SNOHOMISH COUNTY—Hundreds gathered on November 13, 2024, at the Jackson Board Room of Snohomish County’s Robert Drewel Building to voice their strong opposition against a proposed 8% property tax increase embedded within County Executive Dave Somers' ambitious $3.07 billion biennial budget. This significant financial plan includes plans to raise the County's general property tax levy by the state-allowed 1% each year, along with tapping banked capacity from deferred tax increases, leading to the total increase during this biennial period.
Weeks prior to this public hearing, Snohomish County Council Vice President Nate Nehring put forth a budget amendment aimed at countering the proposed property tax increase, proposing corresponding cuts to expenditures. "Taxpayers in Snohomish County have been burdened by ever-increasing taxes in recent years," Nehring stated, arguing for the necessity of balancing the County budget without imposing tax hikes, all whilst maintaining the expected level of services for constituents. Nehring’s proposal sought to cut excessive county spending, thereby eliminating the rationale for increased taxes.
This pushback came just after Snohomish County residents emphatically rejected a county-wide 0.2% sales tax increase intended for public safety funding during the general elections on November 5, where they voted it down by nearly 14 points. Nehring articulated what many residents were feeling, stating, “It would be unfair for the council to discuss raising property taxes just weeks after the public clearly showcased their financial constraints.” He suggested potentially putting the property tax increase up for voter consideration.
Adding to the discussion, Councilman Strom Peterson speculated on the taxpayers’ frustration with what he termed "regressive taxes." With three out of four realized measures from recent ballot initiatives being tax-related, Peterson recommended the council investigate more progressive revenue streams to fulfill county needs. "A modest $10 per year increase isn’t unreasonable," he stated, emphasizing its importance for necessary county allocations, including staffing for victim advocacy.
Council President Jared Mead supported Nehring's notion of the tax increase being "unreasonable and irresponsible." Mead noted the importance of thoroughly reviewing the budget for possible cuts prior to considering any tax hikes. Yet, he cautioned against completely stalling tax increases, especially if it causes the county to spiral dangerously close to deficit. Councilwoman Meghan Dunn, on the other hand, expressed beliefs about the property tax increase being indispensable. She underscored how it would protect commitments made to employees and services; most of the county's budget directly cycles back to its residents.
Despite Dunn’s arguments, Mead emphasized there are larger issues at play, implying the necessary economic stabilization and legislative backing falls beyond the Council’s control. Amid these discussions, the property tax increase proposal was soundly met with skepticism and disappointment from the public during the extended two-and-a-half-hour comment section of the meeting.
Residents shared stories reflecting their own financial hardships rooted largely in inflation and the soaring cost of living. A shocked Susan Tinker voiced her disbelief over the proposed tax when so many are struggling to buy basic necessities. “How can we afford even more taxes when food prices have skyrocketed?” she asked. Other attendees echoed similar sentiments, leading to emotionally charged comments reflecting their outrage.
Marysville resident Maribelle Williams’ voice broke the crowd as she passionately exclaimed, "We have some of the highest taxes in the nation, and you want more? For our homes?! You’re turning the American Dream upside down!" Local business owner Dave Stuart aligned with popular sentiment, describing the tax increase as poorly timed, affecting working-class families and seniors alike.
Attendees expressed grave concern over what they described as the working class being "taxed out of their homes," with many contemplating moving to states like Idaho where they believe the cost of living would be more manageable. “Many here, including myself, have called Snohomish County home for decades. These tax hikes are driving us away,” lamented another resident.
Julie Johnson, hailing from Edmonds, urged the council to explore budget trimming rather than thrusting financial burdens onto residents. “The county must become more efficient without resorting to higher taxes. Only raise taxes when it becomes absolutely necessary,” she firmly suggested.
Further emphasizing the urgency of the matter, Joseph Walkman from Lynnwood highlighted alarming statistics pointing to the consumer price index surging by 45% over the last decade, severely impacting families’ purchasing power. He emphasized the real-life consequences of the proposed tax hike, portraying it not as mere figures but as challenges affecting parents struggling to provide meals and seniors on fixed incomes choosing between medication and utility payments.
Anti-tax activist and businessman Tim Eyman also made his presence known, reminding council members about voter-approved initiatives restricting tax increases to no more than 1% without voter consent. Eyman pointed out the display of residents willing to show up to voice their discontent, urging the council to reflect on the depth of opposition present to this 8% proposal.
Some residents, particularly those living on fixed incomes—veterans, senior citizens, and disabled individuals alike—reported their property taxes had surged about 33% since their initial relocation, warning they could become forced to sell their homes if the proposed tax increase materialized. Others echoed foundational American principles, quoting the historical outcry against "taxation without representation" as they implored the council to reconsider its approach.
After hearing public sentiment and acknowledging the financial struggles voiced, the council postponed the decision until their meeting on November 23, leaving many residents with bated breath as the fate of property taxes hangs uncertain. The council now finds itself at the crossroads between managing public expectations and addressing the pressing fiscal realities they face moving forward.
