It really depends on how one feels that the city has adequately planned for and spent property tax dollars. The city has known for a long time that it would be experiencing budget shortfalls based on how state law requires Snohomish County to calculate and assess property taxes.
The proposition is a temporary fix to raise revenue and will still lead to budget shortfalls in the future that the city may or may not be planning for.
It's worth noting that the wording includes studying, but not actually doing, reopening the Forest Park Park pool, Office of Neighborhoods, and library hours. Doing those would presumably cost extra.
$28 a month is another $336 a year or over $500 in W-2 wages before FICA, 25% federal income tax (the 22% bracket goes back to 25% in 2026), state paid leave taxes, state LTC tax, and the employee portion of workers compensation premiums, assuming one takes the standard deduction.
The average cost of a home in Everett is now $650,000 and the average monthly taxes is $82 currently and will increase to $118/month. Not even mentioning that letters are being sent with properties new assessment of higher value. So really, it will be more than $118/month.
I think yes. I can’t find any good reason against the city’s reasoning: the state law capping property tax revenue increases at 1% per year, even though inflation and thus cost of services go up by more than 1% per year. The city’s budget can only grow by 1% per year from property taxes, despite property values increasing more than that. No matter what the city’s ability to provide services will suffer. Unless we get a lot more huge businesses to increase business tax revenue. If im wrong about any of this, help me understand.
“If passed, Proposition 1 would fund public safety, like police and fire, park maintenance, libraries, the animal shelter, street maintenance, support for neighborhood associations, social services for those in need, the arts, community events, and more. Proposition 1 would also support exploring ways to restore some services that were reduced or eliminated in the past – including the Forest Park Pool, Office of Neighborhoods, and library hours.”
“This property tax increase would cost the average taxpayer $28 per month, based on Everett’s average home value.”
I’m in a neighboring city, but travel to Everett often for work, play, and appointments. I’m hoping to be a resident again as a homeowner within the next year. I would vote for this if I could! This benefits the community as a whole. I’ve lived in areas where the community doesn’t invest in itself, and they aren’t places worth staying in. I am curious to learn about the “and more” part from “the arts, community events, and more” section.
It's an increase from last years tax rate.
from the proposition:
an increase of approximately $0.67 per $1,000
over the 2024 levy rate. This would be an increase of approximately $28 per month (about $335 per
year) on a $500,000 home
There isn't anything left to cut, the property taxes in Everett are crazy low compared to other areas and have not kept up for years with the basic increases of the cost of living index. Not voting yes pretty much shuts almost every service and resource down except for basic needs like fire and police. The quality of life in the city will fall dramatically and the massive needs in the areas of social services will suffer. The lack of a rise of income is not the mayor's fault… a pint can't hold a quart.
The city has cut so many jobs in the past 4 years that it's becoming obvious. Parks (I've seen so many weeds in city parks as of late that I just want to go pull them myself) and Library have taken such a beating that they're being run on essentially a skeleton crew that can't properly accommodate, in my opinion, things like vacations and sick days for employees.
I am voting yes on Prop 1. I love the library and parks and those would be the first to be cut even further if the revenue issue can't be remedied.
Can Cassie's exec team take one for the team and give themselves a slight pay cut if it meant saving 2-3 jobs? That'd be nice.
You're saying these govt ppl are doing a bad job of allocating public funds. Why would you want to give them more money?
Edit to say: doing a bad job of allocating public funds
It’s not about allocation. The cost of living has far outpaced the 1% cap on tax increase. Essentially the city has been running on less and less money every year. It may not be sexy to ask for more funds to provide a similar level of services, but it sure seems nccessary
The 28 dollars a month figure is based on the average home value of 500 thousand dollars which is low. The average home value is between 6 and 7 hundred thousand in Everett. This is only a bandaid to the problem what we need is a solution. This budget problem didn't just happen it has been going on for years and they have done nothing about it. Bring a solid plan to us to be funded, with definitive actions not studies and open ended terms. Vote no.
What hasn’t been mentioned is assessed property values have gone up. Mine have, just got the letter. So, property values go up and then additional taxes with Prop 1?
Many reasons beyond this that heavily considering a no on this proposition.
That's not how our property taxes work though. The amount the city/county/state collects is a set dollar value. So if the assessor decides everyone's house is worth more, they still collect the same amount of money.
There's also the fact that the assessors largely undervalue property anyway. Our average assessed value is $550k. The average market value for a home in Everett is substantially more than that currently.
This is bullshit, especially for seniors on fixed income. It also doesn't actually solve the shortfall, only provides a stop-gap. & they need to spend more money to "study" providing park services, not actually providing them. No thanks.
The amount of govt waste on high salaries for administrative positions is fucking gross, aming other things. Tax money is wasted constantly, let's not give the govt more if they're not able to use what they have wisely.
