A routine city council business meeting about Lynnwood’s biennial budget and a proposed property tax increase turned into a lengthy and somewhat heated discussion earlier this week about whether the council should repeal a section of the Lynnwood Municipal Code that prohibits councilmembers from holding other elected offices.

The proposal from Councilmember Patrick Decker during the Nov. 12 council meeting was prompted by Council Vice President Julieta Altamirano Crosby’s recent election to the Snohomish County Public Utilities District Board. During new business, Decker moved to repeal Section 2.04.060 of the city’s code, which had been adopted by the council in 1988. It prohibits city elected officials from holding “any other office, federal, state, county or municipal, except in the National Guard or any branch of the United States military or as a notary public.”

In making his case for the motion, Decker said: “I don’t think that most positions or other elected roles would be sufficiently onerous as to prevent a councilmember from being able to fulfill their city responsibilities. I really think that we’re grown-ups. We can manage our own time, manage our own calendars.”

That prompted an immediate response from Councilmember Josh Binda, who moved to amend Decker’s motion to instead discuss the idea at a future council work session. That prompted a council debate — also involving City Attorney Lisa Marshall — about whether Decker’s proposal could be amended or whether the council needed to vote on it first.

Decker’s original motion didn’t have a date by which is would become effective, but he alluded to “time constraints related to this particular code and how it impacts this council.” Altamirano Crosby then proposed an amendment that would make Decker’s motion effective that same night, adding that she wanted to explain her reasoning “because there are a lot of rumors around about my person and I’m the one who needs to speak about this.”

Altamirano Crosby — who is serving her second term on the city council — also ran in the Nov. 5 general election for the vacant District 2 commissioner position on the Snohomish County Public Utilities District (PUD) board. While the election results have not yet been certified, Altamirano Crosby is the apparent winner after receiving 53% of the vote over opponent Amber King

Altamirano Crosby said she spoke to City Attorney Marshall prior to filing for the PUD commission position and was told “it’s not a conflict at all,” although the councilmember — if elected — would need to recuse herself from council matters involving the PUD. As an example of someone holding dual offices, Altamirano Crosby pointed to the election of Mary Fosse, a Washington State legislator from 38th District who also serves on the Everett City Council.

Councilmember Binda argued that it is “unprecedented and unethical to revise the code after the election of a councilmember to a position that is currently in question,” stating that the Everett City Council revised its city code years prior to Fosse being elected to the city council while also being a state legislator.

Other councilmembers expressed displeasure with the last-minute nature of Decker’s motion.

“I hate new-business surprises,” said Councilmember David Parshall. “I’m not in disagreement necessarily with Councilmember Decker and Council Vice President Altamirano Crosby about making change. I am against doing anything tonight. So I plan to vote no, but I would support a motion to have a further discussion about this when we all have the opportunity to have equal research and look into this and have the proper time to respond.”

Council President George Hurst then asked if City Attorney Marshall could explain, given the city’s code, “the logic of why a council member was told, ‘yes, you can run for a county office.'”

Marshall noted that any discussion she had with any councilmember was protected by attorney-client privilege, and asked Altamirano Crosby for her permission to disclose their conversation. After receiving that permission, Marshall explained about “the doctrine of incompatible offices.” Washington state law prohibits people from holding two offices only when the positions are incompatible, and Marshall said she believes that doesn’t apply to Altamirano Crosby holding both a council seat and a position on the PUD board.

“The doctrine of incompatible office is a legal doctrine,” Marshall said. “It requires legal skill to understand and interpret. And if you go to the MRSC (Municipal Research and Services Center) page and read the article about doctrine of incompatible offices, it will list all of those tests so you can determine what they are. They involve subordination of one position to another. They involve whether the enabling legislation is involved. It involves whether the conflict of interest in contracts might come into play.”

Binda then asked why the council would consider revising the code if the city attorney determined that the doctrine of incompatible offices comes into play, and that there is no conflict. Marshall replied that although the city indicates no dual office holding, she believes the doctrine of incompatible offices is “written pretty darn close, pretty close to what’s in the Lynnwood Municipal Code.”

That discussion was then interrupted as Mayor Christine Frizzell and the council debated whether they needed to automatically adjourn because no one had moved to extend the meeting beyond 9 p.m. After that was sorted out and it was determined that a motion and a second had indeed been made, the council had more discussion on whether Decker’s motion to repeal the code was needed, given the city attorney’s interpretation of it.

