Exposure is important.

Candidate McBride’s response to the Kirkland Reporter candidate interview was revealing. She states her reasons to be elected. Many of those reasons are why she should not be elected.

Page one initial question was, “Why are you running and what are your priorities?” Her response was to “look” at some of the big issues facing the city. Most of those issues are big problems she helped create; the biggest one being our growing budget deficit. Instead of voting to keep Kirkland’s money in Kirkland, she’s voted to give it away.

She mentioned annexation. Kirkland has already spent more than a million of our money, not the PAA’s, only to take on millions of more debt at the expense of lowering our level of service if the annexation goes through. It’s already started. Reduced services is a big issue she is responsible for. Annexation is fiscally irresponsible.

She mentioned finding a new city manager. Given the pressures she’s put on our current manager to keep us in this quagmire, we would be better off if she was not on the search committee.

She is the most experienced member of the community council. That’s a problem. She has taken away more than the communities have received to the detriment of communities and subsequently, the citizens and the city. The cost benefit ratio is alarming. Communities are subsidizing Metro rail of which we have none, our money’s going to the county’s Brightwater new sewer plant that is millions over budget, and we are subsidizing flood control with millions of dollars only to get back thousands. Some communities pay, others receive. Ms. McBride and the council’s budget takes more than a million from communities only to give it to whom she and they want, not necessarily who the communities want.

She wants to pursue the “notion” of one Kirkland saying, “We are all one.” Earlier on in the response to how I-1033 would change financing she said, “That’s not the way we are.” In each case, Ms. McBride ignores individualism if favor of a collective “we,” those who think like she does. I don’t want to be her clone. People like to be themselves and have control over their own lives. If Ms. McBride were elected, her votes would continue to be a detriment to individuals and free choice.

The next paragraph describes her final priority, a sustainable budget. Here she fails big time. She’s been on the council a long time, too long. Council should have created a sustainable budget and revenues before they created our $19 million growing deficit. Like her colleagues, Ms. McBride had much to do with it. Now instead of looking for savings in the budget to stay within its means like citizens have to do, Ms. McBride wants higher taxes, not savings. As far as the awards the city has won for its budget reporting, that’s only to say its budget was reported correctly. It’s not to say it was properly managed. The AAA bond rating will likely go down because we reduced our reserves to a point to not warrant an AAA rating. We’ll probably get an AA rating, which will raise the rates at which we can borrow money. It will be more expensive. s that good budget management?

Ms. McBride has never met a new tax she didn’t like and was much responsible for the new head tax that will cost each and every one of us more. She’s also hoping the unnecessary utility tax will pass even though the city could save enough savings in their current budget to restore service cuts to citizens. The $2.2 million in new taxes is not necessary. She voted to allow the annexation effort to proceed. The mayor speaking for Ms. McBride and the council said the city was capable of annexing the PAA thereby taking on additional debt while we are in a recession. That is fiscal irresponsibility. Council members will have to choose where the money is going to come from. Any bets as to where? We don’t need more McBride’s on the council.

In her last paragraph on the subject, she says she will fight for Kirkland. It’s clear the Kirkland she wants is not exclusive to just Kirkland. With so many interests, instead of wanting to pursue her special interest, whom we elect should be someone who cares for all of us in Kirkland, which Ms. McBride finds it hard to do. She doesn’t fight for all the citizens of Kirkland: she fights for the administration.

The next question was, “What qualifies you to be a council member?” Her response was very inclusive. One wonders whom she is working for, the citizens or the organizations. As far as her experience on the job, she is primarily the cause for the budget mess we’re in yet she didn’t think twice about the consequences of her “experience” statement. Her experience in creating budget gaps is well known. I don’t think I would be proud of creating the budget gap we have now that will grow with annexation.

The next question was, “Where do you stand on development?” Her response is very much in step with the other candidates. There’s no reason to single Ms. McBride out for her ideas on development? The question remains how much development is possible and what will the neighborhoods accept for additional traffic.

What followed is, “What do you think of your opponent and why are you a better choice?” I will not comment on the responses.

