Cashmere approves 1% levy increase, weighs other revenue after Prop 1 fails

CASHMERE – The Cashmere City Council approved a 1% increase in the city’s property-tax levy Nov. 9, adding roughly $7,000 to $8,000 in annual revenue as officials consider how to fund services after voters rejected a larger tax increase.

The measure passed 3–1, with Councilmember Jayne Stephenson opposed and Councilmember Joyce Williams absent. Council members Chris Carlson, Jeff Johnson and John Perry voted in favor.

Officials estimated that new construction would generate about $5,000 more, bringing the combined increase in annual property-tax revenue to roughly $13,000.

The council-authorized increase applies to the amount the city collects through its levy. It does not mean every property owner’s total tax bill will increase by 1%. Officials said the city’s levy rate would probably decline as assessed property values increased.

The vote followed a preliminary 2027 budget discussion in which officials considered additional sales-tax revenue, changes to contracted services and economic development as ways to sustain city operations.

Mayor Jim Fletcher said he wanted to revisit a criminal justice sales tax that the city discussed about a year ago but set aside amid uncertainty over the policies required to implement it.

Fletcher estimated that a tax of one-tenth of 1% could generate $70,000 to $80,000 annually. He said he wanted to resume discussions with the sheriff, though completing the process could push implementation to approximately the middle of 2027.

“Doesn’t fill the hole, but keeps us from going backwards,” Fletcher said.

The council did not adopt that sales tax Nov. 9.

The discussion also exposed different views about whether the city should focus on reducing expenses or expanding revenue.

City Clerk/Treasurer Elizabeth Martinez warned that the city was not consistently replenishing savings available for future capital improvements. Although the city has reserves, she said, those balances belong to different funds and do not represent one unrestricted pool of money.

Martinez recommended examining contracted services, including whether bringing water and wastewater operations back under city management could reduce overhead and help support city staffing.

Other council members cautioned against returning to city-operated utilities, citing past difficulties recruiting and retaining qualified employees to run systems requiring continuous service.

Officials also discussed whether hiring an engineer could reduce spending on outside consultants, help the city pursue grants and provide more capacity to work with developers. Some council members favored separating planning responsibilities from public works to reduce Director of Operations Steve Croci’s workload.

No staffing or utility-management changes were approved.

Johnson argued that the city’s central problem was insufficient revenue.

“Quite frankly, our costs are, well, as I mentioned before, we don’t have any fat to cut,” Johnson said.

The failed levy proposal also prompted discussion about the relationship between growth and the cost of maintaining services. Fletcher said attracting businesses and customers was necessary to expand the city’s economic base.

Johnson connected that financial pressure to the city’s pending comprehensive plan and zoning updates, saying limits on building heights should be reconsidered.

“So when we start looking at, like, this comprehensive plan, which we’re going to talk about later in this meeting. And we say, ‘Oh, we’re not going to raise the building height.’ That’s a non-starter for me,” Johnson said.

He suggested that allowing development to go higher was one tool the city should examine as it looks for additional revenue.

Council members also discussed prioritizing public safety, roads and utilities while scrutinizing other spending, including parks. The discussion did not produce a list of service reductions.

Fletcher requested consideration of an additional $10,000 to $15,000 for the volunteer fire department, pointing to fuel, vehicle maintenance and replacement equipment costs.

“You have to replace gear every now and then, whether you want to or not,” Fletcher said.

The council held a public hearing on the preliminary budget but did not adopt the full 2027 spending plan. The levy increase provides a modest addition to revenue while the broader decisions about services, staffing and future income remain unresolved.

Andrew Simpson: 509-433-7626 or andrew@ward.media