As families across Snohomish County continue to face rising costs, local government should be looking for ways to ease the financial burden on taxpayers, not add to it. The County Executive’s proposed 2027–2028 budget received by the County Council relies heavily on additional taxes and fees to balance the books.
The proposed budget includes nearly $30 million in additional property taxes and fees through several separate increases over the biennial budget cycle. These include increasing the general property tax levy using previously unused taxing authority, increasing the Roads and Conservation Futures levies, and removing the Mental Health/Developmental Disabilities and Veterans Assistance levies from within the existing general property tax levy, a process known as “unnesting.”
In addition to property taxes, the proposal includes increases to Surface Water Management fees and Snohomish Conservation District rates.
These increases are stacked on top of the $25.3 million annual sales tax increase passed by the Council on a 3-2 vote earlier this year without voter approval and the $6 million annual increase in vehicle registration fees paid by residents of unincorporated Snohomish County (also passed on a 3-2 vote.)
While these increases are presented individually, taxpayers experience their combined impact when balancing their household budgets. Beyond the burden on taxpayers, these tax increases fail to resolve the county’s long-term financial challenges.
Despite significant new and increased taxes, the Executive’s six-year financial forecast shows that county expenditures will continue to outpace revenues. These tax increases are being presented as necessary to address the county’s structural deficit, yet the proposed budget fails to resolve the underlying imbalance. Without a sustainable approach to controlling spending, we risk facing even more difficult decisions in the future, including significant service reductions or additional tax increases.
The fundamental problem is that the proposed budget relies on additional taxpayer revenue while continuing a pattern of spending growth that outpaces revenues. Rather than using these tax increases as an opportunity to put the county on a more sustainable financial path, the proposal leaves the same structural challenges unresolved. A truly responsible budget requires us to examine not only how much revenue government collects, but also how much it spends.
That’s why I am proposing budget amendments that would eliminate these additional tax increases and offset the lost revenue through responsible spending reductions. My amendments prioritize and preserve essential county services while identifying opportunities for savings. These include reducing funding for offices performing non-mandated county functions, cutting travel and discretionary expenses, eliminating unnecessary high-level administrative positions, and rejecting significant new spending proposed by the Executive. While not exhaustive, these examples represent areas we should examine before asking our constituents to pay more.
My goal with this budget is simple: protect essential public services while bringing county spending into better alignment with responsible revenues. Budgeting requires making difficult decisions and establishing priorities. Continually asking taxpayers for more money cannot be our default solution.
As the County Council considers the next biennial budget, I will continue advocating for an approach that protects taxpayers today while strengthening the county’s financial stability for tomorrow. We have a responsibility to ensure Snohomish County can continue delivering essential services for years to come without overburdening our citizens with new taxes.
Nate Nehring is an elected member of the Snohomish County Council. Nate and his wife, Savannah, are both lifelong residents of Snohomish County, where they are now raising their four young children. Councilmember Nehring can be reached by email at Nate.Nehring@snoco.org.
COMMENTARY DISCLAIMER: The views and comments expressed are those of the writer and not necessarily those of the Lynnwood Times nor any of its affiliate
Author: Lynnwood Times Contributor