The next to last question was, “What are some of the hot button issues the council faces and where do you stand on them?” Ms. McBride still supports annexation. Why did she support us spending our money without knowing if the people in the PAA want to become Kirkland residents? She supported the method of annexation that did not allow us a vote and then turned down an advisory vote of the people. She did not represent us. I cannot emphasize enough the enormous debt we will take on if the council votes to accept a yes vote on annexation. I will not vote for someone who thinks we are irrelevant.

The last question was, “What is the one thing the council has accomplished that you agree with and disagree with?” Her answers are the reasons why exposure is important. Without it, we would have to take Ms. McBride at her word. Much of it is does not benefit the citizens of Kirkland. It’s about time to hold her and the other council members that got us into this mess responsible.

That finishes the comments made in the Kirkland Reporter. Now, some personal observations.

I’ve been keeping track of Ms. McBride actions and verbal statements for 12 years, most of which have not been with the citizens in mind. Here are the latest:

(10/30/06 budget study session) When I related how property taxes affect those on fixed income, Joan responded saying that when taxes go up, older people could take out reverse mortgages so they didn’t have to sell their homes. She apparently doesn’t care if higher taxes cause seniors to dip into their savings in order to pay their taxes. When their savings are gone, they have to sell their homes or are forced to pay the exorbitant cost of a reverse mortgage.

Joan called the citizens tax reducing initiatives of 1099 (repealing motor vehicle tax), 2000 (property tax limit increases to 2 percent), 2001 (property tax limit to 1 percent), and 2002 (loss of Home Base, Apple Computer, and Kirkland Nissan) “horrible” even though they benefited the taxpayer. The city budget should have been reduced but it increased anyway.

(Kirkland Retreat 3/23/07) She voted to raise taxes and increase fees by more than 10 percent.

(7/17/07 council meeting) In regard to an advisory vote on annexation, Joan doesn’t think hearing from the public is good government. She was against an advisory vote.

9/18/07 Council Metting – Joan wanted the affordable housing issue on the 2008 survey. With her tax policies, she is creating more unaffordable housing (senior citizens) than she is creating affordable housing.

(11/20/07) Voted to increase banked property tax capacity to 6 percent.

12/11/07 Council Meeting – Joan made a motion to reallocate funds to the KDA and several charities in a backdoor without a hearing in an attempt to circumvent the public budget process. Hodgson seconded it. The rest of the council wasn’t buying it and hated to be put in a position of playing Mr. Scrooge at Christmas time saying the issue should be resolved during the regular budget session. It was clear that if a vote were taken, it would have been defeated. Realizing it would make the rest of the council look bad by voting NO against her reallocation motion, she would suffer an embarrassing defeat. She withdrew her motion! I’m not sure if Hodgson withdrew his second. If he didn’t, I think the vote should have been taken.

3/29/08 Retreat: Joan stated she wants to raise revenues without any new public services.

4/15/08 Annexation study session: Did not fear loss of services if annexed.

4/15/08 Council Meeting: Joan wanted to give a charity $5,000 without going through the budget process.

6/5/08 Budget Study Session: When Joan said everyone wants services but are not willing to pay for them, she was not totally correct. Those who support themselves and their families demand less services than those who demand services without paying for them. They want to tax other people thereby reducing the ability of those who are trying to support themselves and not become a liability to others in society. She thinks every service the city provides is essential to the city. Wrong. There are many services that most of Kirkland does not use. They are not essential to most of the citizens.

Council member McBride said she didn’t want to put anything on the ballot unless they thought it would pass. That type of power over what the people get to vote on is arbitrary, discretionary, and absolute. The council and the citizens should determine what goes on the ballot.

7/15/08 Budget Study Session: Councilmember McBride suggested that maybe the utility tax should be raised more than needed to take care of future increases in spending. It shows she believes in an unrestrained budget.

11/18/08 Budget Study Session: She said Kirkland wanted representation at regional meetings at the cost of local citizens. What’s more important, local issues or regional issues? Maybe Ms. McBride could get those citizens outside of Kirkland to vote for her.

