Letter to the Editor – Annexation Football
Dear Editor:
After reviewing the tape of the council meeting discussing annexation, it is clear that some Councilmembers still want to pursue annexation regardless of the costs to the citizens of Kirkland. They are Councilmembers Sternoff, Burleigh, and McBride
Councilmember Sternoff suggested that annexation be analyzed from a revenue prospectus in order to determine what service levels could be provided with only the revenues from the PAA. Why does he want the citizens of Kirkland to pay for something the PAA should have paid for themselves, or if the County really wants to unload the PAA, then why doesn’t the county pay for the studies?
In prior discussions about annexation, Mr. Sternoff said he did not want to endorse gambling and it was wrong to accept gambling money to pay for services. If he perceived that accepting money from gambling was wrong before, why now has he changed his mind? Did the million or more gambling revenue influence Mr. Sternoff? I think so.
Councilmember Burleigh and McBride remain true to their socialistic pursuit of revenue sharing believing that Kirkland should subsidize the PAA shortfalls. Whatever the PAA cannot pay for, they are willing to use money from the citizens of Kirkland to cover the cost. It will result in the citizens of Kirkland paying more for fewer services.
The current comments from the PAA indicate they are tired of being second-class citizens being tossed around like a football between Kirkland and Bothell; however, they have not taken the necessary steps to annex. Neither Kirkland nor Bothell know what the PAA wants. Neither does the PAA. Therefore, all the efforts by either city may be a waist of time. The correct course of action should be for the PAA to submit a petition to the city of their choice or incorporate themselves.
For Kirkland citizens to fund any additional annexation studies is costing us money, not the PAA. It’s time the council represented us and not some other personal interest.
Sincerely,
Bob Style
Posted by Admin on Monday, January 12, 2009 at 2:04 pm
Filed under Letters · Tagged with Annexation, City Council, Letters, PAA
Print This Article
Related Stories:
|
|
|
|
|
Bob, we, the PAA, cannot incorporate ourselves. Kirkland made that impossible when they annexed the Totem Lake and Juanita commercial areas. It is commercial areas and not residential areas that provide the most revenue to a city. So, when I shop in Totem Lake or Juanita, I am ultimately paying for your services. Is that fair? The xenophobia from some in Kirkland is palpable. Should I and the rest of the PAA stay away from Kirkland?
The best solution in my opinion is for Kirkland to give up and officially release claim on the PAA so Bothell can annex us.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The PAA could incorporate if 60% wanted to. Since you have not initiated the annexation petition, you don’t know if the majority wants something new or want to keep what they have.
There are many communities that exist on residential income, many by choice. To pursue greater commercially based revenues, at least some of the residential charater must change, something the existing residents may not want. It’s important to remember that sales tax supports where we shop, not where we live. Many Kirkland residents shop in Bellevue and Redmond. Does that mean we should stop shopping in other communities? If Mr. Pabst Jr. really was interested in what’s the best course of action, he should determine how much support there is for incorporation. Until then, stop using Kirkland and Bothell’s money to do your homework.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Bob, The council conducted a survey to measure the response and an overwhelming majority of PAA citizen’s wanted annexation to Kirkland.
You miss John’s point about the difficulty in incorporating an area that has been picked clean of the majority of it’s economic base. I would also point out that Kirkland has spent way more “studying” this than Bothell had to. So if there is finger pointing on the costs of that, it should be directed to Kirkland City Council Members and staff.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Cami:
The economic assumptions of annexation contained in the survey were wrong consequently the conclusion was wrong. In my opinion, the PAA was duped in hopes the people would think they would be getting the same urban services as Kirkland without costing them more money.
The PAA has to decide on what services it wants. Your taxes are high and more than sufficient to pay for basic services. If you want more, expect to pay more.
