So, for many of us who voted for inclusion into Kirkland, it has been for the lack of support ad response from the County. In fact when I contacted my County rep. I got a call back from a staffer who’s best suggestion to me was “let’ hope the annexation is passed”! The interesting thing is 145th is the County Line between Kenmore and King County. And most of the heavy speeding traffic comes from all the new developments in Kemore. And yet I have never seen a Kenmore cop petrol 145 during rush hours to contain speeders.

Without a doubt I would have liked to have had Bothell be the city take this area over. But you take what you can get. Kirklands Zoning laws are punitive at best and out of touch with today’s needs and creative thinking that is necessary for green solutions. Those things can be changed and I hope those in the Northend can be problem solvers for those necessary changes.

For the current City Council to make a decision for the next is part of government business. It has nothing to do with fairness, right or wrong, socially correct or not. It is just the process. If you want to find the ethical issue it is the people who did not vote.

So, for many of us who voted for inclusion into Kirkland, it has been for the lack of support ad response from the County. In fact when I contacted my County rep. I got a call back from a staffer who’s best suggestion to me was “let’ hope the annexation is passed”! The interesting thing is 145th is the County Line between Kenmore and King County. And most of the heavy speeding traffic comes from all the new developments in Kemore. And yet I have never seen a Kenmore cop petrol 145 during rush hours to contain speeders.

Without a doubt I would have liked to have had Bothell be the city take this area over. But you take what you can get. Kirklands Zoning laws are punitive at best and out of touch with today’s needs and creative thinking that is necessary for green solutions. Those things can be changed and I hope those in the Northend can be problem solvers for those necessary changes.

For the current City Council to make a decision for the next is part of government business. It has nothing to do with fairness, right or wrong, socially correct or not. It is just the process. If you want to find the ethical issue it is the people who did not vote.

That said I certainly didn’t appreciate having your group continuously disparaging me or my group all summer long. I especially didn’t like it when one of your supporters was harassing members of my group at freeway off ramps trying to force unwanted donation money on them so that individual could entrap us with a complaint to the PDC. I know that you are not personally responsible for their individual actions, and having spoken with you on decent terms at one point I doubt that you are in any way responsible. But still, those and many other underhanded actions are very hard to forgive, and make it especially hard to view the CFOK in a good light.

As for the money, your group raised over $10,000.00. Mine spent well under $1000.00. I don’t know what you consider big money, but in my opinion that is big money.

It’s interesting that when a city council makes a decision that is in favor of something people wanted, that they selectively ignore everything else. I stayed at the meeting long enough to hear residents along Lake Washington complain about how the Kirkland city council ignored input from them during the development of the Shoreline Master Program. I also listened to several impassioned individuals representing real estate groups asking for public hearings on a new construction tax issue that had (as it appeared) been denied a public hearing process. And specific to annexation, this city council ignored its citizens from the start and continued to do so throughout the process. That was enough of the business as usual for me, so I left early. Fortunately the city records those meetings to be watched later. Which I may even do at some point, but for now my position is that since I have no voice I may as well just wait for their final decision on the Tree Regulations to be made public.

“Assets to bring to this partnership.” A partnership implies that both parties have something to gain. We have assets (a fire department that is flush with cash and physical assets) and stability (from property taxes). What does Kirkland bring us? Unfortunately I don’t see the representation, though I do agree with Matthew Pruitt that the new council offers much promise based on their backgrounds. And I don’t see better services in our future without significant costs which we’ll all be paying in taxes, fees, traffic tickets, and baseless permits. And unfortunately there is no evidence of real fiscal responsibility resulting in stability that I’ve found in reviewing as much of the last 20 years of Kirkland that I could get my eyes on. So I do not see what Kirkland brings us.

In the end time will tell. If the council votes in annexation, in a few years we’ll all be able to review the progress, or lack there of. We’ll be able to looks at the tax rates, at the crime rates, at the progress of the home values compared to surrounding areas, count the number of citations issued, count the numbers of businesses that opened and closed. We’ll be able to see how many single family homes become row houses, or not. We’ll all know whether Kirkland “cleaned up Kingsgate” (I’m quoting four of your supporters there). We’ll even be able to access quality of life surveys to find out if the ends justified the means. And most of all we’ll have an answer as to whether or not this annexation is a good idea.

