On Friday afternoon October 11 at 4:15 p.m., the Mukilteo City Council received the City’s first biennial preliminary budget from Mayor Joe Marine for the years 2025-2026. In the run up to this preliminary budget, there was vigorous debate concerning waiving our deficit spending policy, known as the Gap policy, for this budget, with the mayor promising in our August 19 regular meeting: “Trust me. I’m not using all the ending fund balance. I wouldn’t do that, even if you gave me the authority. I am way more conservative than that.”
This August 19 vote to waive the Gap policy was the summation of several months of hints, nudges and pressure from Mayor Marine to have the Council to remove the “Gap” spending constraint of a 3% deficit in any one year. Council President Harris motioned to waive the policy. Council Vice President Jordal seconded the motion. The motion passed, against my wishes.
Proper roles of government
For months, I have steadfastly warned the Council not to pass this dangerous motion. I have been steadily ridiculed for either my supposed inexperience or my unwillingness to be a team player with the administration. I won’t use this space to defend my substantive experience, though I will use it to remind Mayor Marine that the role of the legislative branch is to be a co-equal check and balance on the executive, not its teammate or rubber stamp on bad ideas. Thoughtful dissent and rigorous oversight is a good thing.
On issue after issue, I have been proven right. I raised the Gap issue. City confirmed it. Then on October 3 they asserted that transfers are not to be included in the expenditures used to calculate the deficit, so voila – no deficit here. No Gap closing plan, Councilmember Dixon. Ironically, the new Financial Software calculates Gap my way, so the Budget actually agrees with my calculation method for 2025-2026, while Mayor Marine lies and tells us we are not in Gap for 2024. Done correctly, we should be implementing immediate deficit reduction strategies as we are at least $300,000 over the current Gap limit.
EFB and why important
Ending Fund Balance (EFB) is the money left over at the end of the year. We need a certain amount on hand for emergencies. Our EFB balances grew from 2019 to 2024, so I analyzed the issue and determined that it was simply due to the underspending of prior budgets because of the inability to hire staff. Once hired, however, that one time saving would be gone. Presented with this analysis, in September Administrator Powers confirmed that we are now at or near full employment in the city, so the EFB grew simply due to a nonrecurring phenomenon – one time, historic understaffing for budgeted positions.
Spendthrift Joe
With no consideration for what gave rise to it, our $6 million ending fund balance was burning a hole in the mayor’s pocket and he couldn’t wait to spend it. And spend it he did. While claiming to be a fiscal conservative, like the proverbial drunken sailor, his budget takes the ending fund balance down to $2.5 million by 2026! Yes, that is a level so dangerously low, it is equivalent to 1.5 months of operating expenditures, versus the 2 months required by budget policy and the near 4 months we are currently at with our current reserve level.
With deficits as far as the eye can see, the mayor’s budget is a shameless dereliction of duty: 4.7% in 2024, 3.5% in 2025 (with ARPA, without ARPA 14.3%) and 15% in 2026! Worse, this follows transferring $1.9 million of one time ARPA funds to fund Emergency Management Services, or EMS. Without the one-time ARPA monies from the Federal Government, his budget would have taken the ending fund balance down to $600,000, from $5.8 million today.
This reckless budget would then hand off a structural deficit of $2 million per year, with only 1 month of reserves in operations.
Good luck in 2027 – huge deficit, no money and no plan.
This is why he spent so long promising not to abuse the ending fund balance, only to do exactly that! Rather than make a single cut, he grows actual expenditures by $3.6 million, from $16.9 million in 2023 to a proposed $20.5 million in 2026, while actual revenues only grow $0.6 million, from $17.2 million to a proposed $17.8 million for the same time period.
What can be done?
We clearly need to reduce spending significantly – immediately! We can no longer afford the mayor’s broken promises, outright mendacity and dereliction of duty.
Give us a budget that is a credible plan, Mr. Mayor. Keep your promise not to raid the ending fund balance.
If you can’t do your job, why do we need you? If Council has to balance your budget for you, what value do you add?