12/2/08 Council Meeting: Once again Councilmember McBride demonstrated how little she knows how state agencies work. The Puget Sound Partnership would not be needed if DOE and county health departments did their jobs. They don’t enforce all the rules they have now so why would we not expect the PSP not to do the same. If the DOE had done its job, Puget Sound would be a lot cleaner. Instead, they selectively enforce, selectively punish, and selectively chose jurisdictions with the capability to fund projects. No money, no enforcement.

Before the DOE or the PSP starts handing out money, especially to Seattle, Seattle should bring its sewer system up to standards by separating storm drainage from sewer before receiving any additional money. It should have been done in 1968 when METRO was formed, but they reneged. Where was the DOE? Does Seattle have a program to install oil-silt separators? I think not; otherwise, they would be bragging about it.

Councilmember McBride needs to come down to earth and learn about the real world of the DOE and health departments work. They could have done a lot more to clean up Puget Sound. Since the Governor was head of DOE at the time, you can ask her why she failed to do her job.

3/3/09 Study Session & Council meeting: Joan admitted that the budget gap between the PAA and Kirkland would continue to exist years from now. That will require an increase in taxes year after year after year.

At the council meeting, she said she listens to all the citizens of Kirkland but she did not want to take an advisory vote on annexation. She only wants to listen to the people she chooses.

3/23/09 Moss Bay Neighborhood meeting: It was months ago when Gov.r Chris Gregoire said on KIRO radio there was “no projected budget deficit in our state” when at the time there was already a $4 billion dollar projected shortfall. It’s grown to $9 billion since and getting bigger.

Now we have a local Council member, Ms. McBride, saying the same thing about Kirkland’s budget. At the Moss Bay Neighborhood meeting, she desperately tried to save face on her position on annexation by saying Kirkland had a balanced budget and there will be no deficit. She emulated Gregoire and became a political clone of someone who makes false statements to whitewash the growing deficit.

The city has a serious budget shortfall in the millions. The budget that was adopted last December as a balanced budget is no longer. It lasted about a month. It will have to be revised to show reduced revenues and added expenses.

The issue came up when I asked Ms. McBride why the city proposed taking on even more liability with the annexation of the PAA when the city cannot even balance the budget without annexation. Ms. McBride quickly pointed out that the city must balance its budget. By taking on more deficit, the only way she can do that is by increasing fees and taxes. We will end up paying more for less if we annex. The numbers are staggering.

6/22/09 Response to Kirkland Views Forum:

Ms. McBride finds it easier to solicit votes by recruiting and creating greater numbers of people and agencies that depend more and more on government. Sometime she goes out on her own before the council knows what’s she’s doing. It’s no wonder she supports diverting public money to be used to promote her special interest. While many non-profit agencies the city supports are credit worthy, the city should not take money from taxpayers who may want to contribute to agencies of their choice.

More money could be made available for neighborhoods.

When she says she believes in the public process, she lies. There has not been a time when Ms. McBride has not tried to circumvent the public process to find ways to fund charities of her choice. At the Council meeting on Dec. 11, 2007, Ms. McBride made a motion to reallocate funds to the KDA and several charities in a backdoor attempt to move funds without a hearing in an attempt to circumvent the public budget process. Hodgson seconded it. The council in as much admonished Ms. McBride for not using the public process. At the April 15, 2008 Council Meeting: Joan wanted to give a charity $5,000 without going through the budget process. She has a history of avoiding the public process when she thinks she needs more money for her special interest.

One of her special interest is affordable housing. Twenty-five percent of Kirkland housing units are now categorized as affordable and subsidized with taxpayer money. Since when is it best for government to encourage housing that does not balance it’s own budget. Services have to be paid for. When it comes to balancing the budget, affordable housing is a liability, not an asset. The more affordable housing we have, the less money we have to run government. Miami-Dade County almost went broke because of too much affordable housing. As a Council member, Ms. McBride needs to support those who pay the bills if we are to have a sustainable budget.

The Growth Management Act has designated the counties, not cities, as the agencies to distribute affordable housing. Heavily subsidized bussing allows low wage earners to commute to a job anywhere within the county.

Ms. McBride’s thinks all government services are essential. She’s wrong.

Robert Styles, Kirkland