In principle, do you believe that “the ends justify the means?” Please give an example which best illustrates your perspective.

Candidate Responses:

Penny Sweet

In principle, never.  In practice, sometimes it may seem to.

Ends simply do not justify the means by which they are attained.  Once we have given into the temptation to justify our actions it will be very difficult in the future to know where to draw the line.

We live in a nation of laws which are built on a set of noble principles including things like respect for human dignity, respect for the opinions of others, honor for our institutions and systems.

Unfortunately, losing sight of these principles whether at the national level or at the Kirkland City Council level can tear nations and communities apart.  Witness the intense national debate over the torture policies of the federal government or the debate that can occur when campaign laws are conveniently ignored in order to get your candidate elected.

Succumbing to this justification may appear expedient but pays no dividends later.  Let’s abide by the grand vision that build our nation and brought us communities like Kirkland.

Brad Larssen

I am sure there is some deep, philosophical meaning to this question. Volumes have been written on this subject by great writers throughout the ages.  Obviously, the answer depends upon the specific situation.

Normally it does not.  For example, does obtaining information justify torture?  No.  Is getting your way by denial of due process  justified?  No.

Yet the founding of this country illustrates that great improvements, like representative government, do not spring up overnight by themselves.  They involve taking a stand, often at great risk, and a lot of hard work and persistence.

Was our ancestors’ creation of the underground railroad to assist fugitive slaves to freedom justified?  Yes.  Most people today would agree.  Many of the rights and procedures we now take for granted were established at great risk and against considerable resistence.

Basically, I learned the answer to this question in Sunday School at an early age.  Do the right thing.

Candidate Question Number Three:

Currently, there is a projected $8 million deficit in 2009.  To balance the budget, either the citizens will be asked to pay more or the city must reduce spending.  Which do you prefer? Specifically, name some taxes you would increase and name some programs you would cut in order to balance the budget.

Candidate Responses

Penny Sweet

The city must reduce spending in order to balance the budget. The worst time to raise taxes is during a recession when families must tighten their belts and reduce their spending. It is tough enough for both families and businesses to make ends meet without facing additional tax burdens from the city.

I would not propose increasing any tax. Rather, the city should actively identify ways to reduce costs further than they have already. Core government functions should be the first priority. We must preserve fire and police protection, and vital infrastructure like water/sewer service and traffic safety.

After that, all other services should be prioritized and reductions based on that prioritization should be made immediately. The city should look to contract for some services. For example, the citizens of Kirkland have placed a high priority on retaining our tree canopy and enhancing the city’s air quality. That is a laudable goal and we should do all we can to achieve it, including every effort to save the magnificent Sequoia tree on my neighbor’s property. However, retaining a city arborist when this service could be contracted to any number of reputable tree service companies is not the best use of city revenues. This is a good time to contract out since there are many companies (even in Kirkland) looking for work which should result in competitive pricing. In the future, as we grow, it makes more sense to provide these services with city staff, it will not be difficult to shift from contracted to internal services.

Brad Larssen

The Council will need to identify essential services in order to develop a sustainable budget, where predictable revenues cover expenses.  Ideally, decisions about raising taxes or lowering service levels would be made by the citizens of Kirkland through a public process.  I do not believe in raising taxes in a recession, where citizens are already struggling financially.  I will prioritize public safety, because that is the service most important to Kirkland’s citizens and their quality of life.

Candidate Question Number Four:

Families are feeling the economic crunch. Utility fees keep going up, but the city wants to put an additional utility fee increase on this year’s ballot. Do you agree?

Candidate Responses

Penny Sweet

This is the worst possible time to ask families to pay more in taxes.

However, our citizens have come to expect the services provided by the city. We receive great services from our city despite Kirkland having fewer employees per thousand of population than all of its neighbors. While that is a testament to the dedication and hard work performed by the staff Kirkland has been able to attract over the years, it is also the time for our citizens to make a choice. Placing the measure on the ballot will give the city council the opportunity to hear from the citizens of Kirkland about what they value most. I welcome that message and sincerely hope the council will listen to it.

Brad Larssen

I do not believe in raising taxes in a recession, where citizens are already struggling financially.

.

.

.

Candidate Question Number Five:

How would you work to improve cooperation between the city, citizen’s groups and developers and improve the process on downtown development projects?

