Will you chip in to support our nonprofit newsroom with a donation today? Yes, I want to support My Edmonds News!
The Edmonds City Council at its Tuesday, Jan. 13 meeting is scheduled to consider whether to approve a 0.1% Transportation Benefit District sales tax. The money raised — estimated at $660,000 for nine months in 2026 and $1 million in subsequent years — would be used to address transportation-related deferred maintenance and make improvements to city streets and sidewalks.
The Council held a public hearing on the proposed tax at its Jan. 6 meeting.
Other business on the council agenda includes:
- Reappointing Susan Paine as the council’s liaison to the Community Transit Board, a position she has held since 2022.
- Accepting a proclamation for Martin Luther King Jr. Day.
The meeting will begin at 6 p.m. in the council chambers, Public Safety Complex, 250 5th Ave. N., Edmonds. Prior to the 6 p.m. business meeting, the council will meet at 5:30 p.m. to interview Shaun Leiser, a candidate for appointment to the Architectural Design Board.
To participate in the meetings remotely, click on zoom.us/J/95798484261. To listen by phone, call +1 253 215 8782 and use Webinar ID 957 9848 4261.
You can see agendas for both meetings on the City’s meeting portal.
It is so very frustrating to have our city ‘leadership’ continue to think taxing us will resolve the years of mismanaged accounting and no citizen oversight. Our own personal finances would NEVER survive with this mentality. At our homes, we can’t keep spending and then get into a pickle, to then rely on others to bail us out; we need to cut something out if it is stretching our budget….the city needs to consider this approach.
Hello Heidi, I feel your frustration about more taxes. What are some of those things that you think we should be cutting out?
Adding to the expenses should not be considered without a deep dive as to true need. If something is needed, the council and city should be able to determine if jobs can be performed across departments. We know that many public work projects are not performed in the winter rainy months. Why could we not utilize these folks for other tasks during this time when they have less to manage? It is all about working to allocate within your means not continuing to ask others to just pay more to support whatever the city and council decide they ‘want’. I have heard them say over and over about ‘needing these tax dollars’; well, we the people voted down a levy, and I realize they are unhappy about this but unilaterally deciding these new taxes on ‘our behalf’ is not the answer.
Amen!
I’d like to offer a concrete next step the City Council can and should take immediately toward restoring trust and transparency. It would be enormously helpful for the City Council to begin an open discussion, from the dais, at this week’s council meeting about the Blue Ribbon Panel’s suggestion to establish a Finance Committee. Such a committee could provide the Council with the expertise and structure needed to work through a genuine financial recovery plan.
Although the topic isn’t currently on the agenda, there is ample room to add it. Even a brief, initial conversation would signal to the community that the Council is willing to explore new approaches and is serious about doing things differently. A simple, transparent dialogue among councilmembers—held in public—would be a good first step and go a long way toward rebuilding trust and demonstrating that the city is ready to move beyond business as usual.
I would like a more detailed list of what would be funded by the Transportation Benefit Charge above and beyond streets and sidewalks. A million dollars per year on top of funds currently coming in seems like a lot of money for street and sidewalk work.
Good question, Robert. This is restricted money for streets and sidewalks only. For a complete list I would point you to the city’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) at: https://cdnsm5-hosted.civiclive.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server_16494932/File/Government/Departments/Public%20Works%20and%20Utilities/City%20Capital%20Projects/2025/2026-2031_PW_CIP_CFP%20Dec%202025r.pdf
Personally, I support this incremental sales tax increase to improve roads and sidewalks. Our community ranked this as a top priority in the survey. In addition, this approach aligns with many key city objectives:
• Addresses current budget shortfalls directly.
• Funds and accelerates essential infrastructure projects already in the CIP but currently scaled back.
• Unlocks additional grant opportunities by providing matching contributions – a true revenue multiplier.
• Can be implemented immediately with no added administrative burden.
• Does not necessarily require additional staffing since construction work can be subcontracted.
• Provides restricted funds that benefit the entire community — pedestrians, cyclists, drivers, and even parking.
How else could we generate nearly $1.2 million in new annual revenue? Cities nearby, such as Lynnwood, have already implemented this tax, and several others are evaluating it. Adopting this measure allows us to distribute the financial responsibility, rather than depending exclusively on property taxes. This positions us to present a better, well-reasoned and appropriately sized levy lid lift to the community when needed. If we choose not to pursue this option now, the $1.2 million will likely be shifted to a future property tax levy instead.
I agree with Jim. Streets and sidewalks are very high priority items for our residents/businesses, and this tax is specifically restricted to these things. Also, this tax can be used to help the city make much needed progress toward ADA requirements in our street/sidewalk infrastructure. As Jim points out, without this incremental sales tax increase, the shortfall will very likely be added to the property tax levy request coming our way in 2026. I personally don’t like to pay more taxes in any form, but on balance, I believe this one is warranted.
Just one more example of how the Mayor and Council disregard taxpayer input. How many times and in how many ways do they have to be told that more taxes are not the answer? Rebuilding credibility and trust is what must come first – as Jim and others have been saying for over a year. Where’s the discussion about how another 0.1% tax will put Edmonds in the highest sales tax quartile of all western Washington cities? Where’s the discussion about how the 2026 budget is based on inflated 2021-2025 spending for general staff and police and how the City needs to explain the past excess spending, and reduce the 2026 budget? Where’s the discussion on why doubling the utility tax should be rescinded? Where’s the discussion about how the State has eased the restrictions on REET taxes and now allows them to be used for more than just street maintenance? Where’s the discussion about other city funds being available to be used for essential budget items? Where’s the discussion on why the City shouldn’t demand RFA management reform in addition to the $15M owed by the RFA? Where’s the discussion on how much money was spent on the Rimmer tree case and why? Hopefully Council Prez Dotsch, and CMs Chen and Barnett will make good governance and rebuilding trust the #1 priorities for 2026.