By Carrie Wood and

Matt Phelps

Kirkland Reporter

The race for Kirkland City Council Position 1 this November will pit 30-year resident Martin Morgan against Deputy Mayor and 12-year council woman Joan McBride. The Reporter sat down with each candidate for a Q&A and this is what they had to say about the issues facing the City of Kirkland. This is part one of a two-part series.

Why are you running and what are your priorities?

Morgan: I’ve had dealings with the City of Kirkland and when I started seeing how they do things or really what they don’t tell you, that’s what bothers me. They’re broken and somebody needs to fix it. I want to live in a place where my kids can continue to live here, they have a choice whether they can live here or not, they can afford to live here and they don’t have to deal with stuff. Right now, we have this (budget) deficit and somebody needs to try and fix that so they don’t inherit it. I’ve just seen it get worse and worse over the past 10, 12 years.

The budget is a big priority because it needs to be fixed, but anything – there’s Totem Lake that needs to be fixed, there’s the downtown core – that’s a succession of failures down there. It’s not the people who sink their life savings into it, I mean that could be a little bit of the problem perhaps, maybe they don’t really know what they’re doing, they think, ‘wow, what a great idea, let’s go do this.’ But it’s just broken and I just care about Kirkland. Sure, Kirkland might be a regional place, but let’s fix our own town first and stop copying other cities that are broken.

McBride: My priorities are to look at some of the big issues that are facing our city. I am going to be concentrating on annexation, the transition should that vote go well. And related to that is Totem Lake and reenergizing Totem Lake. Another priority, will be looking for a city manager and that is a very, very big decision. And I think having experienced council members, at least having a few that have some real legs and have been on the council for a while is actually a very good thing. I have a lot of experience on search committees and I am the senior most member on the council, I have the most years. In addition, I also have five years on the community council, so all together that is 17 years of experience. So I can help a lot with that process. One of the other issues I think we have, is to help bring the city back together and work on issues around civility and integrity. How the city works with the businesses, how we work with our neighborhoods and how we help the notion of one Kirkland. We are all one. We are all on the same page. We all have the same goals. And I would like to be able to help that as well.

And the final priority, and this is probably the biggest challenge, is working to make sure we have sustainable budget and revenues for this biennium and the next biennium. We are going to be OK economically cause we are extremely careful in how we budget. We have gotten budget awards for the last 12 years. Many people don’t realize that. We also have a AAA rating, not many cities have that. So we are very careful with money. Every penny that comes in is accounted for, but right now we could use a few more pennies. We have more expenses than we have revenues. So making sure that we have a sustainable budget is very important to me.

I am running because I have lived in this town for 50 years and no matter what the challenges are I am never going to give up on Kirkland and I am always going to fight for Kirkland. This is the best city on the Eastside. It is the most progressive and we have a story to tell to the entire region. We have the most amazing citizens, parks and staff. I want to be a part of that team and it has been important to me to be a part of the solutions.

What qualifies you to be a council member?

Morgan: I think just the fact that I love this town and I look at things from a different perspective. Some people say that I should be on one of the park committees or the planning committee or something like that and I say why, so I can get indoctrinated on how the city works? I think the city’s broken – I don’t want to get indoctrinated. I’d like to sit there, read everything, decide what’s best for the citizens and the health of this town and look at it from an un-jaded point of view.

So I think the fact that I’m more qualified because I have that perspective and I’ve been here for 30 years, I read everything that goes on within this town, I watch it really close and a lot of it I look and I go, are you kidding me?

Anybody who wants to talk to me, I’ll talk to you. I’ll tell them anything they want to know about me, what I do – I’m an open book, I don’t really care who knows. So I think the city should act in the same way. There should be absolute transparency in everything that goes on.

So I just want to run for council and talk to the citizens of this community and represent them, not anything that the city might already have in the works. I think the city needs to be more transparent that if they feel something needs to be built or done a certain way, then they should be absolutely up front. But they don’t do that at all. They just try to make their deals and move on.

