EVERETT — The Snohomish County Council completed its first biennial budget update Wednesday, approving a planned 2% property tax increase with a 3-2 vote.
The vote was consistent with how the council voted in 2024 when it approved the 2025-26 biennial budget. Council members Meagan Dunn, Jared Mead and Strom Peterson — all Democrats — voted for the 2% increase, and Republican council members Nate Nehring and Sam Low voted against.
This increase was part of the $3.2. 2 billion budget since the 2024 vote.
“Last year, we were accused of increasing property taxes by 4%,” Mead said in an interview after the meeting. “Really what that meant was 2% each year.”
He added that while technically last year’s vote was on a 4% budget, “it was really two consecutive 2% budgets.”
The county’s revenue increase is estimated at $2,126,130.
Each year, Washington counties can impose a 1% property tax increase without voter approval. However, the county is not required to levy the additional tax each year. If the county doesn’t levy the tax, the percentage is saved for later use, referred to as banked capacity.
Raising property taxes an extra 1% in 2025 and 2026 leaves Snohomish County with a banked capacity of 4.3%, according to county spokesperson Kari Bray.
“My vote today on voting no on those tax increases, which were decided last year, was just to be consistent with my vote last year,” Nehring said in an interview.
In 2024, Nehring proposed reduced spending as an alternative to raising taxes.
“The case I made was the cost of living is very high. There’s a significant tax burden that Snohomish County residents are facing, and I did not at the time and I still don’t feel that we have eliminated unnecessary spending into a point which warrants a tax increase.”
Even with tax increases, the budget was passed with a $16 million structural deficit, meaning planned expenses exceeded revenue, and money from the county’s fund balance would need to be used.
The increase will not be on a property owner’s entire bill. It will only affect the county’s portion — about 5.99% of the total bill. Fire districts, schools, libraries, roads and others get a portion of the revenue as well.
The council also followed through with planned 1% increases to the roads and conservation futures property taxes. The road tax equates to 4.06% of the homeowners ’ property taxes in unincorporated Snohomish County. The conservation futures tax is less than 1% of a homeowner’s bill.
The council voted 3-2 to approve the conservation tax, with Nehring and Low voting against. Council members voted 4-1 to approve the roads tax, with only Nehring voting against.
“I have always been known for roads and transportation. I have usually supported the roads levy more times than not,” Low said in an email. “I support our county conservation futures program however, I do not believe we need to keep increasing taxes year after year. The program has plenty of funding.”
The road tax revenue increase will total an estimated $752,401, and the conservation futures tax revenue increase will total an estimated $45,959.
The council also voted unanimously to add 19 full-time positions to the 2026 budget.
County Executive Dave Somers recommended 18 new or extended positions based on revenue, Dunn said in an interview. Non-general fund money will pay for these positions.
The 19th was a one-year extension to a deputy prosecuting attorney position, set to expire at the end of the year and recommended by County Prosecuting Attorney Jason Cummings, Low said. General fund money from the chemical dependency and mental health sales tax will pay for the position.
Finally, the council voted 3-2 to approve the allocation of $5 million from the Affordable Housing and Behavioral Health Program fund for recovery housing development projects. Nehring, Low and Mead voted for the proposal. Dunn and Peterson voted against.
“From my perspective, it’s really important that we have funds set aside for recovery houses which have built-in accountability, where you’re using tax dollars to give somebody housing — you’re ensuring that they’re not using while they’re there,” Nehring said in an interview.
The way the affordable housing fund was set up rewards low-barrier housing projects, he said. Tenants are allowed to continue using while staying in low-barrier housing.
In a 2016 study from the Seattle University School of Law, sobriety and background check requirements, among others, can become barriers that “often prevent meaningful access to emergency shelter.”
Nehring said a majority of the fund will still be available for low-barrier housing, calling the $5 million a “small portion” in comparison to the larger fund.
Dunn argued that the use of the funds has always been determined by an advisory committee made up of experts, she said in an email. “While I see the need for recovery housing, earmarking funds for a specific use circumvents our already-established process and does not funnel money towards our community’s highest and greatest needs.”
The county’s greatest need is shelter for the unhoused population, Dunn said in an interview.
“We have an eight-year waiting list for someone who is seeking help with long-term supportive housing or emergency shelter,” she said.
In 2021, the council passed a 0.1% sales tax to fund emergency and affordable housing and behavioral health services. A plan was created to lay out how the funds would be used to cut homelessness in half by 2027, Dunn said.
“By diverting funds away from that mission and instead earmarking it, removing the competition from all other housing programs — only specifying that it’s for recovery — we’re shifting away from that mission, and the mission will take longer,” she said.
Taylor Scott Richmond: 425-339-3046; taylor.richmond@heraldnet.com; X: @BTayOkay
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