Think about how much money is being wasted on putting that old gazebo in storage, so that one day, we can spend more money to restore it. Just restore it now!!! What a waste of money!
So yea. I have no trust that local officials will do anything intelligent with the extra money.
Well the mayor basically said parks maintenance is one of the items on the chopping block should this not pass so they certainly won’t be providing parks services when they’re full of garbage because no one is there to pick them up. Parks have already been cut to the bare bones and it certainly seems like that’s where the cut is going to come from should this not pass. I’d guess the park ranger program would go away and probably like the animal farm never come back again.
I personally don’t want Everett parks to turn into what Marysville schools have where they refuse to fund them because they’re so bad so they continue to get worse due to not having enough money to keep them at the level they’re at.
I’ll be voting yes.
I'm going to be voting no because there's not a solid plan to fix the budget shortfalls long term. I can afford the increase, but not everyone is as fortunate as my family.
I’m not sure if this is an accurate picture you are painting though.
Since the early 2000s the city has not been allowed to raise taxes by more than 1% without a referendum. They have never asked for more money, until now, and inflation has far outpaced %1. Voting no doesn’t send a message that they need to address shortfalls, it just continues to kick the can down the line.
If you look elsewhere in the county you will see that the taxes are proportionally much higher.
I would love to see a more sustainable solution, but this vote is about addressing the immediate issue.
Just to add: In 2001, Initiative 747, which limited property tax increases to 1% per year, was passed by the voters of Washington by a margin of 58% to 42%. Prior to passage of the initiative, cities and counties were able to raise property taxes by 6% per year and many cities and counties did so every year. The 1% increase isn't keeping up with inflation. The current rate is between 3-4% I believe.
In general I vote against any tax increase. Here’s a deal: give us back our cheap car tabs we voted for at least 3 times that I can remember, and I’ll vote yes for this.
It really depends on how one feels that the city has adequately planned for and spent property tax dollars. The city has known for a long time that it would be experiencing budget shortfalls based on how state law requires Snohomish County to calculate and assess property taxes. The proposition is a temporary fix to raise revenue and will still lead to budget shortfalls in the future that the city may or may not be planning for. It's worth noting that the wording includes studying, but not actually doing, reopening the Forest Park Park pool, Office of Neighborhoods, and library hours. Doing those would presumably cost extra. $28 a month is another $336 a year or over $500 in W-2 wages before FICA, 25% federal income tax (the 22% bracket goes back to 25% in 2026), state paid leave taxes, state LTC tax, and the employee portion of workers compensation premiums, assuming one takes the standard deduction.
Its about $1000 a year for each resident. $80 a month. Pretty cheap for what you get.
The average cost of a home in Everett is now $650,000 and the average monthly taxes is $82 currently and will increase to $118/month. Not even mentioning that letters are being sent with properties new assessment of higher value. So really, it will be more than $118/month.
I think yes. I can’t find any good reason against the city’s reasoning: the state law capping property tax revenue increases at 1% per year, even though inflation and thus cost of services go up by more than 1% per year. The city’s budget can only grow by 1% per year from property taxes, despite property values increasing more than that. No matter what the city’s ability to provide services will suffer. Unless we get a lot more huge businesses to increase business tax revenue. If im wrong about any of this, help me understand.
“If passed, Proposition 1 would fund public safety, like police and fire, park maintenance, libraries, the animal shelter, street maintenance, support for neighborhood associations, social services for those in need, the arts, community events, and more. Proposition 1 would also support exploring ways to restore some services that were reduced or eliminated in the past – including the Forest Park Pool, Office of Neighborhoods, and library hours.” “This property tax increase would cost the average taxpayer $28 per month, based on Everett’s average home value.” I’m in a neighboring city, but travel to Everett often for work, play, and appointments. I’m hoping to be a resident again as a homeowner within the next year. I would vote for this if I could! This benefits the community as a whole. I’ve lived in areas where the community doesn’t invest in itself, and they aren’t places worth staying in. I am curious to learn about the “and more” part from “the arts, community events, and more” section.
$28 a month means Everett's Average home value is $153,000. Is this true or did someone fuck up? A $500,000 home pays almost $100 per month.
It's an increase from last years tax rate. from the proposition: an increase of approximately $0.67 per $1,000 over the 2024 levy rate. This would be an increase of approximately $28 per month (about $335 per year) on a $500,000 home
Boeing was definitely one of the biggest drivers of cost, since they paid people locally.
There isn't anything left to cut, the property taxes in Everett are crazy low compared to other areas and have not kept up for years with the basic increases of the cost of living index. Not voting yes pretty much shuts almost every service and resource down except for basic needs like fire and police. The quality of life in the city will fall dramatically and the massive needs in the areas of social services will suffer. The lack of a rise of income is not the mayor's fault… a pint can't hold a quart.