Candidate Responses

Penny Sweet

I would start by calling together some kind of a peace meeting.

I believe the answer to our continuing development dilemma is in assuring that we build a deeper understanding of the needs and desires of all of the stakeholders in these projects. Property owners, tenants, developers, neighbors and all citizens need to have a conversation that puts all of the issues on the table and results in some general agreements regarding where we want to be in 25 years.

Clearly there is a lack of trust among all of the stakeholders. If we can elevate our conversations about the future of our city we could rid ourselves of the rhetoric and move forward

Given that:

What Should Be Expected From Developers

They should be REQUIRED to meet with citizens, especially those directly impacted by their project, to openly and honestly discuss their plans and to listen carefully to what their future neighbors have to say

They should be expected to develop projects in keeping with Kirkland’s comprehensive plan. Deviations from that plan may be acceptable but it is incumbent on the builders to justify those deviations to the Planning Commission.

What Should Be Expected From Kirkland Citizens

They should be expected to show up at meetings with developers and share their point of view (it is not helpful to show up after the review process is well underway.)

They should be expected to honestly discuss the merits, or lack of merits, of the project for the entire community of Kirkland.

What Should Be Expected From Kirkland

Our City Council should put in place procedures which ensure that that developers and citizens each understand how important it is for Kirkland to grow, and especially how important it is for that growth be in keeping with a collective vision of Kirkland’s future.

Brad Larssen

A great deal of time and care, involving all the stakeholders, was put into developing comprehensive plans for each neighborhood and downtown. These comprehensive plans and our zoning regulations are the guidelines that Kirkland has put in place to insure that the public interest is given due consideration in the development of our city and its neighborhoods. This is standing operating procedure in any well-run community. Development that closely follows the comprehensive plan for each neighborhood and downtown ordinarily can expect a good deal of public acceptance. Such development proceeds with a respect for the high value Kirkland citizens hold for the character of our downtown and neighborhoods.

Where developers and developments sometimes go wrong is when development proposals are presented that greatly exceed the guidelines of our comprehensive plan and zoning regulations. I have attended design review, planning, city council, neighborhood, and stakeholder meetings in a number of communities in this area. This is what most often tends to stir public opposition and hold up developments.

The solution is not to install developer advocates on the city council. The solution is not to blame the public for having a healthy civic concern for their community, downtown, and neighborhoods. The solution is to respect Kirkland’s citizens, zoning regulations, and comprehensive plan and to propose developments that are consistent with these community values and codes. In general, the more a project exceeds local codes and zoning regulations, the more public opposition is created in response. Well-proposed, suitable developments tend to proceed rather smoothly, with little opposition. Where this process is followed, development is reasonable in size, height, and scope. It’s something most people can live with, and there is relatively little delay and controversy.

Candidate Question Number Six:

What changes would you like to see in downtown Kirkland, the major neighborhoods, the waterfront, Totem Lake and the BNSF corridor to look like in 5 years? 10 years?

Candidate Responses

Penny Sweet

Downtown Kirkland

Downtown is clearly the heart of Kirkland. I would hope that through a combination of restoration and redevelopment we can maintain the intimate scale of our core while accommodating the need for increased office space and first floor retail. Some of our older buildings present such significant environmental and fire risk that they must simply be replaced, while others, like the old theater and Triple J’s must be restored as part of a testimony of our past.

In the long term there is the need to create an effective mix of business, office and residential as projects are conceived for downtown. Combine that with green building principals and open space and throw in a public/private process for parking and we would all be well served.

Major Neighborhoods (are there Minor?)

Our neighborhoods are a precious source of pride within our city. They provide a tangible sense of connection and identity to their membership. We need to promote Map Your Neighborhood programs and emergency management plans for each neighborhood.

As our neighborhoods redevelop we need to incorporate innovative housing design like clustered or cottage housing and accessory dwelling units, rather than the proliferation of mega houses we see too often.

Totem Lake

With annexation, Totem Lake becomes the geographic center of Kirkland. It is way past time for the redevelopment of the mall and surrounding area. The plans are approved and in place, no more excuses!

BNSF Corridor

I’d like to see the BNSF corridor enhanced as a bike and pedestrian trail. Since the corridor will be operated by the Port of Seattle it will be the Port’s call on whether to remove the rails. Regardless, I believe we can create a trail that is compatible with the rail line, as there are examples across the country.