You are right on the money when you said the exorbitant cost in pursuit of annexation is the responsibility of the Kirkland Council. They took more than a million from our pockets, not the homeowners in the PAA.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Hi Cami,
The City of Kirkland has responded to a request for the amount of money Kirkland has spent on annexation. Kirkland has spent over $700,000 according to a King County study dated February 1, 2008. Please visit the Forum where the details of this report are available:
http://www.kirklandviews.com/forum/open-discussion/annexation-study-cost-700000-and-rising-kirkland-citizens-paying-the-tab/#p46
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Bob and Rob, Although I agree that the $700k spent is alot of money, I also know for a fact that the last annexation of Totem Lake was a more a rape than a friendly romance. Kirkland did in fact take the commerically viable. The City and both of you have benefited. To jsut look at the cost without the other information is a disservice to the rest of the people who read this blog and do not know the history. I look at what the study did was to explore the the annexation in a conservative way. It also caused the City to look at itself. I believe tat what is happening now will be benficial to the long term survival of Kirkland and that survivial includes annexation! Al
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Kirkland has a lot of folks really interested in it’s future. This has been a real education for me. I didn’t know how much trouble Kirkland is in. The parks and everything like the Kirkland Brand still is strong in my mind. I don’t really know the Kirkland council other than seeing one briefly in Juanita last summer. I don’t follow them like Bob obviously has. My home is in the PAA and as of now I really have no interest in being annexed by Kirkland. I feel a bit rejected to be honest. My one wish is for a good value for the taxes we pay and I don’t think what pay is fair. I agree with John that Bothell has been a better (and friendlier) friend to our family than Kirkland.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Jenny: I agree that Bothell has been more friendly toward annexation; however, I do not think their fiscal studies are correct. Bothell may end up like Kirkland and have to raise taxes to make up for the shortfalls caused by a demand for services. Once an area incorporates, the demand for services will be immediate. That takes money and a lot of it. I feel there may be many like yourself that would like to keep the area like it is. The only way to find out is to circulate a petition.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
On what basis do you think their fiscal studies are not correct Bob? Did you question the correctness of Kirkland’s which did not include any growth assumptions?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The cost for services. After the initial assumptions were made about annexation, the Council discovered they could not provide the PAA with the same service levels. They had to go back and direct staff to revisit the cost to include capital expenditures as well as operating cost. Department heads were pressured to reduce their original projections in order to paint a prettier picture. Also, once an area incorporates to receive urban services, they want them immediately after annexation. They don’t want to wait 10 years. It can’t be done.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Bob,
I have racked my brain to find where Sternoff said he was against the Casino or gambling. I vaguely remember others on the Council saying something like that.. As far as I can tell from viewing the old meetings where the casino was discussed I can ‘t find it. Please direct all of us to where you found that statement.
Al
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Al: It was at an annexation study session. In fact, he supported shutting down the card room if Kirkland annexed the PAA. It would help to talk to staff to get the exact date. Based on Council guidance, they drafted the economic impacts without gambling. I called the Planning Director, Eric Shields, asking why the card room would not be allowed to exist and be grandfathered in if annexed. He responded that it was not a zoning issue because gambling is controlled by a different set of RCW’s. Some Councilmembers including Mr. Sternoff wanted to to use those reg’s to shut the card room down.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“No casino” was a firm position when annexation was first discussed by this council, with Bob Sternoff being the leader of the annexation subcommittee. I am not positive that Bob made that statement categorically himself, but I can say for sure that the Council took that stance.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
In order to keep the record accurate, I need to point out that Al Czervik is simply incorrect. Councilmember Bob Sternoff was unequivocally against a casino. I found a public statement of his on tape which I will quote here:
“I’m not in favor of keeping the casino. If we’re going to do that, then we might as well open a public [garbled]“ – Councilmember Bob Sternoff while discussing the dire outlook of annexation financing at a study session. The staff presentation at this study session was bleak and one suggestion was the possibility keeping the Casino open in order to collect the $1 million in gambling revenues it produces. Councilmember Bob Sternoff made this statement at 01:42:04 on the video for the annexation study session dated November 15, 2007. Please review the entire video for full context and comments from each of the City Councilmembers.
Thank you for your comments.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
As a Kirkland resident, what is the benefit to me if we annex the PAA? I’m not trying to start a fight, but what’s the net effect to me if Kingsgate (and surrounding areas) becomes part of Kirkland? Also, what’s the possibility that Kirkland property values will be affected by this? Call it xenophobia or whatever you want, but there is definite perceived valued placed on homes inside Kirkland city limits. Can someone explain this? Is this a inside-city-limit vs unincorporated area or is it a Kirkland vs Kingsgate?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“As a Kirkland resident, what is the benefit to me if we annex the PAA?”
Very little. There is minimal upside and lots of risk, not to mention the known issues already raised.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Something to consider about annexation in regard to house values. Barring the current financial situation, if annexation were to happen it is likely that the value of the houses in the PAA will likely go up. The side effect is that when house in the City get appraised and compared with similar houses it helps the overall value if houses nearby have increased in value. The thing that can drag down the value is something like a jail that is built in an area across the border that the City doesn’t control. Perhaps..
