No, a contract extension has already been negotiated to secure a continuation of our current level of service from the same first responders who are currently staffing our fire stations.
The City of Edmonds is considering joining the South Snohomish County Fire & Rescue Regional Fire Authority (RFA) after the RFA unilaterally terminated its contract with the city before its original 2030 expiration date. If annexation is approved, this move would shift the funding model for fire and EMS services from the city's contracted arrangement to direct funding via property taxes paid to the RFA. With these changes, a significant increase in our tax bill will result. This proposal is being brought to the citizens in April for a vote.
Edmonds' contract with South County Fire is ending in 2025 due to cancellation by South County Fire. While the city claims annexation is the lowest-cost option for maintaining service levels, this assertion should be viewed critically, considering potential long-term financial implications and loss of local control. Rather than renegotiating a new contract, the RFA chose to terminate our contract the month before Mayor Rosen took office, not giving him an opportunity to address RFA concerns. That set off a cascading set of events to where we are today.
If the annexation occurs, property owners will directly pay South County Fire for fire/EMS services through two new line items on our property tax bill. The city's EMS levy will be eliminated, but a new higher RFA levy and a "benefit charge" will be introduced. For instance, a home valued at $895,700 (the RFA's defined “typical Edmonds house”) could see an annual increase of approximately $868, totaling $1,765 for city and fire/EMS services. This represents a 97% increase! This is a shift in financial responsibility from the city's general fund to individual property owners.
Edmonds currently uses its general fund and EMS levy to pay for our fire/EMS services. Annexation would transfer these costs directly to property owners. The RFA's funding model also incorporates a "benefit charge" based on building size and risk factors, which increases overall costs. This charge is applied in addition to the traditional levy-based property tax revenue model. Since the "benefit charge" is not a tax but a fee, it is not subject to yearly 1% cap on increases. Thus, the RFA can, at its discretion and without a vote of the citizens, raise the benefit charge fee for additional revenue.
Yes, our property taxes represent a stable source of revenue for the city. In addition, sales tax revenue is another significant component to our General Fund for funding priority-based expenses.
Yes, if Edmonds joins the RFA, existing member cities will see a reduction in their taxes because our city’s assessed value is relatively high. Our taxes will increase, their taxes will decrease. This point underscores that Edmonds' annexation primarily benefits the RFA and current member cities by expanding the tax base to include Edmonds.
The majority of Edmonds seniors who received the exemption in 2024 will see a large RFA tax on their bill in 2026 if annexation is approved. A combination of your income bracket and the change in your home’s assessed value determines the new RFA tax. The County treasurer can provide the tax estimate for your home.
While annexation is said to ensure continued high-quality emergency response services and access to specialized resources, there are "no significant new benefits beyond maintaining current service levels". All at nearly double the price.
Yes, the governance of fire/EMS services would shift to the RFA Board, where most members represent areas outside of Edmonds. Under an RFA, decision-making authority shifts to a larger, less accountable bureaucratic structure. This transfer of control means funding priorities, using our tax dollars, will be dictated by regional interests rather than for Edmonds’ unique needs.
Yes, but it’s not a practical option. De-annexations costs would be considerably higher due to contractual language in the annexation documents. It’s best not to count on this as an option going forward.
While other cities who have joined the RFA used this approach, it makes little economic sense for a city in the financial situation that Edmonds is in to do so. It represents a significant transfer of assets without immediate compensation. If these stations cease to operate as active fire stations in the future, ownership could revert to Edmonds after adjustments for improvements made by the RFA.
There are unresolved concerns about unpaid transport fees owed by South County Fire. A "Reader view" post alleges that South County Fire RFA owes Edmonds millions in unremitted transport fees, potentially breaching their contract. (Reader view/opinion: Where's the money? - My Edmonds News)
Fitch & Associates conducted a limited scope study funded by the city to look at only a couple of options to annexation. The city claims it explored re-establishing its own fire department or contracting with another provider but deemed these options more expensive than joining the RFA. Instead of rushing into a costly and permanent decision, we should explore less costly alternative ways to enhance public safety without sacrificing local governance or imposing excessive taxes. We have other options to explore such as alternate funding sources, new service models, changes in policies, identifying operational efficiencies or administrative actions. All stylized to our needs, not what the RFA wants to provide. A NO vote buys us time to bring in new voices and ideas into the conversation to fully explore less costly solutions, equal to or better than our current services.
Some residents fear that Edmonds' higher tax contributions could fund services or expansion in other areas within the RFA’s jurisdiction. The city has not provided detailed assurances regarding this concern.
The city is hosting town hall events and community meetings to inform residents and address concerns about annexation. However, residents should seek diverse sources of information and critically evaluate the information provided by the city and the RFA, given their vested interests in the annexation's approval. It is important for voters to have all the facts before making decisions about a city's services and finances.