Brad Larssen

Kirkland is the only city with a downtown on Lake Washington waterfront. Kirkland residents love their city, its character, its strong, distinct, safe neighborhoods, its beautiful downtown on the lake. Kirkland residents love the unique character of Kirkland and want to retain and protect it. We have developed a comprehensive plan and codes and zoning that meet the requirements of the Growth Management Act while meeting the needs and wishes of our citizens. My opponent complains about the public opposition and delays that many over-sized, over-zoned, and over-code developments that have been proposed downtown have been met with.

I believe we should elect councilmembers who listen to citizens and advocate for their interests. Developers, outside business PACs, lobbyists, and other special interests have paid employee and advocates of their own. It is not in our citizens’ interests to have developer advocates run the city government as well. The city councilmembers that you elect should represent the 48,000 citizens of Kirkland, not a handful of special interests.

Despite considerable growth and density, Kirkland still resembles the city I chose to buy a home in 30 years ago. I will work hard to see that the downtown and neighborhoods still retain their unique character and livability five and ten years into the future. If we wanted high-rise development on the waterfront, we would have zoned it accordingly.

While a few advocates of over-development have been fighting the citizens and codes over a few properties downtown, Totem Lake Mall has suffered high vacancies and dwindling customers and revenues. We need to pay attention to the whole community. We need to encourage clean, green business to locate here. It is long overdue that someone resident in the northern 1/3 of Kirkland annexed 21 years ago have a voice and a vote on city council.

Candidate Question Number Seven:

Given the budget deficit, should the City of Kirkland consider outsourcing  some services to private enterprise if it could save money? If so, which services would you outsource? Which would you not? Are there any city services which you believe could be shared or pooled with adjoining cities?

Candidate Responses

Penny Sweet

Outsourcing is a concept that often emerges when organizations, including government, experience budget deficits. At best it is a marginally successful short term solution which can often result in greater costs down the road when it is necessary to rehire and retrain staff as workloads begin to grow again.

Although I am skeptical, I would be willing to consider the technique if it can be shown the savings are not temporary and service quality is not diminished. At a luncheon last week the city manager described the overwhelming decline in requests for building permits and services from that department. I’m sure there have already been cutbacks in response to a lightened workload that but this is an area where savings could be found. One form of outsourcing that can work in the short run is to hire someone as a city employee on a private contract, then, when work loads increase you often have trained and willing personnel ready to become full time city employees.

One last thought, with the real possibility of Kirkland annexing an additional 30,000 residents this is probably not a good time to consider losing valuable personnel we may need later.

I do believe cities in the future will share more and more resources including staff. This would most likely work best with specialized services such as public information officers, an arborist, or prosecuting attorney, but the decision should be based on workload and service quality not just budget savings. A good example of shared services is the NORCOM system of emergency response dispatch. It took years of negotiating over turf issues but will prove its worth in the years to come. We should always look for these opportunities to deliver better service more efficiently.

Brad Larssen

No. There is a misconception by some people that outsourcing some services would save money. Yet studies show that this is not the case. The cost of a city worker for any given service is predictable, fairly established and negotiated, and protected by a contract. There is no third party contractor taking a profit off the top. Any money that you think you are going to save by paying workers less, is spent providing a profit to the contractor, so there is no net savings. In addition, the city loses direct control over the workers providing the services.

The citizens of Kirkland expect and deserve a high and professional level of service. They like the security of having city workers and vehicles clearly identified to the public. When they call City Hall with a problem, they want it resolved. They do not want the buck passed to a third party contractor they cannot hold directly accountable.

In addition, there could be significant legal costs involved with such an attempt to evade existing contracts with city workers. We would lose trained city staff and replace them with a series of less-trained temporary workers. In the end, it would result in a lower level of service, less accountability, and no net savings to the city.

Candidate Question Number Eight:

The Level of Service (LOS) for the annexation areas are significantly below the City of Kirkland’s LOS. If annexation passes, the newly minted Kirkland citizens will demand and deserve equal services for equal taxes paid to the city.  What solution will you be advocating if annexation passes? If you favor raising LOS in the annexation areas, how will you pay for it? If necessary, would you consider lowering the LOS in existing Kirkland?

Candidate Responses

Penny Sweet

I would not support lowering the level of service in Kirkland.