We need a competent leader, not one who is sadly and obviously well beyond his depth.
Very respectfully,
Mike Dixon, Mukilteo Councilman
Mike Dixon was elected to a four-year term in 2023. Born and raised in the U.S. Virgin Islands, he has made Mukilteo his home since 2007. Mike is currently a cleantech executive with GM Energy, owns and operates an insurance agency in Old Town, and is a solar farm investor in the Caribbean. Mike is also a three-time elected water sewer commissioner, former president of the Board of the Alderwood Water & Wastewater District, and current commissioner of the Mukilteo Water & Wastewater District. He holds a bachelor’s degree in management science and an MBA, both from MIT.
According to his bio, his council goals are building a cleantech cluster in Mukilteo, developing the waterfront as a commercial and recreational economic hub in the region, marketing Mukilteo as a welcoming and inclusive city, building policy to support the middle class and ensure our city’s sustainability, working collaboratively to ensure strong and robust long term financial planning and annual budgets, and partnering regionally to help Mukilteo remain an inclusive, sustainable, vibrant and growing city.
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 Staff
17 Responses
What about you Mr Dixon, asking for $60K in funds to support your DEI program! What is the justification for the money, and why does the city need a DEI program or have room in the budget for one – based on your budget comments etc!
Secondly, this article is so politically motivated and shows little respect for the mayor and fellow council member’s. And respectfully your are certainly not collaborative, no matter how you try to convince the public you are!
Bravo, Sharon! I totally agree w/your comments.
It’s disappointing, becuz I voted for Mr. Dixon. I thought he would work together w/our mayor & other council members. This is another example that he isn’t. If I didn’t know better, I would sense from this article that he’s promoting himself to run for our mayor’s position. It looks like a campaign ad.
Hello Melinda,
A friendly word of advice. It is a PDC violation to publicly claim I am running for office, so please be aware of the election law: (https://www.pdc.wa.gov/…/candidates…/candidate-faq). I have never asserted that publicly, so I would appreciate your not speculating or idly suggesting that I am. There are PDC consequences for me if you persist in that speculation, so I am asking you to please not suggest something like this in a public forum, as I assuredly have said no such thing in any sort of public forum.
I thank you for your thoughtful inquiry and discourse.
Very best regards,
Thank you for taking time to consider my commentary. With all due respect though, the budget deficit in the Mayor’s proposed preliminary budget in 2026 is $2,667,000. DEI received $6,000 in this current 2024 budget and will likely receive that paltry amount again next year. I don’t think the DEI budget of $6,000 is creating a near $3 million deficit as proposed by the Mayor, nor did my request for $60,000 from 2 years ago and prior to being on Council.
Councilmember Schmalz and I are hosting a community chat on Thursday at Rosehill at 6pm where I will be showing residents the new budget software and we can walk you through any of my factual conclusions and answer any questions you may have. The budget is all online, so this is wonderful as you can read everything that either Steve or I claim and determine for yourself if it is true. My simple question and challenge to anyone is please show me factually where I am wrong in my conclusions, analysis or assertions. Let’s have that discussion.
Very respectfully,
Amen to that!
AGREE Sharon N
If the City drops EFB too low and then needs to borrow money, the City will find it has a “junk” rating, i.e., significantly higher borrowing costs. Someone should review Standard and Poor’s rating matrix.
I think it is shocking for Councilmember Dixon to accuse Mayor Marine of “broken promises, outright mendacity and dereliction of duty.” If Councilmember Dixon has concerns about the budget, he should have a friendly conversation with the mayor, who helped Dixon get elected in the first place. Instead, Dixon resorts to outrageous accusations in the press. I’m sure the mayor didn’t expect Dixon to be a mere yes-man on the council, but I’m also sure he didn’t expect Dixon to make unjust accusations about him either.
Many cities are facing financial hard times now—but that is because of the terrible inflation we are experiencing. Far from being derelict, Mayor Marine is doing the best that he can.
