Cashmere opens 2026 budget talks

CASHMERE — In a workshop that avoided slogans and got straight to trade-offs, the City Council began hashing out a 2026 budget philosophy on September 8. The questions were basic and consequential: What do core services mean in a small town, what do residents value beyond the basics, and how do we pay for both?

Council member Jeff Johnson framed the discussion bluntly. He doesn’t read the community as anti-tax for its own sake. “I don’t think we can say that Cashmere residents want to remove taxes and live in what is considered to be unsafe,” he said, pointing to strong local support for schools and fire. On costs, he explained, “inflation-plus” pressures like law enforcement, jail, dispatch, chemicals and compliance for water and sewer, and roads are outpacing the city’s limited revenue levers. “When our costs exceed the rate of inflation,” Johnson said, “we cut services. And we’ve been cutting for years.”

Johnson argued for a clear, shared basket of essentials — police, fire, roads/sidewalks, water/sewer, basic staffing — and a willingness to fund quality-of-life priorities that residents consistently cherish, from parks to the pool. He floated a one-tenth of 1% sales-tax option as more palatable than relying on property-tax hikes alone, noting the 1% property-tax cap brings in about $7,800 on a roughly $780,000 levy, which is far short of looming needs.

Mayor Jim Fletcher kept the conversation grounded in Cashmere’s identity. He praised the council’s willingness to explore every legal funding avenue while protecting the town’s “small-town feel.” He also emphasized public education, walking residents who were present for the meeting through what the city must provide by law and what it ought to provide to keep the community livable. Any ballot measure, he cautioned, requires time and outreach.

There were plenty of other takeaways from the meeting, and plenty of quotable moments from various council members and the mayor, but a few stood out from the conversation as particularly insightful.

On transparency and priorities, council member Jayne Stephenson said, “Maybe we need a list of what’s required by law — on the table — so people can see what we have to provide.”

The entire council seemed to agree that years of “death by attrition” have deferred sidewalks, road work, cemetery upkeep and even code enforcement capacity.

Council member Chris Carlson, on the subject of fairness in trade-offs, said that decisions should come with dollar amounts residents can weigh: “Do you want this, and are you willing to pay this much for it?”

Mayor Fletcher emphasized that surveys and workshops matter, but they must be crafted to avoid popularity contests that put pools above pavement; core services need their own lane.

The thread running through the night was less about left-right politics and more about shared maintenance: If we love Cashmere, we pay for Cashmere — for the necessities and for the amenities that make life here feel like home. Johnson put it most plainly: being “allergic to taxes” isn’t a plan when basic costs climb. Fletcher added that any solution will likely be a blend of ideas, like a modest sales-tax measure, targeted fee updates, and careful budgeting, paired with honest storytelling and transparency about where the dollars go.

Council will continue the discussion in coming meetings, including a planned visit from county officials to talk about law-enforcement costs. Residents who want to have a say in what gets funded — and how — should watch for survey and workshop opportunities as the budget takes shape.

For now, it was more than refreshing to see a frank dialogue between city officials, thoughtfully considered in front of their constituents, about the hardest part of their job: How to balance growth with tradition, and how to fund the city that everyone loves.

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