McBride: First off, I have experience at the job but I also have experience from the Houghton Community Council. And actually one of the best things that qualifies me is that I was the president of the PTA at the elementary school level. And if you can be a PTA president at the elementary school level, you can pretty much handle just about anything. Because when people are concerned about their children, they need answers and they need them fast, you need to be ready to supply that and it is a really good training ground. I am also experienced with regional work. Currently I hold some leadership positions. I am the vice chair on the Flood Control District. I am vice chair of the WIRA 8 Salmon Recovery Board. I am also on the King Conservation advisory board. I am also on a number of boards that are not connected to the city. I am on the Bicycle Alliance of Washington, the Feet First advisory board and also the Family Resource. In addition, last year in late 2007 I was presented with the Elected Official of the Year Award form the Eastside alliance of agencies. Also, I received a King Conservation District Award. And then I was an invited presenter at the New Partners for Smart Growth Conference in Washington, D.C. and they paid my way. It was exciting. I have been asked to do a number of speaking engagements. I won a Golden Acorn Award, a Community Partnership Award from the Seattle King County Public Health Department. I think I am qualified and other people do too.

Where do you stand on development?

Morgan: Well, every city’s got to grow. So it needs to be developed, but how? I think if development is in a neighborhood, that neighborhood association should have more to say about it than anybody. But if they want to build something in Houghton – I live in Rose Hill, so does my opinion really count? I mean if I want to provide my opinion I should go live in Houghton and tell them what I think. The best thing you can do is probably get more people involved in their neighborhood associations because that’s really where it starts.

I was involved in the South Rose Hill 85th Street Corridor. We worked really hard to have things built a certain way and then the city came along … for some odd reason allowed a building to be built that had nothing to do with the current zoning or the way it was supposed to look. And all that did was cause issues probably forever, but that’s just wrong. The people in that neighborhood worked very hard to get those zoning codes put through that and (the council) finally they decided they didn’t have them right and that’s just all wrong.

It needs to be developed in a matter which everybody’s happy. A developer wants to develop something where he can make money. But there’s always that happy medium. Because once some guy owns a piece of property and wants to develop it, he’s more than willing to sit down and come up with a project that everybody likes because if the neighbors like it, that means the business coming in is going to like it and maybe the neighborhood can say well we like to see this sort of a business in our neighborhood and the developer could develop it maybe more towards that type of business. I think it would be a win-win instead of just willy-nilly I want to build this, for what, because that’s what pencils out the best for me. That’s something that doesn’t help the businesses moving in there because it’s something the neighbors don’t really want.

McBride: In Kirkland we have some areas that are crying out for development. We have the Totem Lake area that is a designated urban center. SO that is an area where we have up-zoned it, welcomed development in that area. We have planned for certain kinds of development. We are extremely happy with the way Evergreen health hare has developed. We are very sad that the economy seemed to tank right as Totem Lake was about to take off, but we are very confident that Totem Lake will be redeveloped and that it will be wonderful. It just might take a bit longer. Totem Lake is an area of opportunity. I also think that there are other areas for opportunity where development is especially sought after. Areas around Juanita Village, that is an amazing place now. Juanita Village 10 or 15 years ago, it was in a very sad place. There was no center there. And now, it is a neighborhood. It has coalesced because of the good development that has happened there. I think we have some areas in Kirkland that could stand some redevelopment and I am confident that will come. I don’t see development as a bad thing. I am a believer of smart growth. That every neighborhood is deserving of an activity center. A place where you can go and get a carton of milk, a grocery store, a coffee house, a place where you can build community. Most of our neighborhoods have that. Houghton is a good example, Bridle Trails is a good example. And those areas are community centers for their neighborhoods. Some of those want to redevelop. Houghton wants to redevelop. Houghton Market is going to move into a metropolitan market and hopefully we will see some other types of smart growth around there, because I don’t think that anyone is enriched by a sea of parking. We need to kind of decrease that and maybe increase the development a little bit more, which is in mind with smart growth. So I am open to development where we have made room for it.