The city has cut so many jobs in the past 4 years that it's becoming obvious. Parks (I've seen so many weeds in city parks as of late that I just want to go pull them myself) and Library have taken such a beating that they're being run on essentially a skeleton crew that can't properly accommodate, in my opinion, things like vacations and sick days for employees. I am voting yes on Prop 1. I love the library and parks and those would be the first to be cut even further if the revenue issue can't be remedied. Can Cassie's exec team take one for the team and give themselves a slight pay cut if it meant saving 2-3 jobs? That'd be nice.
You're saying these govt ppl are doing a bad job of allocating public funds. Why would you want to give them more money? Edit to say: doing a bad job of allocating public funds
It’s not about allocation. The cost of living has far outpaced the 1% cap on tax increase. Essentially the city has been running on less and less money every year. It may not be sexy to ask for more funds to provide a similar level of services, but it sure seems nccessary
The 28 dollars a month figure is based on the average home value of 500 thousand dollars which is low. The average home value is between 6 and 7 hundred thousand in Everett. This is only a bandaid to the problem what we need is a solution. This budget problem didn't just happen it has been going on for years and they have done nothing about it. Bring a solid plan to us to be funded, with definitive actions not studies and open ended terms. Vote no.
I'm voting no because I can't afford it and never get to enjoy the parks or library anyways because I'm always working.
What hasn’t been mentioned is assessed property values have gone up. Mine have, just got the letter. So, property values go up and then additional taxes with Prop 1? Many reasons beyond this that heavily considering a no on this proposition.
That's not how our property taxes work though. The amount the city/county/state collects is a set dollar value. So if the assessor decides everyone's house is worth more, they still collect the same amount of money. There's also the fact that the assessors largely undervalue property anyway. Our average assessed value is $550k. The average market value for a home in Everett is substantially more than that currently.
So cost of living is up, inflation is up, pay is down and they want more tax money.
This is bullshit, especially for seniors on fixed income. It also doesn't actually solve the shortfall, only provides a stop-gap. & they need to spend more money to "study" providing park services, not actually providing them. No thanks. The amount of govt waste on high salaries for administrative positions is fucking gross, aming other things. Tax money is wasted constantly, let's not give the govt more if they're not able to use what they have wisely. Think about how much money is being wasted on putting that old gazebo in storage, so that one day, we can spend more money to restore it. Just restore it now!!! What a waste of money! So yea. I have no trust that local officials will do anything intelligent with the extra money.
I agree with most of it except seniors impact. Seniors get reduced property taxes so the impact may not be that much
Most seniors are exempt from the new rates if passed
Truth! My parents are about to take advantage of that tax exemption this year.
Well the mayor basically said parks maintenance is one of the items on the chopping block should this not pass so they certainly won’t be providing parks services when they’re full of garbage because no one is there to pick them up. Parks have already been cut to the bare bones and it certainly seems like that’s where the cut is going to come from should this not pass. I’d guess the park ranger program would go away and probably like the animal farm never come back again. I personally don’t want Everett parks to turn into what Marysville schools have where they refuse to fund them because they’re so bad so they continue to get worse due to not having enough money to keep them at the level they’re at. I’ll be voting yes.
I'm going to be voting no because there's not a solid plan to fix the budget shortfalls long term. I can afford the increase, but not everyone is as fortunate as my family.
I’m not sure if this is an accurate picture you are painting though. Since the early 2000s the city has not been allowed to raise taxes by more than 1% without a referendum. They have never asked for more money, until now, and inflation has far outpaced %1. Voting no doesn’t send a message that they need to address shortfalls, it just continues to kick the can down the line. If you look elsewhere in the county you will see that the taxes are proportionally much higher. I would love to see a more sustainable solution, but this vote is about addressing the immediate issue.
Just to add: In 2001, Initiative 747, which limited property tax increases to 1% per year, was passed by the voters of Washington by a margin of 58% to 42%. Prior to passage of the initiative, cities and counties were able to raise property taxes by 6% per year and many cities and counties did so every year. The 1% increase isn't keeping up with inflation. The current rate is between 3-4% I believe.
Taxes Boeing ,Amazon ,and Fed Ex more....since the city gives them all huge tax breaks it would be more like them paying their fair share....
Always a no for tax increases. If you can’t balance your budget why should I give you more money.
I live on a budget. The council needs to learn to do the same.
In general I vote against any tax increase. Here’s a deal: give us back our cheap car tabs we voted for at least 3 times that I can remember, and I’ll vote yes for this.
You know you can tell whether a person here owns a home and whether they actually live here.