money in fund 512 started in the general fund. and you will also know there is precedence for transferring funds back to the general fund.
here’s the situation in Edmonds: The king has no clothes. and we’re politely ignoring that. the elected officials gave 22% and 12% raises to the two unions in the police department with no ability to pay them long term from the general fund. either transfer the money back so you can meet payroll, or open those contracts to negotiations now and come up with a mutually agreed upon cost of police compensation that the general fund revenues will cover. there is no big increase in property tax in 2026. the voters were pretty decisive about that on Nov 4th
Exactly what we’ve (whether for or against the levy) have been asking for. Government Accounting is akin to a company creating multiple subsidiaries that create a tangled web of “intercompany” payable and receivables that essentially amount to debt. In the private sector, they eliminate all of that so that shareholders and banks dont get screwed. Why not clearly outline that flow of funds for the taxpayer? Why not point out that grant financing from the State increases potential State budgets or create long term obligations that potentially lead to short falls? Why not clearly show what funds are legally fire walled from other uses? In private life, I have two sets of experts in procurement reviewing indirect spend to find inefficiency- because families lose jobs if I don’t govern the Company that way. It shouldn’t have to be an ask. Every action should be defined and measured to an expected outcome. Unfortunately, Government doesn’t fail fast – it’s a painful and slow and costly process to watch – then followed by painfully fast actions required to correct. I am still waiting on that “fiscally responsible” addition to the Comp Plan that limits, or at leases places ground rules, on expected outcomes and results (cost or revenue generating) – but Edmonds still hasn’t found the hutzpah to place measurable results into actionable ideas.
Exactly. This is what they should have been doing all along — proactive financial management, not crisis management. Instead, we got a fire drill.
We have citizens that are tracking our taxpayer dollars more closely than the very elected officials we put into office.
Unfortunately the buck starts and stops with the Mayor. We desperately need to move to a city manager.. our current mayor has too much authority / power – he is driving Edmonds into a deeper financial hole because of inexperience running a municipality and managing departments.
At what point does he say “we need help!”.. not likely. I would be willing to bet that he is currently working behind the scenes on another $6M levy, that will be proposed next year.. starting paying attention now…
I can’t fathom how we reached this point without a clear accounting of available restricted funds and their real limitations…
I agree entirely with exception to the current administration- much of this mess was inherited- and much of this mess is inherent in Government. We’ve seen more action taken in the past 2 years than the previous six – is it enough? Probably not. Is it what the voters have allowed – yes. With that being said, I was torn on my yes vote for the levy, and I don’t really see the failure as a bad thing – it is a both positive and negative in that it forces a more reasonable levy (which both sides could reasonably agree is probably necessary) and more revenue generation and cost sharing to developers and those who seek to invest in Edmonds (which both sides could reasonably agree is probably necessary). I would argue that unfettered spending hasn’t been an in issue under Rosen, unraveling years of spending has been – is it happening fast enough – probably not. I live in the private sector and the pace of public governance is well beyond my patience level – and thats probably a good thing too.
Lee, where were you when I needed you? For about the last fifteen years before I decided to leave Edmonds behind after 50+ years; I clamored for exactly the change you are recommending. Edmonds politics and management as now constituted are simply irrational, illogical and not fixable. Look at this election. Chis Eck, a relative newcomer citizen and openly staunch Democrat wins handily against a long term resident, no nonsense, NON-PARTISAN business person. Chris Eck heartily supports the 14.5M levy lift that goes down in flames, yet she retains her office where she can keep making these bad decisions. On top of that the hero of the day Council Person, Will Chen, who fought the levy lift had just last year voted to throw away 100K of the taxpayers money on the Landmark boondoggle that was a last ditch effort of his Party friend, Mike Nelson, to stay in office. There is no fixing a system that works like this. You need a Strong Council (district based), City Manager, Weak Mayor form of government – yesterday. The evidence is everywhere – Connector, Landmark, waste plant, Parrenville Creek blockage, Civic Field overbuild and cost over-run, unexplained use of public funds in the millions, the city suing it’s own citizens, police personnel suing the city they work for, for millions. You can’t make this stuff up.
15 years ago? I was a lobbyist at GTH – lobbying on behalf of municipal clients (when red light cameras were gaining popularity). Serendipitous? Possibly.