Believe me when I say that after spending so much time looking into how Kirkland’s other annexations have been mishandled, that there is nobody in the PAA who wants to be wrong about this more than I do.

That said I certainly didn’t appreciate having your group continuously disparaging me or my group all summer long. I especially didn’t like it when one of your supporters was harassing members of my group at freeway off ramps trying to force unwanted donation money on them so that individual could entrap us with a complaint to the PDC. I know that you are not personally responsible for their individual actions, and having spoken with you on decent terms at one point I doubt that you are in any way responsible. But still, those and many other underhanded actions are very hard to forgive, and make it especially hard to view the CFOK in a good light.

As for the money, your group raised over $10,000.00. Mine spent well under $1000.00. I don’t know what you consider big money, but in my opinion that is big money.

It’s interesting that when a city council makes a decision that is in favor of something people wanted, that they selectively ignore everything else. I stayed at the meeting long enough to hear residents along Lake Washington complain about how the Kirkland city council ignored input from them during the development of the Shoreline Master Program. I also listened to several impassioned individuals representing real estate groups asking for public hearings on a new construction tax issue that had (as it appeared) been denied a public hearing process. And specific to annexation, this city council ignored its citizens from the start and continued to do so throughout the process. That was enough of the business as usual for me, so I left early. Fortunately the city records those meetings to be watched later. Which I may even do at some point, but for now my position is that since I have no voice I may as well just wait for their final decision on the Tree Regulations to be made public.

“Assets to bring to this partnership.” A partnership implies that both parties have something to gain. We have assets (a fire department that is flush with cash and physical assets) and stability (from property taxes). What does Kirkland bring us? Unfortunately I don’t see the representation, though I do agree with Matthew Pruitt that the new council offers much promise based on their backgrounds. And I don’t see better services in our future without significant costs which we’ll all be paying in taxes, fees, traffic tickets, and baseless permits. And unfortunately there is no evidence of real fiscal responsibility resulting in stability that I’ve found in reviewing as much of the last 20 years of Kirkland that I could get my eyes on. So I do not see what Kirkland brings us.

In the end time will tell. If the council votes in annexation, in a few years we’ll all be able to review the progress, or lack there of. We’ll be able to looks at the tax rates, at the crime rates, at the progress of the home values compared to surrounding areas, count the number of citations issued, count the numbers of businesses that opened and closed. We’ll be able to see how many single family homes become row houses, or not. We’ll all know whether Kirkland “cleaned up Kingsgate” (I’m quoting four of your supporters there). We’ll even be able to access quality of life surveys to find out if the ends justified the means. And most of all we’ll have an answer as to whether or not this annexation is a good idea.

Believe me when I say that after spending so much time looking into how Kirkland’s other annexations have been mishandled, that there is nobody in the PAA who wants to be wrong about this more than I do.

Above you said “Our roads and sewers are maintained at a higher level than Kirkland does today. ” I wonder where you got that from? Roads are constantly potholed and then repaired, sewers leak/break and are repaired and renewed. Can you please point out the “higher level” of these services that exist in the County controlled zone?

Thanks

Above you said “Our roads and sewers are maintained at a higher level than Kirkland does today. ” I wonder where you got that from? Roads are constantly potholed and then repaired, sewers leak/break and are repaired and renewed. Can you please point out the “higher level” of these services that exist in the County controlled zone?

Thanks

The point of my presentation at the most recent Kirkland City Council was to show that the PAA is not coming hat-in-hand to Kirkland for our services. Our area has assets to bring to this partnership that seem to be left out of the discussion. Included in those are the assets of Fire District 41 which many of the PAA residents paid for with their taxes.

Contrary to your assertion, the City Council does represent the local community and is accessible. People often feel they are not represented if the council makes a decision they do not agree with. I saw you were at the meeting and spoke to the council. How many times have you addressed the King County Council? If you had stayed for the whole meeting you would have seen several council members questioning the staff recommendation on the tree ordinance.

