A joint meeting between the Kirkland and Bellevue City Councils conveyed their mutual hope for a possible partnership on regional community facilities.

However, such a partnership is unlikely in regard to Kirkland’s plans for the Aquatic Recreational Community (ARC) Center and its consideration of a metropolitan park district (MPD) to fund it due to significant differences in planning and site preferences, a problem it has faced with other neighboring cities.

At the same time, Bellevue Mayor Claudia Balducci and other councilmembers expressed interest in cooperating in the future in some way as they look to meet the growing needs of the Eastside communities.

Bellevue is one of several neighboring cities Kirkland has reached out to, in addition to local organizations, in the hopes of a partnership not just for the ARC but future community facilities as well that might be funded through an MPD. The Lake Washington School District originally planned to be a significant partner with the city on the ARC, according to City Manager Kurt Triplett, but its financial involvement came to an end when their $755 million bond measure failed last year.

Like Kirkland and other cities on the Eastside, Bellevue is also looking at a new multi-use aquatic facility approximately the same size as Kirkland’s ARC, to replace the six-lane Odle Pool located at 601 143rd Ave NE. The pool was built in 1971 and expanded in 1997. Bellevue completed a feasibility study for a new aquatic center to replace the pool in 2009, though estimates for the cost range widely, depending on the size and scope of the facility, from as little as $19 million to as much as $114 million.

As with the city of Redmond, which Kirkland also looked into having a partnership for a facility, Bellevue is still in a very early planning stage for a new community center, though it has stated where they would want it located. Whereas Kirkland, based on feedback from the community, has stated a preference for the ARC to be located in the Totem Lake neighborhood and is currently looking for private property to purchase, Bellevue is considering either Highland Community Park or Bellevue College Campus. Like Kirkland, Bellevue too has also reached out to local organizations to see if a partnership was possible and discovered that despite a mutual agreement on the demand for a pool, their timing and priorities weren’t sufficiently aligned for it to work.

On a partnership with the ARC, the meeting’s outcome mirrored to an extent that of a joint meeting Kirkland had with the Redmond City Council, in which the cities concluded that a partnership for the facility would not be viable for similar reasons stemming from differences in site preference and timelines. Redmond, which started working on their Recreational Building Master Plan in 2013, has yet to complete it and look to have their recreation center in their downtown, where they are currently conducting a site analysis.

According to city documents, Bellevue has no specific timeline for a potential facility. The difference in planning stages was noted by Balducci at the joint meeting, stating that while they hope to work with Kirkland, the city should not put off a vote on the MPD this November or place the ARC on hold.

“It seems you’re way ahead, and if you’re looking for a ballot measure, we would probably slow you down,” she said, “I would not want to delay you and then have it come to nothing.”

She added, however, “I think this kind of subregional cooperation is the way of the future.”

Kirkland Councilmember Penny Sweet said “I don’t think we should stop having this conversation.”

The city of Kirkland is currently working on a ballot measure for an MPD, following the approval of a resolution by the Kirkland City Council at their April 12 meeting. The council will make a final decision on the matter in August.

The measure could set the tax rate, where the boundaries would be located, and where the money would go, or leave it to be worked out later.

Its proponents in the city say it would provide flexibility while it looks for a site to purchase. The lack of property, they said, leaves the final cost for the ARC uncertain. If the district were confined strictly to Kirkland, it would be run by the council. The day to day operations of district facilities would be handled by city staff through an interlocal agreement between the city and the district, according to Parks Director Jenny Schroeder.

“Nothing will be visibly different,” she said. “It really is a funding mechanism. It would be the council that would be the governing body of the district.”

An MPD would also be able to spend levy funds on facilities located outside of the district, though this has raised concerns that it would not provide enough accountability for how the money is spent.