George, exactly what great action has Rosen taken that is helping solve all the problems his predecessors created? His only claims to fame are inflicting a Regional Fire Authority property tax on you that doubled the cost of fire protection in the space of one year and promoting a huge property tax lid lift that failed for good reason. This is the man two of your prior Mayor’s and other self adulating past public officials at the ECR who; (with the extreme help of Mike Nelson) have created your city money wasting machine over time; personally hand picked to succeed them. Raising taxes isn’t management genius; it’s just raising taxes. He told you Edmonds good life is doomed if you didn’t buy into his tax scheme. Now you are going to find out if that was a lie or not.
Hand-picking these people as a means to retain control of costing our city. Dearly.
The same 10-13 “insiders” have been hand-picking who runs this city for years. The public keeps getting boxed out while the same small circle makes decisions for 42,000 residents.
It’s not leadership — it’s control. Rosen wasn’t elected to serve a club; he was elected to serve the community. Maybe it’s time that power structure finally got some sunlight.
Someone needs to let us all in on who these 10-13 insiders are. I been around quite a few years and seems to me the ones who are active in our community sign up for these somewhat thankless tasks. I am pretty sure I am far from an insider – and wouldn’t take the job if you tripled the salary. I am not sure where any of the elected don’t serve the Community- they may do it differently than you or I would – but that’s the risk of electing anyone. Hell, it cost 35k plus to run an effective Council race – and I am guessing that money isn’t coming from rank and file citizens like myself – no matter the candidate. To Clinton’s point, WA State loves progressive ideas and has a limitless supply of great ideas – good luck to any elected who even slightly goes against the lightest of blue ideas. It takes a lot of government to work your way to the 4th most expensive State in the Union, pass record tax increases, still run short of funds, and have just about zero to show for it. It takes a lot more government to send down unfunded legislation and further hamper local control. We elected them (being the majority – no matter who individuals voted for).
Does “It takes a lot of government to work your way to the 4th most expensive State in the Union” relate to not being 47th in just about every category from life expectancy to education to impoverished to violent crime? Is spending more on society money well spent on tech, child/health care, environment? Genuine question, not rage bait.
Good Question, why not ask folks in Oregon who spend an amazing amount on “A lot of Government” and are in the lower quintile in just about every category from K-12 Public Education to Mental Health, the Child Welfare. But hey, they are #3 for folks on SNAP Benefits. So, there is that.
I too am curious about these “same 10-13 ‘insiders'” who have been “hand-picking who runs this city for years.” Mr. Reeves speaks with such certainty, he must know who they are by name, at least a few of them. If you have some names, Mr. Reeves, please share them with us~ or are these “insiders” destined to remain unknown and unknowable, maybe like the folks who “rigged” the 2020 election for president?
Sorry, but I won’t engage on that, Roger. Nice attempt though. I’m not extreme — I’m practical and principled. I just want to see our local government actually function for the 42,000 people who live here. You tell me who the 10–12 are — you’ve been here longer than me.
The names should come from the originator of the statement. Did it not originate with you? If not who? I strongly suspect that it’s an untrue statement.
Ron, your last sentence nailed it. Of course there’s no cabal of 10-12 “insiders” who secretly control who runs Edmonds. There are a few folks, however, who seem to enjoy dishing such hyperbole. I’d rather they instead be practical and principled enough to strive for truth. Facts and truth are the only way to advance our civic conversation.
So the city finance director says that only around $1 million of the internal service fund money is available to transfer but CM Chen and CM Dotsch claim that $5 million can be transferred. I’d love to see these three individuals sit down and debate these numbers and present the basis of their analysis for all to see. Given the overall size of that fund, this is a pretty huge discrepancy so somebody is really off base in their analysis.
Hello Niall – please provide the name of the document with Director Gould’s quote that $1M of ISF funds are available.