As far as the discussion about the gap policy, Councilmember Dixon requested at the Oct 7 meeting that they add a discussion of whether the city was in violation of the gap policy. This discussion went on for about an hour, and Councilmember Dixon was not satisfied by answers from the finance director, the city administrator, other council members, or the mayor. And all this was even after the finance director had provided the council with a written report explaining the situation.
The mayor has repeatedly (over many years) proven himself willing and able to work with people, even people with differing beliefs. Councilmember Dixon seems to be going out of his way to NOT work with people in a cordial way.
As far as whether it is a PDC violation for residents to speculate about whether someone is running for office: Unfortunately, the link Councilmember Dixon supplied is abbreviated, so it does not take us directly to the point he intended (most likely the link auto-abbreviated; I am not blaming Dixon for that). But we can see from the link that he intended to cite an FAQ answer, so I looked at those. Perhaps the one he intended to cite is this one (the only one that came close to applying): “Becoming a candidate. According to the disclosure law, you become a candidate when you do one of these things: accept a contribution or spend money for your campaign; reserve space or purchase advertising to promote your candidacy; authorize someone else to do any of these activities for you; state publicly that you are seeking office; or file a declaration of candidacy.” That rule has to do with what the potential candidate is doing; it says nothing prohibiting random residents from speculating about whether someone might want to run for office.
Sharon, if you assert my candidacy publicly, I am concerned that if I don’t rebut each assertion publicly, it will become a de facto public announcement. That’s my thought process. PDC is very meticulous and they do file monetary charges against candidates who violate their rules.
All else is fair game. It is my honor and privilege to serve, even if we disagree. You are all my bosses.
Have a wonderful evening and thanks for participating in our community.
SHARON Damroff is absolutely correct! Dixon seems to want to bring his Seattle politics to Mukilteo. DEI etc… NO THANKS Mike!
I agree with Sharon D’s comment: “The mayor has repeatedly (over many years) proven himself willing and able to work with people, even people with differing beliefs. Council-member Dixon seems to be going out of his way to NOT work with people in a cordial way.”
If Dixon was as truly interested in understanding the situation and reaching a resolution with Mayor and Council privately, which he claimed during the council meeting, why did he not reach out to them BEFORE the meeting? He’s clearly been studying this for quite sometime. He initially brought this up at the council meeting 2 weeks ago. Rather than attempting to understand the situation and work through the issues privately, he chose to wait until the council meeting and make a public spectacle of the entire council, administration, Mayor and City. His actions do not reflect those of a team player and are NOT in the best interest of our community. I have lost all confidence in his leadership abilities and to do what’s in the best interest of Mukilteo.
For the record, let me clarify a few things.
1. The first time we received this budget was Friday October 11 at 4:30pm. I commented on this budget on Monday October 14 at 7pm. Let that sink in before suggesting that I have a vendetta. It’s the Mayor’s proposal and it is my job to study it, comment on it, propose changes to it and ultimately to vote to approve it. I’m doing my job and it is a job I love doing.
2. The public deserves public discussion of public issues affecting the public. You wouldn’t know these facts if I didn’t point them out to you.
3. The issues I have been raising all summer long were separate and related to the current FY 2024 budget deficit the City Administration has been unwilling to acknowledge. The current deficit is 4.5%, not 15% as proposed by the Mayor in FY 2026.
4. There is a seperation of powers in our law. I don’t work for the Mayor. I work for you. My function as the legislative branch of our city is to make policy and approve budgets. His function as the executive branch is to execute the policies we make and propose budgets to us.
5. If a Democrat or Jennifer Gregerson had proposed a 15% deficit budget with no funding for equipment replacement or facilities maintenance and decimated the operating reserve down to 1.5 months of operations from 4 months of reserves – you would run them out of town, and rightly so. Instead, you call me, the truth teller demanding better, a charlatan and non-team player. If you are as fiscally conservative as I believe you are on most other issues – I don’t understand why you are not equally outraged.
Someone was outraged about DEI spending $6,000, but they just bat two blind eyes to a Mayor proposing a $2.667 million deficit on a $18 million of revenue? Perhaps I should repeat that.
