SNOHOMISH COUNTY—Hundreds gathered in the Jackson Board Room of the Snohomish County Campus’ Robert Drewel Building Tuesday morning, November 13, to speak out against a proposed general property tax levy increase of 8% drafted in County Executive Dave Somers’ proposed $3.07 billion biennial budget.
The Executive’s proposed 2025/2026 budget increases the County’s general property tax levy by the state-allowed 1% each year as well as taking banked capacity from previously deferred tax increases for a total increase of 8% over the biennium.
Weeks before the public hearing County Council Vice President Nate Nehring proposed a budget amendment to the property tax increase while proposing to make corresponding cuts to expenditures in the budget.
“Taxpayers in Snohomish County have been burdened by ever increasing taxes in recent years,” said Council Vice President Nehring. “We can balance our County budget without tax increases while continuing to provide essential services our constituents expect. My amendment does just that by identifying cuts in unnecessary county spending to eliminate the need for a tax increase. Taxpayers have had to tighten the belt with regard to their own personal budgets and government ought to do the same.”
Councilmember Nehring’s amendment removed budget increases over the previously budgeted levels and discretionary spending not connected to essential county government functions.
During the general election on November 5 Snohomish County residents resoundingly voted down a county-wide 0.2% sales tax increase to pay for public safety – by almost 14 points. Council Vice President Nehring said Tuesday it would be unfair for council to discuss raising property taxes just weeks after the public, who values public safety, clearly showcased that they are simply overburdened financially and now is not the time to ask them to pay more. He continued that placing the property tax increase on a ballot for voters to decide could be an option to explore.
Councilman Strom Peterson noted he speculates taxpayers may be frustrated with “regressive taxes” seeing as they supported three, out of four, ballot measures on November 5 which could be considered tax measures, including capital gains. He suggested the council look at progressive revenue streams to meet the needs of the county while stating that asking taxpayers to pay a modest $10 a year is reasonable and helps pay for important county investments such as staffing a Victim’s Advocate for those who have been victims of a crime.
Council President Jared Mead agreed with Vice President Nehring stating that a 8% increase in property tax is “unreasonable and irresponsible,” especially before looking at the budget to see where cuts can be made before asking the taxpayers to pay more. However, he added, that raising taxes 0% while in a deficit would also be “unreasonable and irresponsible.”
Councilwoman Meghan Dunn said the property tax increase is critical to follow through with promises the county has already made, as far as staff wages and services go, noting that the majority of the county’s budget cycles back to the public.
However, Council President Mead rejected Dunn’s narrative agreeing with her that the county’s bank capacity is in the red and tough decisions will need to be made in four to five years from now. He continued to say the county’s proposed property tax increase alone will not solve the issue and there needs to be conservative cuts, legislative backing, and an economic stabilization – all out of the county’s control. Therefore, according to Mead, the decision to raise taxes for the public would simply delay the inevitable. He proposed an amendment to the ordinance, No 24-075, to reduce bank capacity usage as a solution.
Tuesday’s public comment section spanned roughly two-and-a-half hours featuring members of the public all voicing their existing financial tribulations caused by inflation and already unmanageable cost of living expenses.
Resident Susan Tinker shared that she was “shocked” to learn that the county was considering raising property taxes when most people can’t afford to put food on their table due to grocery prices, and Washington State having one of the highest gas taxes in the country.
While it’s true Washington ranks within the top five states for gas price taxes at a rate of about 49.4 cents per gallon, according to Tax Federation, it’s still overshadowed with states such as California, Illinois, and Pennsylvania. Washington also ranks among the five highest in the country for local and state taxes with Snohomish County, specifically, having the highest sales tax in the state.
“We have some of the highest taxes in the nation and you come to us for more? For our homes?!” Maribelle Williams, a Marysville resident asked the council emotionally. “You’re turning the American Dream into the American nightmare.”
Dave Stuart, local business owner, seconded everything the crowd expressed adding that the tax increase is “not good timing that affects the working-class people as well as the retired people.”
“You’re taxing people out of their homes,” said Stuart.
These concerns were echoed by several others who claimed they are looking to move to Idaho or other states to escape the unaffordable cost of living and homeownership in Western Washington, some who have called Snohomish County home for 50 years or more.
Julie Johnson, Edmonds resident, urged council to trim the budget instead of asking taxpayers to pay more property taxes stating, “I am confident that the county can find ways of cutting costs while still being efficient.”
“Homeownership is expensive hence the need to be respectful and mindful of our taxpayer dollars,” continued Johnson. “Only raise taxes when proven absolutely necessary.”
Joseph Walkman from Lynnwood noted that the consumer price index has surged 45% in the last decade “eroding the purchasing power of every hard-working family.”
“This isn’t just numbers on a chart,” Walkman continued. “It’s parents struggling to put meals on their family’s table, seniors on a fixed income forced to choose between medication and utilities, and young people losing hope of owning a home here because the median income is not keeping up with the cost-of-living index.”
Tim Eyman, anti-tax activist and businessman, reminded council that voters overwhelmingly voted on an initiative that would not allow council to approve more than a 1% increase in taxes without voter approval but there has not been any discussion of asking voters on a proposed 8% increase.
Eyman brought attention to the hundreds of citizens who showed up on a Tuesday morning to voice their opposition to the 8% increase and asked the council to consider how many would turnout on the weekend, or outside of the average work hours.
Some residents living on a fixed income, such as combat veterans, disabled people, and seniors, came forward to voice that their property taxes have already been raised about 33% since moving in, and with raising costs in other fields the 8% increase will force them to have to sell their houses and move elsewhere more affordable.
Others reminded the council that this country was founded against “taxation without representation.”
The decision to vote on the ordinance was continued until the council’s meeting on November 23.
Author: Kienan Briscoe