All I know about is his MEN interview on October where he sized up the surplus funds in the investment pool at $1.5M. (and not reported by MEN in that article is the additional detail that the $1.5M is from a bond issuance for building maintenance and repairs that the Administration never spent – and never provided an explanation for not doing the work. )
thank you
The levy failure offers proof that many don’t have confidence in our city governance. At this point improving things seems monumental, but this Washington Policy Center five minute video offers hope and a framework for getting better results for and from our governance. You may see it at the WPC website under the Watch tab for Nov. 5th or at the Youtube link below. Here’s to results-driven city government in Edmonds!
https://youtu.be/mYFUVXpGRj8?si=zOX4xztVjbSgfAmf
Shirley- yes- getting good governance reform with the current Mayor and majority of Council is a big challenge. However, as the Washington Policy Center youtube video points out, successful reforms of failed government business practices and ever increasing taxes have been proven when results-oriented business practices are introduced into government organizations. That’s exactly what Edmonds needs to correct the mismanagement, excess spending, and lack of fiscal discipline that has existed for the last 10 years. The Prop 1 defeat signals that a complete overhaul is in order. The Mayor and Council should study the youtube video link and study the 5-part video series that discusses how to introduce and implement a results-oriented culture to achieve good governance and budgeting for long term success. If Will and Michelle and new Council Member, Erika Barnett, get behind the results-oriented culture, and accept the demands of the voters, they can hopefully convince one of the other 4 Council members to embrace good governance reform. That would result in a good governance majority to support and implement the results-oriented turnaround to control spending while providing essential services. Keep the faith and check out the KeepEdmondsAffordable transition ad banner on the My Edmonds News website: https://myedmondsnews.com/ Click through to the campaign website featuring Michelle and Will’s innovative results-oriented governance reform plan. Volunteer professionals are standing by to help KeepEdmondsAffordable!
The same number who voted against Prop 1 voted for Chris Eck. She is one of the main proponents for Prop 1 and was on council during the decisions which led to our fiscal problems in Edmonds. Logic?
I agree with you. But does it logically follow that taxes are what does it? We also lead in homelessness and drug addiction- is there a correlation? Or is it distinct cultural differences and the fact that Seattle has a high degree of tech and aerospace jobs that draw higher tax base? One could argue it takes a lot more community and private dollars versus taxes to make those things happen – not government. We shall see. The great experiment still goes on –
Mr. Johnson, the “decisions which led to our fiscal problems” were made before Chris Eck joined City Council. Chris took her oath in late November 2023, after Mayor Nelson was defeated and Council had declared the fiscal emergency. She’s been on Council only two years, during the time Mayor Rosen and City Council have been working diligently to fix problems inherited from the previous regime.
The only reason Eck was reelected was because she was the incumbent, and she had large financial backing from the firefighter’s union, police union, and County dems. She promoted her ‘concern’ for citizens while disregarding taxpayer input on the tax levy and budgets. She was a cheerleader for RFA annexation that cost taxpayers $21M in new direct tax costs vs. the $12.5M taxes that were previously paid to the City for the RFA contract. She has never once asked any questions about how to measure the results of incremental spending. She never once asked for an analysis of why staff wages/benefits rose by almost 40% since 2022, or why the police budget soared by 61% in the same timeframe, or why the $6M in free Fed gov’t ARPA funds were spent on extra salaries, extra staffing when there was no need for more services. It’s time to stop excusing the Mayor and Council for rubber stamping all spending increases, for violating Public Disclosure laws, and for fear mongering about the consequences of defeating the $14.5M outrageous tax levy. She and others have to be accountable for their inaction, their failure to invoke fiscal discipline, their failure to adopt good governance principles, and their failure to be transparent and put taxpayers first. Fiscal discipline and measuring results trump Eck’s get along/go along rubber stamping persona.
Since you are from Woodway, Bill, you may not realize she did not get contributions from the police or firefighters unions. And from the party most of it was in-kind voter data. A great majority of her contributions were from individuals because she has broad support within our community of Edmonds. This is reflected in the substantial percentage of votes she won after working hard to earn all of the support she achieved. Seems you may be disregarding and discounting many people who live in your neighboring city.
Tom, if you happen to be looking for any sort of logic or common sense; I would strongly urge you to avoid Edmonds City Hall as now constituted. Lee Reeves, I pass my torch onto you, my friend, but don’t ever expect the crew you are up against to ever admit they were wrong about anything and watch out because they don’t hesitate about the idea and practice of suing their own constituents if they don’t like what you are saying or want some of your property for some grandiose “isn’t Edmonds wonderful” project to attract the tourists and development at all cost types. Just ask the Ebb Tide owners about property rights and the Olympic View Water District about bad policy to attract and appease developers if you wonder what I’m talking about.
