Letter: Props 1 & 2 Are Not Necessary for Good Parks

Dear Editor,

Did the City Council envision the additional $10 million cost to tax payers for Juanita improvements?

Why are Kirkland’s citizens alone bearing the full load to pay for Juanita Park, a regional park used by everyone in the surrounding area who do not contribute to the cost?

Did the Council envision locked doors at Kirkland's parks?

Did the Council envision the need for Volunteers to make up for the shortfall in park maintenance?  Our cost for parks has exceeded our ability to maintain them.  We are already overextended.

The Council is ignoring the citizen survey that said we should pay for the Cross Kirkland Trail by prioritizing the park system expenditures so that we don't raise taxes.

Did the Council envision reduced garbage pickup?   If the Council thought so highly of our park system, why then have they chosen to spend their money on something other than parks?  Their spending priorities come at a cost of our park system.

Each year the Council gives outside agencies $3 million dollars of our money in addition to the $12 million dollars surplus they've averaged per year for the last 20 years.  And yet, with a $95 million shortfall in staff generated unfunded needs in Capital facilities, the Council continues to give away our money, money that makes Prop 1 & 2 levies unnecessary. 

Props 1 & 2 shows the Council has failed to meet the needs of the City. They have not been responsible.

A NO vote will restore Council responsibilities and force them to use the money they already have to improve parks, roads, and pedestrian facilities without raising taxes and reducing our quality of life.

-Robert L. Style, Kirkland