Longview’s Never-Ending Money Grab: How Much More Do They Expect Residents to Pay?

Longview residents are not an unlimited source of revenue, and it’s time city officials started acting like they understand that. Water, sewer, and garbage rates have been jacked up by 15%, residents are facing the prospect of increases approaching $50 a month by 2028, the local sales tax is climbing to 8.2%, and now taxpayers are being asked to help fund a proposed $26 million fire station through Proposition 1.
How many times do residents have to be told to pay more before somebody at City Hall acknowledges that people are already struggling to keep up? Every increase chips away at what families have left for groceries, housing, insurance, medication, and other basic necessities. Apparently, the answer from city government is to keep reaching into the same pockets and hope nobody notices how much is already gone.
This is what happens when affordability becomes an afterthought and taxpayers are treated like an ATM instead of the people who have to live with the consequences of these decisions. City officials can debate budgets and justify their proposals all day long. Residents still have to figure out how to pay the bills.
At what point does the financial burden on the people who actually live here become a priority?
Mayor Erik Halvorson has been answering questions about Proposition 1, and the discussion surrounding the proposed $26 million fire station and the additional tax revenue it would require raises some legitimate questions. Residents deserve clear answers about the costs, staffing, long-term operating expenses, alternative locations, and whether less expensive options have been adequately explored. Even the mayor has acknowledged that this is a substantial request, particularly when Longview residents are already dealing with Washington's increasingly expensive cost of living.

Councilmember Keenan Harvey has also weighed in, arguing that residents are being asked to pay more for a third station while questions remain about existing facilities, response coverage, and how emergency services are funded. Residents have raised questions about the proposed location near Lowe's, the possibility of using existing facilities, and whether other approaches could address coverage gaps without placing such a heavy burden on taxpayers. For once, Keenan Harvey and I are in agreement. Those questions deserve serious consideration, not dismissive responses or arguments suggesting that another $30 a month is a small ask.

Thirty dollars a month might not sound like much to someone who has room in their budget. For a senior on a fixed income, a disabled resident, a working family already struggling with groceries, or someone trying to keep a roof over their head, it absolutely matters. That is $360 a year, every year, before accounting for any other rate increases or additional expenses.
People cannot simply manufacture more money because city government has decided it needs more.

Let's also talk about the hypocrisy of the broader political conversation in Washington.
We constantly hear claims that Democrats are taxing people right out of the state. Yet here in Longview, residents are watching utility bills climb, sales taxes increase, and another property tax measure come before voters. The people who live here are being asked to absorb one increase after another while trying to keep up with the cost of everyday necessities.
Apparently, the affordability crisis only matters when somebody can use it as a political talking point.
You cannot complain about Washington becoming unaffordable while supporting policies that make your own city increasingly expensive to live in. Pick a standard and apply it consistently.

Let me be clear about something. Firefighters, paramedics, and emergency medical services are essential. Nobody wants to wait for help during a heart attack, a serious accident, or a house fire. Public safety matters, and the people who respond to those emergencies deserve the staffing, equipment, and resources necessary to do their jobs.
That does not mean residents should automatically approve every funding proposal without demanding accountability.
Before asking taxpayers for more money, city officials should demonstrate that they have thoroughly evaluated alternatives, examined existing resources, scrutinized project costs, and developed a realistic plan for ongoing expenses. Building a new station is only part of the equation. Staffing it, maintaining it, replacing equipment, and operating it for decades will also cost money.
Residents should not have to accept a blank check simply because the proposal carries the label of public safety.
There is a difference between recognizing a legitimate need and agreeing that the proposed solution is the only responsible option. Voters have every right to demand evidence, transparency, and a complete accounting of the financial consequences before deciding how much more they can afford to pay.

Longview officials need to remember that they are spending the public's money, not some imaginary pile of cash that magically replenishes itself whenever another tax increase is proposed.
Here's the part that seems to escape the people who keep reaching deeper into our pockets: people can leave.
When housing, utilities, groceries, insurance, and taxes keep climbing, residents eventually start looking at other places where their income might actually cover their living expenses. Retirees may relocate. Working families may look elsewhere. People on fixed incomes may find themselves with fewer and fewer options.
A city cannot keep making itself more expensive and expect everyone to stick around out of civic loyalty.
Longview could eventually find itself facing a mass exodus of residents who simply cannot afford to live here anymore. People will reach a point where they cannot afford to pay attention because they are too busy trying to figure out which bill they can afford to pay this month.
That is not a sustainable way to run a city.
Here's another thing Longview's decision-makers need to consider: the same people who complain about the city's growing unhoused population need to think about what happens when they keep making it more expensive for people to live here.
You cannot keep driving up the cost of living and then act surprised when people can no longer afford to keep a roof over their heads. When utility bills, property taxes, sales taxes, rent, and other basic expenses keep climbing, people living paycheck to paycheck have less and less room to absorb another financial hit. For some households, another increase could be the difference between keeping up with their bills and falling behind on rent or a mortgage.
No, a proposed tax increase isn't automatically going to make someone homeless. However, piling additional costs onto people who are already struggling can push vulnerable households closer to a financial crisis. That is a very real possibility that deserves consideration before city officials keep reaching into residents' pockets.
Longview cannot complain about homelessness on one hand while supporting policies that make it harder for people to afford to stay housed on the other. If the city wants to address homelessness, keeping people from losing their housing in the first place ought to be part of the conversation.
It makes absolutely no sense to keep squeezing residents financially and then expect the community to deal with the consequences when people can no longer afford to live here.
So before Longview's decision-makers ask residents to pay even more, they need to answer some basic questions. What alternatives have been seriously evaluated? What will the total cost be over the life of this project? What will taxpayers be paying beyond the initial construction? How will the city protect residents from being buried under an endless succession of tax and rate increases?
Most importantly, when does the city start treating affordability as a public concern instead of an inconvenience to be brushed aside?
Longview residents are not bottomless ATMs. They are people trying to make ends meet in an increasingly expensive state. They deserve a city government that understands the difference between funding necessary services responsibly and continually asking the public to cover the bill without adequately demonstrating that every alternative has been considered.
Public safety matters. Fiscal responsibility matters, too. The two are not mutually exclusive.
My position is simple: Stop treating taxpayers like an unlimited revenue source. Show people the numbers, answer the questions, examine the alternatives, and prove that this is the most responsible use of our money before asking residents for another dime.
At the rate things are going, Longview may soon discover that there is a limit to how much residents can afford to give, regardless of how many times city officials insist the next increase is a small price to pay.
You cannot price people out of their homes, complain about the consequences, and then pretend the two have nothing to do with each other. Longview residents deserve better than that.