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You won’t get annexed to Bellevue, Kirkland or Bothell down the road because your city can no longer survive as a small enclave of 45,000 or so
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
One meeting of note re: annexation had Mary Alyce stating
“I am pleased to report that the State (of Washington) has agreed with the ‘no casino’ requirement and that the sole casino (Caribbean) in the PAA will lock up the morning after we annex the PAA”
Not a direct quote but close.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Bob Style, You are the one who had made the statement about what Sternoff said. I have reviewed the meetings and still can’t find it. I don’t mind you expressing your opinions however when you put words in other people’s mouths without proof I think it only fair to ask for the proof. I was at the community meeting where you stated that the Fire District response times in the PAA were diffferent from the City of Kirklands. Sternoff took you to task by informing you that the response times were in fact the same. Fact was and is that the City of Kirkland provides funding for District 41 in order to keep the level of service. the same. Ghost has it right. Sternoff was the “leader” of the annexation committee. In the end he supported the annexation and As far as I can tell he did not categorically make that statement. In fact if you check the last study meeting before the annexation vote Sternoff suggested that the Casino be left in and considered grandfathered. Bob Style I request “just the facts” please? Al
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The facts are that Mr. Sternoff was a no gambling proponent then. Now he’s not. I will try to research his exact words to belay your concerns about facts.
Also, police and fire response times are not the same throughout Kirkland or the PAA. Service levels are different. When expressed as an average, may be Mr. Sternoff was correct; however, when it comes to responding to each address, some response times are below average.
For the most part, Mr. Sternoff is trying to do the right thing. Never-the-less, he is still a politician and needs to be watched just like any other politician having control over our lives.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Bob, I will await your research and stand corrected if what you say is so. I have not found it after reviewing nearly every tape. Service levels are an average of times throughout Kirkland and the PAA. I understand that some calls may take more time than others while others take less. This is due to time of day, traffic, construction and most importantly if the nearest station is out on a prior call. I have read the Norcom information and it says that response times will improve due to dispatch procedures. The firemen that take my blood pressure (its free at the stations!) have told me that new staffing will also help with response. times. I concede that Sternoff is a politician. I appreciate that he was the only council member to see the economic condition the City was in and say something. I also appreciate his vote against budget while the others added taxes for all of us. Al
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For what its worth I do think that Al has a point. If a council member did in fact say something then it should be documented when it was said. As has been pointed out on this blog before it would be nice to not libel or demean any person including council members without a citation. I appreciate the passion that some in this City have. it just appears to me as a newbie that there are way too many grudges that are being perpetuated here. For the record I don’t really care if a Council member changed their mind on the Casino. If the decision was in the best interests of the City then so be it. BTW I think the City did a great job on the annexation process. It was open and the economic where very conservative. From reading Mr. Style’s letter and hearing him speak at the Council meetings I would think he would appreciate that.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
As a new resident of the PAA area I am still becoming familiar with the issues surrounding the potential incorporation. I’d be interested to get some perspective on some things I’ve notived while living here. First, there seems to be alot of empty retail space, especially in the Totem Lake area. Is this a result of the current economy or are there some other issues underlying it as well, such as city policies or zoning. It would be nice if some of the places we have to drive to the surrounding cities for had locations in some of this underutilized retail space. Second, why would I want to be incorporated? I pay alot more in property taxes here than for a comparable home in the Bellevue or Redmond area. If my area were incorporated into either city would my tax rate go down due to efficiencies realized once leveraging services of the city?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I agree. Our taxes should be plenty to cover our service needs. How can we get lower services than Bellevue when we pay more! I don’t have any problems with lack of police because I never call them but my neighbors seem to. For me I think we need more sidewalks and more community and more shopping.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Soooo, against annexation of the PAA but want us to host your jail inmates eh? The NEC is looking to dump a proposed 640 bed jail in our front yard. The released inmates will only have to walk about 100 yards across NE124th St into Kirkland to get tto the Lucky 7 “sports” bar where they can indulge in the pastimes of…..gambling,& gaming for “prizes” AND drinking. Nice. Of course, Kirkland does not want any gambling ( how horrible) in pristine Kirkland. Ahem? You might like to think again on that one.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0