I know the times are tough and all of us are looking at our budgets to determine what expenses are needs versus wants. Many of us (including governments and businesses) got used to having discretionary money when the economic situation was better. The changes we make now can make us better prepared for when things improve.
I believe that Kirkland and the PAA will be stronger together than separate. If we can make it work now, just think of what we can do together in the future.

The point of my presentation at the most recent Kirkland City Council was to show that the PAA is not coming hat-in-hand to Kirkland for our services. Our area has assets to bring to this partnership that seem to be left out of the discussion. Included in those are the assets of Fire District 41 which many of the PAA residents paid for with their taxes.

Contrary to your assertion, the City Council does represent the local community and is accessible. People often feel they are not represented if the council makes a decision they do not agree with. I saw you were at the meeting and spoke to the council. How many times have you addressed the King County Council? If you had stayed for the whole meeting you would have seen several council members questioning the staff recommendation on the tree ordinance.

I know the times are tough and all of us are looking at our budgets to determine what expenses are needs versus wants. Many of us (including governments and businesses) got used to having discretionary money when the economic situation was better. The changes we make now can make us better prepared for when things improve.
I believe that Kirkland and the PAA will be stronger together than separate. If we can make it work now, just think of what we can do together in the future.

Thank you for the apology. I respect your opinion and position on this issue even though I think your reasoning is flawed.

My point on the local representation is that Kirkland does not represent its citizens. It extracts taxes and fees from them, while almost unilaterally ignoring their input. The update to tree regulations is a great example. The 162 online surveys I read were overwhelmingly in favor of reducing some of the ridiculous parts like have to get permits to trim trees on one’s own property. But the recommendation was to increase fees and require even more permits. This is just one small example I’ve witnessed over the last few months. But it is important none the less, because it illustrates that the City of Kirkland is not listening to its citizens. Ergo, having a group of people issuing edicts and tax increases is not representation at all.

In so far as permits are concerned, the City of Kirkland is notorious and well known throughout the region as having the most expensive and nearly the most arduous system in place to a permit through. The exception being Issaquah.

I can’t argue unwritten laws. I can, however, point to the fact that with the exception of police levels, and free doggy poop bags in the parks (which Kirkland recently canceled), the service levels we have in the PAA are not that different than those that Kirkland will provide if in fact they do vote to pass annexation. A great example that we all use every day: Our roads and sewers are maintained at a higher level than Kirkland does today.

Kirkland’s sales tax revenues can’t support its service. That’s what they told us at the community meetings in June, 2009 and repeated throughout the process. So it apparently doesn’t matter where the sales tax revenues go. They aren’t enough to support services.

We agree on this one last item regarding the business and citizen relations. Somewhat anyway. I don’t think that Kirkland is light years beyond the county in regards to small businesses. Kirkland’s business taxes are a hindrance to small business growth. Look at Bothell, Woodinville, Redmond (the cities that are not BROKE) who are growing their small businesses, or at least not losing them as quickly. I don’t think that fish cafe in downtown Kirkland will be re-occupied any time soon.

Lastly, I too am hopeful about the prospects of the new council members. Perhaps they can fix Kirkland. The decades long track record of failure of many, many new faces on the Kirkland City doesn’t bode well however. Unfortunately, based on that track record, it doesn’t seem very likely that even if they do address the financial mess that they’ll be doing anything to make owning a home in Kirkland any better (read lower taxes, fewer lower cost and simplified permits, etc) than any of the hundreds of council members that have come before them.

In summary: I’ll believe it when I see it. Until then, an ideal situation would be a system of fitness reports from the surrounding cities and annexations that actually make sense.

Thank you for the apology. I respect your opinion and position on this issue even though I think your reasoning is flawed.

