If Edmonds is raising taxes, how can it afford Landmark 99?

I read with interest a recent article, outlining the city council’s decision to raise property taxes and the EMS levy as well (“After marathon meeting, Edmonds council raises property taxes 1%,” The Herald, Oct. 25).

This seems at odds with the proposed acquisition of the Landmark 99 property for $39 million, which is just for the property currently occupied by the Burlington Store and an antique mall. This property is just barely inside the city limits, and not a centralized location. The cost is for acquisition only and does not include any costs associated with the purchase, or future development costs, which would most likely add millions of additional dollars.

Given that the city has difficulty with basic infrastructure maintenance and improvement, most notably street paving and sidewalks etc., how can city officials justify this purchase.

Sited in the proposal of Landmark 99 development, is the possible placement of a Boys & Girls Club building, and improved pedestrian access. This is not a pedestrian friendly corridor, and recent traffic mitigation efforts would most likely require modification to improve and create pedestrian access.

The proposed tax increase doesn’t sound like a lot, but with the average home price in Edmonds currently at $824,000, property taxes are significant already, especially for senior citizens on fixed incomes. The city council needs to get in touch with the reality of basic city needs, and not get into the black hole of property development outside of those needs.

Wally Bergquist

Edmonds

Talk to us

> Give us your news tips.

> Send us a letter to the editor.

> More Herald contact information.

More in Opinion

toon
Editorial cartoons for Tuesday, Oct. 28

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

2024 Presidential Election Day Symbolic Elements.
Editorial: A recap of Herald Editorial Board endorsements

By The Herald Editorial Board Voters, open up your ballots and voters… Continue reading

toon
Editorial cartoons for Monday, Oct. 27

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

Comment: Blame ICE raids, visa limits for higher food prices

President Trump’s immigration policies are making it harder for farmers to harvest crops affordably.

Goldberg: Trump’s flinging of AI feces misses target, debases himself

Trump’s reposting of juvenile AI video seems a defensive reaction to those who won’t bow down to him.

Policies can promote compassion, unity

Loving as a nation Policies can spread compassion Martin Luther King taught… Continue reading

City of Snohomish: Oppose church’s slate for council

City of Snohomish Oppose church’s slate for council The city of Snohomish… Continue reading

Monoe mayor: Cudaback cares for, serves city

Monoe mayor Cudaback cares for, serves city I’ve served as Monroe’s mayor… Continue reading

toon
Editorial cartoons for Thursday, Oct. 23

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

Comment: White House didn’t need Trump’s Mar-a-Lago makeover

The ‘billionaire’s ballroom’ will stand as a garish monument to one man’s taste for gold-plated everything.

In an official White House photo, President Lyndon Johnson shakes hands with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. after signing the Voting Rights Act of 1965, in Washington on Aug. 6, 1965. The Supreme Court has shown a willingness to chip away at the landmark civil rights legislation. A Louisiana case could unravel much of its remaining power. (Yoichi Okamoto/Lyndon B. Johnson Library via The New York Times) — NO SALES. FOR EDITORIAL USE ONLY. —
Comment: Ruling could effectively end landmark voting rights act

If the Supreme Court throws out Section 2 of the act, Republicans could gain up to 19 more seats.

Add name to petition to impeach President Trump

Impeach Trump Add name to petition for action Donald Trump has violated… Continue reading

Support local journalism

If you value local news, make a gift now to support the trusted journalism you get in The Daily Herald. Donations processed in this system are not tax deductible.