The mayor proposed a 15% deficit and blamed it on revenues, EMS levys and now inflation. He promised to not spend down our ending fund balance to below 25%. He proposes to take it to 12%. And, without the ARPA funds, which no Republican supported, he would have taken it down to 3%. He funds no equipment replacement or facilities maintenance and barely procures the current equipment requested. He hands off a 2027 nightmare with a $2.667 million structural deficit, no operating reserve, no equipment and no funds to buy them, and years of foregone faciltiies maintenance. Why that doesn’t inflame you, I cannot fathom. But it does me and will continue to until we fix the problem. He didn’t even attempt to offer a PLAN. You may think that is leadership. I don’t.
It remains my honor and privilege to serve our community as a councilmember, even if we disagree. You are all my boss. I work for you.
Very best regards,
I thought you were very rude during the council meeting and the work session before. I will be voting for whoever runs against you when the time comes. I will also vote against you when you run against Mayor Marine. You are planning a campaign and it’s glaringly obvious.
You want to save money? Give back your stipend and cancel all funding to commissions.
In this presented budget, Mukilteo has plenty of money left in the general fund. All you MBAs from elitist schools know is cut cut cut without thinking about the impact to the community.
Sir, my stipend is $6,000 a year. I’m not the problem, nor am I running a campaign. I don’t understand why you are more offended by me than the Mayor who is proposing you grave harm in a dangerously irresponsible budget that had a Democrat proposed it, you would have run them out of town. Why is that? Don;t you care about his double digit deficits? Help me understand your position, as I am truly offended by the notion of giving you any deficits. Where do you propose we get the money from to fund the programs you want conrinued? We simply don’t have it.
The Mayor presented a $3.3 million deficit in his biennium budget. Even he can’t find the money to continue on this way, so he used one time money and raided our reserves down to a dangerously low level, which I think is highly irresponsible. The city is simply unable to continue on in this way without fundamental changes. This is due to Tim Eyman’s 1% proposition limiting property tax increases to 1%. I urge you to considr that when you look at the host of partisan ballot initiatives which will cut critical funding and harm you in the name of saving you from out of control governments.
My goal is to have an honest dialogue with you, the voter, so you understand the hard truths and we can then have hard adult conversations about a way forward on everything from Fire Regionalization to limiting community services we can provide, to encouraging growth in our town instead of demonizing housing and density, so we can grow our economy and resources in order to provide us all with the services we all want. Mukilteo has always grown its tax base in orcder to support the existing population and continue to providew srevices. Growth is our life blood. We grew through annexation, from inception, until 2011. We need to annex the entire MUGA, but that’s a different conversation for a different day. So when conversations around growth and deficits are demonized or ignored, like the HAP or accomodating our growth requirements, it does no one any good to pretend like reality doesn’t exist. I think you deserve better. I think you deserve honesty.
Thank you for sharing your views. It is my honor and privilege to serve you, even if we disagree.
Instead of demonizing housing and density? You mean the housing and density you voted against a few weeks ago?
And why do you keep mentioning political parties? Local government doesn’t need partisan hacks.
Great point, sir. I voted against a spot zone to rezone a business park to a multi family zone at the end of a local access road. I support middle housing along the speedway, which is what our comprehensive plan calls for. I support density, but in the right location, where it makes sense.
I appreciate Mr. Dixon’s attention to maintaining a balanced budget, which is a necessity in a small town like Mukilteo. Noting that Mr. Dixon is a commissioner for Mukilteo Water and Waste that has some of the highest costs in the state and country for water. Interested to hear his plan to reduce the water costs in this city. Perhaps we can make the landlords in Everett pay their fare share so that private residents do not subsidize the for-profit apartment complexes? Nor do we need to be collecting revenues today for an infrastructure plan that is 20 yrs away. The only thing that will happen is further expenditure prior to implementation. I am interested to hear Mr. Dixon’s plan to reduce water and sewer costs.
Again, thank you for your work in maintaining balanced budgets in our community.
Kind regards,
Kendal Harr