Thursday, March 11th, 2010

Annexation – City of Bothell Fiscal Analysis Looks Promising

3

 

UPDATE: The City of Bothell has informed us that the information quoted in this article has since been removed from the City website as it was preliminary. Please visit this article for details.


The City of Bothell has completed a fiscal analysis of the prospect of annexing Kingsgate, Upper Juanita and Finn Hill. King County urged Bothell to study the possibility of annexing these unincorporated areas, jointly known as the Kirkland’s Potential Annexation Areas (PAAs) when Kirkland found annexation unfeasible in May of last year. Bothell, with a far stronger financial basis, has shown interest in annexing Kirkland’s PAAs. Bothell is now referring to the PAAs, along with an adjacent area, as the South of Bothell Annexation (SOBA) Area.

In summary, the study concluded that revenues from all unrestricted funds would amount to $14.4 million annually, and expenditures to provide City services at current levels would total $13.1 million annually, for an annual net surplus of $1.4 million after one-time costs (estimated at $8 million) are amortized.  The study calculated that revenues restricted to capital expenditures would total $1.8 million annually, and pointed out that the $1.4 million annual surplus in unrestricted revenues (after amortization of one-time costs) could be applied to capital.

Bothell and Kirkland have very different financial situations. The two cities have different cost structures, service levels and budget controls. As everyone in Kirkland is painfully aware, Kirkland spent much of 2008 in a self-described “financial crisis” with projected deficits in the range of $19 million.

Bothell is simultaneously studying the annexation SOBA as well as areas to the north of the city reaching into Snohomish County. Despite the rosy financial picture Bothell’s study has painted, annexation of SOBA cannot take place until the Kirkland City Council decides to release the PAAs from Kirkland’s control. Until Kirkland either releases control over the PAAs or conducts another round financial studies, the residents of Kingsgate, Upper Juanita and Finn Hill will remain in limbo.

From the Imagine Bothell January 2009 Schedule:

Tuesday, January 13, 2008, City Council meeting, starting time 6:00 p.m.

 A.  Study Session to Consider South of Bothell Annexation (SOBA) Area Annexation Fiscal Analysis  

 The purpose of this Study Session is to review the findings of the South of Bothell Annexation (SOBA) Area Annexation Fiscal Analysis (available online at ci.bothell.wa.us).  The Study Session also provides an opportunity to discuss the potential SOBA in relation to the proposed North, East and West of Bothell Annexation (NEWBA), which is now before the Snohomish County Boundary Review Board (SCBRB).  No Council decisions are necessary at this time. 

 The SOBA analysis projected revenues and expenditures which might be expected to result from annexation by Bothell of the unincorporated areas of Finn Hill, Upper Juanita and Kingsgate, should the City of Kirkland relinquish those neighborhoods from its official Potential Annexation Area (PAA) or King County amend the Countywide Planning Policies to allow overlapping PAAs. 

 In summary, the study concluded that revenues from all unrestricted funds would amount to $14.4 million annually, and expenditures to provide City services at current levels would total $13.1 million annually, for an annual net surplus of $1.4 million after one-time costs (estimated at $8 million) are amortized.  The study calculated that revenues restricted to capital expenditures would total $1.8 million annually, and pointed out that the $1.4 million annual surplus in unrestricted revenues (after amortization of one-time costs) could be applied to capital.

 Please note that annexation of Finn Hill, Upper Juanita and Kingsgate would have to include South Norway Hill as well, to achieve contiguity with Bothell’s existing boundaries.  South Norway Hill is already in Bothell’s adopted PAA. 

 A 2006 annexation fiscal analysis of all of the unincorporated territory within Bothell’s Planning Area concluded that South Norway Hill would generate $851,500 in unrestricted revenues and $775,000 in maintenance and operation expenditures, for a net annual surplus of $76,500. 

 Adding South Norway Hill to Finn Hill, Upper Juanita and Kingsgate would thus add to the positive net revenue picture which emerged from the SOBA study. 

 Staff contact: Bill Wiselogle, Community Development Director, via e-mail at bill.wiselogle@ci.bothell.wa.us, or via telephone at 425-486-8152 ext.4466.

Related Stories:

Annexation Financial Information Pulled from City of Bothell Website
  Posted financial information was preliminary and not verified   The City of Bothell has...
Annexation resources
Confused about annexation and don't know where to turn for answers? Want both sides of the story? Here...
Goodbye Kirkland, Hello Bothell – King County promotes annexation of PAA by Bothell
King County encourages Bothell to move swiftly in considering adoption of the Kirkland Potential...
Equal Justice For All – Bothell study confirms feasibility of annexation WITH equal service levels for PAA
The City of Bothell has completed a feasibility study revealing that the annexation of Kingsgate,...

3 Responses to “Annexation – City of Bothell Fiscal Analysis Looks Promising”
  1. Tom the Juanita Guy says:

    I always thought I was Kirkland but then I learned I am King County and also PAA. Now I am to understand that I am Upper Juanita unless I talk to Bothell who calls me SOBA. You can call me Tom.
    This is the confusion of being in unincorporated areas. Bothell seems to have its financial act together better than the zoo down south. I have a Kirkland address but I think it is nice to see Bothell wanting us. For me I am closer to them anyway.
    Tom

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. Jeff says:

    I think the City of Bothell would be a better choice for the people of Juanita, Finn Hill, and Kingsgate. The people would be taken better care of financially and geographically. The City of Kirkland is in a financial mess and is not in the position to annex. In many ways I feel the City of Kirkland Wa needs to revise their management tactics and become more business friendly.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  3. Kathy says:

    I DO NOT want to be part of Kirkland. I’ve lived in my home 39 years (now King County & Finn Hill) 2 houses down from the Northshore School Dist. boundry. I live & breath Bothell. I receive the great weekly paper and any other information about Bothell. If Kirkland really wanted us I would think they could keep the PAA better informed of “all goings on” in Kirkland. I will always choose Bothell over Kirkland. Please, please, Bothell, fight for us! We want to be part of your beatuification program. You’ve made great strides and need to continue to improve. It would be a great loss if my address ends up a “Kirkland” not “Bothell”!!!!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

Tell us what you're thinking...


COMMENTING RULES: We welcome your comments and encourages you to join in the conversation as a part of our community. In an effort to maintain the high quality of shared community information on this site, we require all participants to abide by the following Code of Conduct.