In addition, Councilmembers Hurst and Nick Coelho agreed with Parshall about disliking the last-minute nature of Decker’s motion. “I think it sets a really bad precedent,” Coelho said.

“I think the good news here tonight for Vice President Altamirano Crosby is…you have sustained the idea that she is perfectly capable of holding both of those offices,” Parshall said to City Attorney Marshall. “And so I do believe that this sort of renders the question moot.”

The council then voted on Councilmember Altamirano Crosby’s amendment to make Decker’s proposal repeal the city code effective the same night, and that was defeated by a 2-5 vote, with Altamirano Crosby and Decker voting yes. Next, the council voted on Binda’s motion to send the item to a council work session for further study, and that passed unanimously.

In other business Nov. 12, the council held public hearing on a proposed property tax levy for 2025 and also on the 2025-26 biennial budget. In a summary prior to the public hearing on the property tax levy, Lynnwood Finance Director Michelle Meyer said the city is proposing to restore the city’s previous tax rate of 57 cents, which was in place prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. “The city decided to be more conservative and try to keep that levy a little lower for property taxpayers at the time, based on the uncertainty going on in 2021 and 2022,” Meyer said. “What happened in ’23 and ’24 is that the levy was actually adopted lower than the amount that was proposed in the preliminary budget. And so that rate has continued to fall in the past few years. So we’re proposing to raise it back up to 57 cents.”

The proposed levy would raise $6.2 million overall for the city, an estimated increase of $84 a year, or $7 a month for the average home.

The money raised would go into the city’s general fund and Meyer reminded the council that the 2025-26 biennial budget includes funding a range of council priorities, including permanetly funding positions related to public safety — police officers, municipal court positions and maintenance workers — as well as park expansion/improvements and health and mental health services.

Council President Hurst noted that the proposal would raise the city’s property tax by nearly $1.5 million, “which is a percentage increase of 31.22%.

“Now it’s up to us to to justify that increase, if we’re going to stand by it, we need to know that residents are not going to be happy,” Hurst said. “So we’re going to have to really do some work as far as why we’re doing it.”

Meyer replied that the city’s property tax rate for 2023 and 2024 “was set at a late that was lower” than both the city’s budget and financial forecasts. “And then additional positions were added when the budget was adopted to spend down the fund balance. Twenty-six positions have been added since that time.

“The increase in property tax from $4.72 5 million to $6.2 million is just a small amount to help cover all the additional services and positions that are already in place, the service levels that we already have,” she continued.

During the property tax public hearing, commenter Ted Hikel asked the council to “do your homework. Do your due dilligence.” He said that the council is “asking property owners, who in our city are, as far as residents are concerned, are not the high income people, they are moderate and low for the most part. And when you raise those taxes on property, if you’re a homeowner, you have to dig it out of your own finances.”

Commenter Quinn Van Order said that he is the president of a Lynnwood homeowners association, and he has “had to deal with the consequences of years of artificially keeping the rates low and saving people money in the short term. And let me tell you, the other side of that sucks. We have a massive amount of deferred maintenance. We have a very massive ongoing construction projects. There are consequences to not raising the rates. I fully support the increase, and frankly, I support the bigger increase because, like, the services you guys provide are amazing, and I’d like them to keep being provided without having emergencies down the road that aren’t budgeted or in the reserves.”

During the hearing on the 2025-26 city budget, Lynnwood Pride co-founder Charlotte LeFevre urged the city council to increase the budget for diversity organizations and events. Lynnwood Human Services Commission member Abby McCutcheon thanked the council for including funding for the city’s human services coordinator in its budget. That comment was echoed by Lynnwood resident Caroline Judd-Herzfeldt, who said that the position — along with the city’s focus on prioritizing behavioral health — makes “Lynnwood welcoming for all.”

In another budget-related matter on Nov. 12, the council approved two items regarding the allocation of the city’s remaining American Rescue Plan Act funds:

– The first directs the city to reallocate any unspent remaining balance of ARPA funds to the city’s paving program. That was approved by a vote of 6-0 with Councilmember Derica Escamilla abstaining.

– The second is related to the council allocation last year of $15,000 in ARPA funds to purchase gift cards for a Lynnwood Police Department gun buyback program. About half of that funding was used, and Finance Director Meyer explained that the city contacted the bank about returning the unused cards, but there would be fees charged to the city. The police department has come up with a plan to instead use the gift cards for an existing program with the Edmonds School District, for families in need. After clarifying that the gift cards could be designated specifically for Lynnwood families, the council unanimously approved that reallocation.

— By Teresa Wippel