Regarding Ross Hunter’s Oct. 14 op-ed, “Small cities like Edmonds need levies to stay strong“: If you live in Edmonds, you should vote “no” on Proposition 1 in the general election.
Proposition 1 asks for a multiyear, permanent levy lid lift of $14.5 million. If passed, Prop. 1, on top of an increase already approved by voters for the Regional Fire Authority, would cause property taxes that support city services, fire and EMS to nearly triple. With inflation, Prop. 1 is projected to escalate to $17 million a year by year six, and that amount becomes the new baseline for all future property tax increases. Far beyond historical spending patterns, Prop. 1 would render Edmonds one of the highest property tax jurisdictions in Snohomish County virtually overnight.
Currently, the owner of an Edmonds home worth the average assessed value of $928,600 pays about $930 for city services. In 2026, when the Regional Fire Authority levy takes effect, that will rise to $1,828. Should Prop. 1 pass, the owner will pay approximately $2,670.
Because most Edmonds households earn below the city’s average household income ($167,694), Prop. 1 will affect most residents and small businesses.
Edmonds’ mayor and city council passed a balanced budget for 2025-26 that included a $6 million property tax levy to address the city’s budget shortfall, caused by overspending and depletion of $18 million in reserves over two years. That $6 million levy has now grown to the $14.5 million property tax proposal with annual inflation escalation.
This is not affordable. Rising property valuation and inflation outpace earnings for all but the wealthiest Edmonds residents. This drastic tax increase will force less-affluent homeowners out. Like many other communities up and down the West Coast, Edmonds will become affordable for a few.
As we have seen in Seattle, investors are buying up homes at a pace that defies national real estate trends. Local developers covet single-family homes thanks to upzoning and the push to increase density. If this measure passes, a housing grab will ensue, pushing out low-, fixed- or middle-income residents. More condominiums will be built for the wealthy, not homes for all.
Opponents to Prop. 1 are frustrated with what we see as fiscal mismanagement. Edmonds was financially healthy through 2021. From 2022 to 2024, our city government repeatedly approved spending despite the depletion of our general fund. The council declared a fiscal emergency in November 2023 but continued to approve deficit spending into 2024 while failing to pursue economic development that would have increased tax revenues. Rather than do its work, the council has left the voters to decide about a levy lid lift.
The mayor and city council should fund city services from existing sources and create new revenue streams. Business attraction programs and innovative economic development initiatives could diversify our fiscal profile. Determined focus and dedicated management are required, rather than marketing tactics that force voters to save the government from its own fiscal mismanagement at the expense of their homeownership.
Although the general fund is struggling, Edmonds has accumulated surplus in other funds that could be combined legally with the general fund. Edmonds is by no means broke, having $70 million in investments and an otherwise healthy balance sheet. Edmonds maintains multiple revenue streams: utility fees, real estate excise taxes, service fees and red-light camera revenue. The website keepedmondsaffordable.com includes an alternative budget proposal, which the mayor and council have declined to discuss. This proposal could restore Edmonds to financial health and protect less-affluent homeowners.
Proponents of a tax hike compare Edmonds to Redmond, Kirkland, Bothell and Issaquah. Unlike these, Edmonds hosts no Big Tech or retail headquarters, nor major biotech industries, nor University of Washington satellite campuses. Traditionally an older adult community with more affordable housing than the Eastside or King County, Edmonds is similar to towns like Mukilteo in taxation and household earnings. When politicians misrepresent Edmonds, they imperil the residence of less-affluent members, and make our city more exclusive, less vibrant and less diverse.