I believe we will bring the service levels up in the annexations areas as we transition to our newly configured city. It’s not going to happen overnight. I don’t believe the people in the annexation areas expect it to happen overnight. What they expect is a higher level of service than they are receiving now. Given King County’s LOS that will not be difficult.

The short answer is: for 10 years the state will provide the necessary funding for Kirkland level of service standards. We should take advantage of this one time opportunity and spend our time working on increasing the revenue that could be generated in the annexation areas and in other areas of Kirkland like Totem Lake.

Brad Larssen

Kirkland residents and anyone following the issue know that annexation is a net revenue loss to the city. It will force painful budget decisions in the toughest economic times since The Great Depression. Before the state subsidy/sales tax credit was proposed, annexation studies and estimates showed a $5 million/year funding gap in balancing our budget, meaning either cuts in services, lower level of service (LOS), tax increases, or some combination of these.

Even with these temporary state subsidies, annexation is a net financial loss to the city. This is a larger funding gap than originally estimated, due to considerably lower sales tax revenues, resulting from much lower consumer spending. After these subsidies expire in ten years, all Kirkland citizens will have to make up for a funding gap of $4 to $5 million/year.

The most optimistic recent figures assume a lower LOS for the annexation areas. If and when newly-annexed citizens call for an equal level of service, they are either denied this, or else the funding gap increases, or LOS to current citizens is decreased, or tax increases will be proposed to pay for it.

This is why annexation faced so much opposition among Kirkland residents.

We need to give honest answers of costs and LOS to the citizens of Kirkland, and also to the PAA voters, so they can make an informed decision.

We are required by law to balance the budget. We cannot operate at a deficit. That is one of many reasons why Kirkland citizens should have been given more of a voice in the annexation decision.

Taxes cannot be raised without a vote of the citizens, so Kirkland’s citizens will eventually be forced to choose between lower LOS or higher taxes. I will work hard to make sensible budget economies, but the funding gap will still need to be addressed.

Candidate Question Number Nine:

Annexation will be voted on by the residents of Finn Hill, North Juanita and Kingsgate. If annexation is passes, do you support grandfathering of the cardroom in Kingsgate and allowing it to remain open? Why or why not? Do you support changing Kirkland’s laws forbidding card rooms?

Candidate Responses

Penny Sweet

I do support grandfathering of the card room in Kingsgate if annexation passes. The fact is the card room is very unlike what I believe many people fear regarding the “casino” concept. I “scootered’ up there and visited one afternoon last spring and was impressed by the low key, friendly atmosphere and how busy they were on a Saturday afternoon. They appear to be a good neighbor in Kingsgate. It’s clean and quiet and does not generate an inordinate number of police calls. It also has the potential to be a significant revenue generator for the city, something we could use right now. Currently in Kirkland pull tabs are allowed in many establishments which generate a lot more police activity and un-neighborly behavior than the casino does.

I do not favor changing Kirkland’s current law banning additional card rooms in the city.

Brad Larssen

This issue illustrates the sort of problems that arise in proceding with annexation at a time of deep recession and economic crisis.  If annexation passes, our city budget deficit will be further increased, because sales tax revenues are down considerably from the estimates projected before the recession and the sharp drop in consumer spending.  As a result, sales tax rebates from the state will also be far less than projected.

What would be predominantly a moral issue in good economic times, has now become wrapped up in the overriding issue of the budget deficit.  If the existing cardroom is not allowed to operate, further losses of tax revenue will result, meaning even greater deficits.  By proceding with annexation during the worst recession in nearly everybody’s lifetime, the choice has been complicated by the budget deficit realities of what combination of service cuts or tax increases would be needed to offset this lost revenue.

Grandfathering of the cardroom as a pre-existing condition is allowed by state statute.  The majority of the current council intend to allow this cardroom to continue to operate, under this grandfathering statute.  If annexation passes, the new council and city government will be in a real bind.  The cardroom owners will have been annexed under the impression that grandfathering would take place.  I would expect them to fight a change of city policy regarding their continued operation.

I believe we should not change Kirkland’s laws forbidding cardrooms.  At most, grandfathering should be limited to an exception of a pre-existing condition, per statute, and per any binding promises made by the city before November’s elections.  It should not be expanded.

This is yet another reason why Kirkland’s citizens should have had more of a voice in the decision to proceed with annexation, especially as the recession deepened and the drop in sales tax revenues increased substantially.