My point on the local representation is that Kirkland does not represent its citizens. It extracts taxes and fees from them, while almost unilaterally ignoring their input. The update to tree regulations is a great example. The 162 online surveys I read were overwhelmingly in favor of reducing some of the ridiculous parts like have to get permits to trim trees on one’s own property. But the recommendation was to increase fees and require even more permits. This is just one small example I’ve witnessed over the last few months. But it is important none the less, because it illustrates that the City of Kirkland is not listening to its citizens. Ergo, having a group of people issuing edicts and tax increases is not representation at all.

In so far as permits are concerned, the City of Kirkland is notorious and well known throughout the region as having the most expensive and nearly the most arduous system in place to a permit through. The exception being Issaquah.

I can’t argue unwritten laws. I can, however, point to the fact that with the exception of police levels, and free doggy poop bags in the parks (which Kirkland recently canceled), the service levels we have in the PAA are not that different than those that Kirkland will provide if in fact they do vote to pass annexation. A great example that we all use every day: Our roads and sewers are maintained at a higher level than Kirkland does today.

Kirkland’s sales tax revenues can’t support its service. That’s what they told us at the community meetings in June, 2009 and repeated throughout the process. So it apparently doesn’t matter where the sales tax revenues go. They aren’t enough to support services.

We agree on this one last item regarding the business and citizen relations. Somewhat anyway. I don’t think that Kirkland is light years beyond the county in regards to small businesses. Kirkland’s business taxes are a hindrance to small business growth. Look at Bothell, Woodinville, Redmond (the cities that are not BROKE) who are growing their small businesses, or at least not losing them as quickly. I don’t think that fish cafe in downtown Kirkland will be re-occupied any time soon.

Lastly, I too am hopeful about the prospects of the new council members. Perhaps they can fix Kirkland. The decades long track record of failure of many, many new faces on the Kirkland City doesn’t bode well however. Unfortunately, based on that track record, it doesn’t seem very likely that even if they do address the financial mess that they’ll be doing anything to make owning a home in Kirkland any better (read lower taxes, fewer lower cost and simplified permits, etc) than any of the hundreds of council members that have come before them.

In summary: I’ll believe it when I see it. Until then, an ideal situation would be a system of fitness reports from the surrounding cities and annexations that actually make sense.

I couldn’t agree more with you that people shouldn’t use words like ghetto to describe their neighboring communities. That is why it is so offensive when I have to read it over and over again.

And perhaps, you could change the picture associated with this article? The welcoming little children is just as offensive considering the pseudo-democratic way that this election is being handled. You see, it seems as though us little children up North need the big guiding hand of Kirkland, and it’s ok that because Kirkland is here to help. Really, give it a thought and consider changing it. The symbolism is not good.

I couldn’t agree more with you that people shouldn’t use words like ghetto to describe their neighboring communities. That is why it is so offensive when I have to read it over and over again.

And perhaps, you could change the picture associated with this article? The welcoming little children is just as offensive considering the pseudo-democratic way that this election is being handled. You see, it seems as though us little children up North need the big guiding hand of Kirkland, and it’s ok that because Kirkland is here to help. Really, give it a thought and consider changing it. The symbolism is not good.

I’d like to apologize for my beyond the fence statement. I realize that it is not true but rather was only trying express my point of view that we need to look at the macro side of things as well as the micro. I understand that all involved care about this community and I respect the opinion of those who do not support annexation, despite the fact that I think they are wrong.

However, I do not think that police service and local representation is tired rhetoric. Will police service not increase if annexation happens? Will we not be able to talk to a city councilmember that represents less people and a smaller geographic region than a county councilmember? WIll we not be able to apply for permits and talk to planners at Kirkland city hall rather than Seattle after dealing with traffic?

How are they going to help the region? By taking over the services in a region that King County is all but abandoning. Trust me. I used to work there. It is without a doubt the unwritten goal of the county to completely and utterly get out of the business of providing service within urban growth boundaries. The longer we wait the worse it gets, and that impacts Kirkland and its citizens. As services decline, so does the community, which hurts the surrounding region in my view. The cost will be a lot more than $2.2 Million and will be far more reaching. In other words the benefits of annexation are greater than the costs.

