Letter to the Editor - A different view of the budget
Dear Editor,
It’s time for Kirkland citizens to get past the city’s budget propaganda. Is there a deficit or not? Only if you don’t know what’s going on.
Budgets are created to tell the citizens just how much the council needs to run the city. Audits make sure the budgets are balanced. The last two biennial budgets the council adopted when they were created were for 2005-2006, and 2007-2008. There was a surplus, not a deficit.
A comparison is needed between what the council says they need versus what they actually collect and spend. For the 2005-2006 adopted budget, the council said they could run the city for $278 million. By the end of the year, they spent more than $353 million, some $75 million over budget because they had a surplus. There was no need for higher taxes. The current 2007-2008 adopted budget was $318 million. The year’s not over, yet the city has already modified its budget to show they had a surplus of more than $47 million. They spent it.
Now, the city has projected a $13.8 million shortfall. That’s only a start. There is a $21 million shortfall in unfunded capital facilities needs – projects asked for by staff.
In 2009, the city will put a measure on the ballot to ask for higher fees and taxes. Non-essential budget request are not put on ballots, so money is moved around between funds to make sure the shortfall is in the right place. As one Councilmember said, nothing should be put on the ballot if it’s expected to fail, hence you can be sure the ballot measure will highlight the essential services the people are being asked to fund. That way, the council will not have to tap into non-essential services to pay for something they should have funded in the first place. The council needs to fund safety, transportation, and parks. If they want more money for something else, let them put that on the ballot.
Is the additional funding necessary? As many Councilmembers have stated, almost everyone comes to government wanting something. Come budget time, the line is long of people and agencies wanting a handout. If the council listened to all of them, yes. If the council properly separates desires from needs and prioritizes accordingly, no.
Sincerely,
Robert L. Style
Print This Article
Print This ArticleRelated Articles
10 Responses to “Letter to the Editor - A different view of the budget”
Leave a Reply
Subscribe
You can subscribe by email to receive newsletter updates:
Subscribe through a RSS feed reader
OMG! An interview with Kirkland’s Jason Mesnick from “The Bachelor”
Sponsored Ads
Why do people complain about taxes, but then the first thing they do is ask government for something? If you want more government “stuff,” then it’s only sensible that you want to pay more taxes.
Also, if you buy something like a new building, or a new park, there’s not just the one-time cost of acquiring, building, etc., but the ongoing costs of maintaining them year after year. We all know this implicitly (we spend lots of money maintaining our homes, cars, etc. after buying them), but seem to neglect the fact that we all have to pay for what we allow our governments to spend, and while debt may be appropriate for shared benefits that have long-term benefits, debt is just a way for the current residents to benefit from something that others will have to pay later (usually as the original benefit deteriorates over time).
[Reply]
mike nienaber Reply:
August 23rd, 2008 at 11:09 am
Thank you David. I like it when folks use their real name instead of hiding behind some cute nick name.
Anyway…why doesn’t Kirkland spend some of it’s budget or even some of its surpluses on something that will make them some money?
Why not start with approx. 7 acres on Rose Hill that is being wasted on their illegal storage of storm water on private land? A plan has been presented to drain the land and restore it to the way it was when King County managed it and before it was annexed by Kirkland. Ironically it has recently been rezoned as commercial in order to keep businesses from creeping into the neighborhoods. That land could be making millions in sales tax revenue for the city’s numerous wants and needs.
Right now would be a perfect time to leverage Costco’s desire to use some of the land for their proposed gas sation and keep it near to NE 85th (where the cars are) instead of locating it deep into the Rose Hill neighborhood.
Upward and onward.
[Reply]
Rob Butcher Reply:
August 23rd, 2008 at 12:32 pm
Hi Mike,
Thank you for your comments. I too prefer to know the name of the person with whom I am conversing, however, I do believe there is a place for anonymity as well. One example would be the roll of a whistle blower not wishing to jeopardize his/her position while trying to do do what is right and expose an injustice.
The downside, of course, is the opportunity to hide behind a moniker to rant and call other names rather than discuss issues.
You may be interested in reading further discussion on this subject at http://www.kirklandviews.com/2008/06/12/anonymity/
[Reply]
Good comments Bob. I agree (which I often don’t with you). Moreover, why does the city always spend their surplus instead of saving for a rainy day? I think it’s another example of the short-sided, self-serving, vision-lacking so-called leadership of Kirkland. Economies have always ebbed and flowed. As individuals, and businesses, we save in the good years to be able to better weather the bad years. It’s time for Kirkland to live within it’s budget, focus on essential services and quit throwing the taxpayers money around wiht a a million here $250,000 there. And let’s see a full disclosure of the pet projects swallowing our dollars. More than that, let’s see some leadership.
Mr. Wall, the city has received increased income for many years…and spent it irresponsibily at times. Why should that be rectified on the backs of the tax payers? I think some cutting will enable some more cautious spending in the future.
[Reply]
The propaganda sent out last week by the council about the budget was pretty and had some good explainations for how government works. I understand something has to give during tough times. Buy why does it have to me? Why do I have to lower my standard of living during a time of higher prices on everything. There are probably a few departments in government that are fat and non essencial and could be cut. That never is the choice. Only dead the beast more money. I want to see the city cuts. I want to see whats essencial services and whats optional. I don’t think this is going to be fair to ask for more taxes during a recession. Please listen and don’t do that to us.
