Edmonds Civic Roundtable Discusses Fire Authority Annexation Ahead of Election

In what might be called RFA 101, the Edmonds Civic Roundtable on Monday evening held the first of what promises to be a busy season of community discussions and forums aimed at arming citizens with factual information prior to the April 22 special election when the Regional Fire Authority annexation issue will be put to the voters.

"The mission of the ECR is to empower our neighbors with factual information," said ECR president Gil Morgan as he welcomed the standing-room-only crowd of more than 100 attendees who packed the upstairs room of the Edmonds Waterfront Center.

"We're not telling you how to vote," he continued. "We simply want to get the facts out in a civil discussion. In the recent election some of us in this room voted Republican and some voted Democrat, right? We all have our viewpoints but tonight we're all here in the same room because we love Edmonds, and we want good things to happen in our community."

Morgan acknowledged the presence of several city and fire officials, including Edmonds City Councilmembers Chen, Tibbott and Olson, RFA Fire Chief Bob Eastman, and several members of the recently appointed groups tasked with writing the pro and con statements for the upcoming voters guide.

"Tonight we have three speakers," explained Pat Moriarty, ECR program chair. "All of tonight's presenters are community members, and all have assured me they have not decided how they will vote on the RFA annexation."

The speakers included the following:

• Larry Fuell
• Nicole Gaba
• Matt Cox

Each presenter provided their own set of PowerPoint slides. These -- along with introductory remarks -- have been combined into a single document available here. In addition, their presentations were recorded on video by My Edmonds News and are viewable at this link.

Larry Fuell began his presentation with a brief history of emergency services in Edmonds, starting from establishment of the first fire department in 1904 and tracing the transition from Edmonds having its own fire department to the 2010 decision to contract with the South Snohomish County Fire and Rescue Regional Authority (then called Fire District 1).

He reviewed the terms of that contract, including the transfer of personnel and fire stations, and the financial aspects of the agreement - which include annual adjustments based on cost of service - tracing the changes in contract costs each year since inception as shown in the following table:

Fuell concluded by referencing the Fitch report prepared by Fitch and Associates, which was hired by the Edmonds City Council to analyze the different fire service options. These included annexation to the RFA, contracting for fire and EMS services with another entity, and re-starting the city-run Edmonds Fire Department. He noted that the Fitch report concluded that annexation into the RFA was the most economical choice for Edmonds.

Next up was Nicole Gaba, who focused on the impact of a yes vote on annexation.

She began by explaining the services Edmonds would receive if annexation passes, emphasizing that status quo will remain unchanged until the end of 2025. She went on to enumerate the range of additional RFA services, such as mutual aid with other districts, economies of scale and access to trained volunteers and disaster response services that would add depth and breadth to the level of service and protection Edmonds would receive under annexation.

She also touched on financial impacts of a yes vote on the city and taxpayers, highlighting the city's fiscal crisis and the increased tax burden that annexation would impose on residents and businesses. She concluded with a hypothetical example of the tax increase for an average home, concluding that the owner of an average Edmonds home valued at $895,700 would pay an additional $866.92 under the RFA.

Matt Cox then took the podium to explore the implications and uncertainties - of which there are many -- of a no vote on annexation.

He began by outlining the known facts, including that whether the vote is yes or no, the current fire and EMS services will continue through 2025. But beyond 2025 he described things as becoming uncertain, since at this time there is no set plan for services after Jan. 1, 2026. He did note that "there is a clause in that contract that states that it may be renewed for additional one-year term after 2026 but that is subject to negotiations by mutual agreement of the parties."

He stressed that regardless of how residents vote, they will pay more, noting that "the latest numbers being discussed are that the contract cost would go from $12.1 million in 2025 to $21 million in 2026, a significant increase." With a no vote, the city would have to pay for this, leaving a significant shortfall (estimated at 40% of the $21 million figure).

Beyond 2026, things get murkier. Cox stressed that because there is no commitment to receive services from the RFA through a contract after 2026, the city would be left to explore options that might include creating a partnership with someone else (for example, Shoreline); join with other jurisdictions to create a separate RFA or create Edmonds' own fire department. Cox went on to explore the challenges, uncertainties and potential benefits of each of these options.

He summarized as follows:

The event then broke up into table discussions, where individuals could ask questions of each other and engage in detailed discussions on RFA history, the impact of a yes vote, and the implications of a no vote. The presenters and officials circulated from table to table and joined in the discussions.

The meeting concluded with reminders from Gil Morgan and Pat Moriarty that there are more sessions to come sponsored by the ECR and other community organizations, and to check the ECR website regularly for links to Monday evening's presentation materials and other resources as voters approach the April 22 election.