Furthermore, why wouldn’t the PAA want the tax revenue it generates by shopping in Kirkland to go toward services used within the PAA? Isn’t that just common sense?

I happen to agree with you that Kirkland could improve its relationship with both business and its citizens, in fact I think it is a big problem within the city, but they are light years ahead of the county in this regard. Again, I have witnessed this first hand. Furthermore, I am personally very hopeful that the election of Ms. Sweet, Ms. Walen, and Ms. Marchione will help in this area.

I’d like to apologize for my beyond the fence statement. I realize that it is not true but rather was only trying express my point of view that we need to look at the macro side of things as well as the micro. I understand that all involved care about this community and I respect the opinion of those who do not support annexation, despite the fact that I think they are wrong.

However, I do not think that police service and local representation is tired rhetoric. Will police service not increase if annexation happens? Will we not be able to talk to a city councilmember that represents less people and a smaller geographic region than a county councilmember? WIll we not be able to apply for permits and talk to planners at Kirkland city hall rather than Seattle after dealing with traffic?

How are they going to help the region? By taking over the services in a region that King County is all but abandoning. Trust me. I used to work there. It is without a doubt the unwritten goal of the county to completely and utterly get out of the business of providing service within urban growth boundaries. The longer we wait the worse it gets, and that impacts Kirkland and its citizens. As services decline, so does the community, which hurts the surrounding region in my view. The cost will be a lot more than $2.2 Million and will be far more reaching. In other words the benefits of annexation are greater than the costs.

Furthermore, why wouldn’t the PAA want the tax revenue it generates by shopping in Kirkland to go toward services used within the PAA? Isn’t that just common sense?

I happen to agree with you that Kirkland could improve its relationship with both business and its citizens, in fact I think it is a big problem within the city, but they are light years ahead of the county in this regard. Again, I have witnessed this first hand. Furthermore, I am personally very hopeful that the election of Ms. Sweet, Ms. Walen, and Ms. Marchione will help in this area.

My own initial opposition to annexation dating back to 2007 was based solely on Kirkland’s inability to reign in costs and the then projected operating cost to existing Kirkland of $50 million. That was then. Since then, the City of Kirkland has raised taxes, substantially lowered service levels, and re-worked the annexation analysis, lowered the number of planned annexation patrol districts, plans to adjust Kirkland’s police patrol districts, and foregone any accounting of facilities costs such as a larger City Hall, Police and Maintenance facilities.
Since 2007, the City has reworked the numbers and now says that annexation is feasible given the changes which have taken place.
You may notice that I try to remain neutral on this issue these days. The financial side is not the only one to consider. There is also a moral obligation that many in Kirkland believe we have toward the PAA based upon past promises Councils have made. This perspective is also very legitimate. I do not begrudge anyone in the PAA wanting to become a part of Kirkland, nor do I begrudge anyone wishing to stay with King County. This is a very emotional issue and I am sure you will agree that we are best served when rhetoric like “ghetto” is not used by any of us to describe our neighbors.
Thank you for your comments.

My own initial opposition to annexation dating back to 2007 was based solely on Kirkland’s inability to reign in costs and the then projected operating cost to existing Kirkland of $50 million. That was then. Since then, the City of Kirkland has raised taxes, substantially lowered service levels, and re-worked the annexation analysis, lowered the number of planned annexation patrol districts, plans to adjust Kirkland’s police patrol districts, and foregone any accounting of facilities costs such as a larger City Hall, Police and Maintenance facilities.
Since 2007, the City has reworked the numbers and now says that annexation is feasible given the changes which have taken place.
You may notice that I try to remain neutral on this issue these days. The financial side is not the only one to consider. There is also a moral obligation that many in Kirkland believe we have toward the PAA based upon past promises Councils have made. This perspective is also very legitimate. I do not begrudge anyone in the PAA wanting to become a part of Kirkland, nor do I begrudge anyone wishing to stay with King County. This is a very emotional issue and I am sure you will agree that we are best served when rhetoric like “ghetto” is not used by any of us to describe our neighbors.
Thank you for your comments.