There’s a lot of sniping about who did what to get Edmonds taxpaying homeowners into this mess…but at the end of the day it all starts and ends with our mayors and department heads. First Nelson and now Rosen. Rosen has not solved this mess but neither have our department heads. Hopefully somebody on the administrative side will “see the light” and put the brakes on the 0.1% sales tax increase “for the arts” and the $625k study for Yost Park…It’s just a study with no construction dollars attached to it. The council should see what a waste of money that is. What other money wasting legacy projects are buried in the City budgets?
I have no idea or wish to know who the 10 or 12 are but hopefully CM Chen and Dotsch with the new councilmember can push Mayor Rosen in the fiscally correct direction. I hope CM Olson will see the light and join with the push. I think the council will eventually realize they were snookered with all the doom and gloom about selling patks etc.
John, exactly, the “10 or 12” are past Mayor’s, Council Persons, and special interest individuals with some economic and political clout and it’s probably a bigger number than that. The names are irrelevant and even debatable, maybe, but the results are where you are at today. The names will change and various alliances of majority fours of CM,s will come and go but Edmonds will never escape the dysfunction as long as you have Strong Mayors, Weak Councils and subservient staffs who manipulate the councils and hide and/or perpetuate the mistakes.
Actually the number is much higher than 10-12. On 11/07/2023, 15,785 people voted for mayor.
John- you’re right. Mr. Pence talks hard CM Eck and the Mayor and Council have worked, but he fails to consider the resounding Prop 1 rebuke of their collective inaction, disrespect for taxpayers, and fear mongering to obfuscate their failures in good governance (fiscal discipline, accountability, performance/results orientation, transparency, common sense, and putting taxpayers first.) Voters were not just voting on an unacceptable tax levy lift – they were voting to invoke good governance reform. Maybe Mr. Pence can tell us why the Mayor and Council didn’t accept all the good governance recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Panel (BRP)? maybe he can tell us why the BRP members didn’t publicly oppose the tax levy lift? maybe he can tell us why the BRP members didn’t publicly criticize the Mayor and Council for their inaction? I believe the BRP did some good work, but given they failed to advocate for taxpayers, and failed to support the KeepEdmondsAffordable campaign, they should be disbanded and a new group of professional taxpayer-advocate volunteers should be appointed as a Citizens’ Oversight Committee. They should be empowered to do proper budgetary due diligence in a variety of areas (zero-based and priority based budgeting; excess staffing; performance/results focus; 360* transparency; non-tax revenues; utilize unused revenues from supplemental funds; find ways to deliver essential services rather than withhold them). https://www.keepedmondsaffordable.com/
Thank you, Councilmembers Dotsch and Chen for your proposal, it is the most sound and encouraging measures we’ve seen from the Council this year.
Hopefully, these measures can be implemented, especially the overall drive to bring more businesses to Edmonds, in order to stop relying mostly on residential taxes.
Re the Results-Driven City Government video link I posted yesterday, its five-part follow-up will come out one at a time weekly on the Washington Policy Center website. The same author, John Bernard, also has a new project called, “America’s Pulse” which gives comparative measurements from federal data of all 50 states in 50 categories. See how Washington ranks!
Thank you Bill K. for your added info.
With a bit of insomnia going this morning, I just thought I’d mention that we had lunch yesterday in Poulsbo, a very old Scandinavian/Viking theme city highly dependent on tourism on Liberty Bay of the Salish Sea which most everyone will be familiar with at least by name. It has Population 13,000+ with it’s own fire and police departments. As of January this coming year they are switching from a full time Mayor to a part time Mayor who appoints a full time City Manager, who must be approved by their 5 member elected at large City Council. This is a hybrid version of a Council/Manager system of government as far as I can tell. So it is certainly possible for a very small town highly dependent on tourism to have it’s own fire and police departments and be relatively well run with wants being met before a bunch of needs are thrown into the mix. What people (politicians of all stripes) actually do is way more important than what they actually say all the time in terms of what they actually accomplish in the world of politics and government use of “other peoples money,” or in other words, taxes demanded of the people for the common good.
Correction: Should be “with needs being met, before wants.” Back to bed and some sleep I hope.