noForum: Edmonds has a spending problem; vote no on Prop. 1

By Becky Brauer / Herald Forum

If you own an average home in Edmonds, your property tax is set to increase $895. Next year if the Edmonds Proposition 1 ballot measure passes on Nov. 3, your tax will jump an additional $845.

For an Edmonds home with $928,600 assessed value, you are paying $929 this year to support the city of Edmonds, including fire and EMS; next year you would pay $2,669 for these services, almost triple.

In 2025 you are taxed 1 percent of assessed value to support the city, which contracts for fire and EMS services. Edmonds voters elected in April to annex to the Regional Fire Authority: as a result, your tax supporting both city and RFA in 2026 will total 1.9 percent to 2 percent of AV, almost double; before Proposition 1. If voters approve Proposition 1 in November, your tax supporting both city and RFA in 2026 will total 2.8 percent to 2.9 percent, almost triple your current rate for these services.

What is Proposition 1?

Our city is asking voters to approve a permanent additional $14.5 million in property tax revenue each year, a lift of the levy lid. Why? Because the city is in financial crisis and has cut basic services.

I got curious about this because, when my husband and I moved to Edmonds six years ago, our city was providing basic services and doing fine. The recent vote to annex to the Regional Fire Authority adds several million dollars to city revenue annually; it doesn’t make sense that the city is still struggling.

I am a retired CPA and retired CFO with a specialty in not-for profit financial management. I began sifting through the 10 years of financial reports on our city website, requesting public records, and talking with current and former City Council Members and fellow citizens. Our city’s messaging implies that this crisis is due to factors beyond city control: that’s not

Why is our city in financial crisis?

Of the 10 years I reviewed, the first seven years, through 2021, are “boring” in the best way: consistent revenue and expenditures with an average year-end surplus, adding a cumulative $4 million to the general bottom line over seven years. The city’s single biggest expenditure is staff compensation: budgeted headcount increased an average 2 percent or five positions per year, ending in 2021 with 241 positions.

In 2022 our city received one-time federal pandemic support funding which — together with our carefully accumulated surplus — created the illusion of a pot of money to spend. We created dozens of new positions, hired more contract labor, and raised compensation. Over the next three years, while city population remained stable, our budgeted city headcount increased an average 13 positions each year, ending in 2024 with 279 positions. We spent more than we took in from 2022 through 2024, cumulatively reducing general city coffers by $16 million.

We have an expenditure problem.

What has been done?

Annexing to the regional fire authority provides our city an additional $6 million in freed-up revenue each year. We also cut numerous positions this year (many of which had never been filled), reducing total budgeted headcount to 252; still exceeding the 241 positions of 2021, when basic services were provided.

Do we need $14.5 million? Urgently? From my perspective as a financial professional: No, we don’t. What we need is consistent good management; and financially minded city council members.

How should I vote?

You are being asked to vote on a very significant tax increase before you have seen the dollar effect on your household of the last significant tax increase with the RFA annexation. This timing overlap is troubling: the property tax levy calculator on the city’s website omits the RFA annexation increase.

I want the best for Edmonds: Careful spending of our tax dollars with an eye toward the future as well as the present, including the discipline to say “no” the way the average homeowner would. Our city has operated effectively before. Let’s ask it to do so again.

Becky Brauer lives in Edmonds.