[Reply]
Haven’t been in town for awhile. Had to take a vacation!
I find Mr Style’s letter interesting. I don’t know where he gets his figures and being the lawyer I am I don’t know if they are accurate. I do know that Cities routinely spend more than they budget. That money generally comes from reserves. I know that this City appears to have large reserves and that they are used in times when money is short and when otherwise deemed necessary to keep operations running. That is good business. I admit that I don’t know enough about where all the money is spent and would look to someone like Mr. Style to tell me where the fat is? What things should we ask the Council to reduce or cut out completely? I would also be interested in where or if Mr. Style believes the surplus (if any) should be spent? I know from the other Cities I have lived in that revenues and expenses fluctuate. I can tell you that they certainly do here at Microsoft.
I am obviously new here. I moved my family to Kirkland because of what we percieved and were told was a well run City. We love the parks and the fact that for the most part the streets are clean and do not have potholes.
I am interested in hearing what others think and for any detail that Mr. Style can provide to further this usefull conversation.
[Reply]
Interested in having your voice heard on the budget? The post below was on the Kirkland City page. They are holding two Open Houses on the bugdet. Might be worth attending to hear what they have to say.
Special Budget Edition of City Update & Budget Open Houses
Homes and businesses within Kirkland city limits should have received a special edition of City Update (PDF) dedicated to the 2009-2010 Biennial Budget. To learn more about the challenges facing the City with the upcoming budget, attend an Open House September 17 or 29, 7-9 p.m. See the newsletter or website for more information. Please email 09-10budget@ci.kirkland.wa.us for questions and additional information.
[Reply]
Admin Reply:
August 30th, 2008 at 6:58 am
Thanks, DCD. Added to Events Calendar.
[Reply]
[This comment was originally in Talk Back and was moved to this post as it is more appropriate under this subject - Admin]
I am impressed with the work here and I want to say a few thing about current events in Kirkland. We can no longer rely on the city to give us the straight answer. I have lost lots of respect for those in charge. Because I feel like they are running our ship aground while whistling a delightful tune. They act like they don’t care what anyone outside of their supporters think and that is no way to govern. I voted for 5 of the 7 on the council and I would take back every one of those votes if I could. I didn’t vote for the city manager but if I could he would go too. His arrogance is astounding and he runs the show. The city has had many ups and downs over the years but I can’t remember seeing such a misguided use of our tax dollars with spending programs added every year. Finally the economy slowed and these people got caught with a 12% budget deficit. Think about what would happen to you if you managed a budget like this at your job. You would be fired and you would deserve it too. There is a trick the city uses in it’s budget and it is one time spending. When times are good the extra tax money is spent rather than saved. Now we have many services funded by one time money streams which are drying up. So the city has to cut services and raise taxes to cover for their mismanagement. During good times these people over spent and we are now stuck with the bill. Lauinger, McBride and Greenway are listed as those most responsible for the over spending because they are the finance committee. Mismanaging the budget plain and simple. Every council membr who voted for the last budget is responsible. I don’t know how they voted but it should be public records. I worked closely with Bothel, Kent and Redmond and they have sound responsible budgetting. Does anyone on the finance committee have experience in finance or accounting or degrees or an education or common sense that there dad told them long ago : save your pennys for a rainy day. Don’t over spend.
The costs we will pay for the lawsuit are just the beginning. They will hide what they have done. When you see a council member and he shakes your hand ask him what his priorities are for spending. He will say some nonsense but he really is culpable in allowing the budget to become a noose around our necks. These people don’t know the first thing about budgeting or priorities. If they did we would not be facing a deficit. 12% over spending. That is there job to mind the store for us and they flunked. I can’t afford higher taxes. Fixed incomes dont bend when government overspends now we are going to suffer for there mismanagement. I bet they won’t cut one single job from Kirkland government because that wouldn’t be nice. They don’t care about us tax payers who are angry because they only listen to the people who will vote for them.
[Reply]
Alex,
Great letter. You nailed this issue very well.I just got my new tax assessment in the mail. Ouch!I agree with you on the Finance Committee and the the City manager. I would also add Asher, Hodgson and Burleigh. I have seen a change in Burleigh and after listening to her comments during the budget meetings I think that she gets it. Sternoff is clearly watching as evidenced by his comments on state and federal mandates. He has also been very outspoken as the Mayor and others have tried to add new advisory committees and boards. He also was the first to say that business as usual was not an option. He also told Asher that that his push to get a levy lid lift proposal on the November ballot was a no go. I just watched the Council meeting where he told Asher that he wanted to see the staff spending reductions first. As you point out City finances are out of control. The propoganda we got in the mail is nothing but an attempt to get us to drink the coolaid. The real fun will happen when the special interests show up during the budget sessions. Watch how the Council deals with them. See what individual Council members pet projects are. The I would like to see is a spending reduction and establish a cap for the next 2 years. If sales tax revenue increases then use that for one time only needs or use for the heavily underfunded Capital Improvement projecgts. Cut all non essential services and positions, implement a hiring freeze, go after our state and federal legislators for the mandate money or refuse to implement the mandates until funded. Encourage and approve redevelopment, stay out of lawsuits and elect people with experience and expertise.
Unfortunately we have entrusted the next few years to the people you mention.
[Reply]