What do you think of your opponent and why are you a better choice?

Morgan: Joan’s been there for 12 years, most of the problems are 12 years old or 13. You can blame the city manager – you can blame a whole lot of people – but really there’s no need to blame anybody, someone needs to fix it. And she’s been there during the same time and I haven’t seen anything has changed.

There’s a lot of people who’ve said I should run against this candidate or that candidate for way different reasons. I was told I shouldn’t be running against her so she should just go through and help other people. Well, I one time asked her for help and she was clueless about the whole thing. So based on that alone was a big thing. She was unresponsive to individual citizens, maybe (there were) certain groups that she helped, maybe not. But I know she likes to tax to spend our money.

It’s broken. She’s been there the whole time. I read some of the things she wanted to do so my only question is, why haven’t you been doing those?

And everybody says it’s an uphill battle if you run against Joan. Why? What has she done that’s so spectacular. I’d like to read about some of that stuff.

McBride: I don’t really know Mr. Morgan very well. He has lived in Kirkland a long time but I really don’t know much about his candidacy. I haven’t read any of his literature. I know why I am a good choice.

I understand that my opponent has some outstanding issues with the city so it is not really appropriate for me to comment on that. But, I am a good stable candidate and I have lived here a long time. I am devoted to Kirkland. I am a hard worker. Since I am retired I can concentrate all my time, or as much as I need to, or whatever the situation calls for, on Kirkland, and Kirkland issues. And then our issues in the region that are important to us because we gain a lot of benefit from being involved. Overall I believe I am a very good candidate for this position.

What are some of the hot button issues the council faces and where do you stand on them?

Morgan: Annexation: I think (the city) could have easily had an advisory vote on the primary. They would’ve known what all the citizens of Kirkland think about it. (Annexation) is going to raise our taxes. It’s going to lower our level of service. So I think we should have a little more say.

Now I’ve been told by one of the other candidates … that said well the state legislature said it’s up to the city council. Well, somebody’s got to be in charge and say go for it or not, but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t at least ask any of the citizens. If I had to make that decision, I probably would’ve went around and asked everybody I ran in to for the next month, what do you think about it, should we annex the area over there? It’s going to raise our taxes and lower our level of service – what do you think of that? Everybody I’ve asked, they don’t like it at all. There’s a group of some (in the PAA) who like it, but that’s because they want something out of it and it has to do with parks. But the majority of them, with all the stuff that comes down and the stuff they’re not told, they just get really freaked out about all that. The city really doesn’t tell you things. The city forces you to try to find out on your own. It’s what they don’t tell you that’s the interesting part about the whole thing.

The PAA, should they be a part of Kirkland? I think absolutely they should be a part of Kirkland. Do I think it should be done at a point when there’s a deficit? I don’t think there’s any reason for us to have a deficit. If you were to go to the PAA and say, hey, we’re going to absorb you because you are Kirklanders, I’d consider them Kirklanders – they’re a part of us, they always have been. We took their business districts a long time ago. But why couldn’t it have been planned and known well in advance that that’s our annexation. Why should it cost us any more money? Why couldn’t it have just been absorbed with no costs? Who was planning that?

Utility tax: Again, why aren’t they (the council) cutting their budget? Here’s the deal, I can see this coming. They want to raise it 1.5 percent. State law says they can’t raise it over 6 percent without a vote of the citizens, that’s why it’s on the ballot. So say it passes, once it’s over 6 percent, does that mean that they get to raise it anytime they want?

If they raise taxes it’s supposed to generate $1.6 million. Does that really fix anything? It looks like it might be a little Band-aid because it really doesn’t cover what they claim … $2.2 million is what they’re really down if they’d make certain cuts.

Business tax: The City of Kirkland seems to me like when they want to do something, they find a city that does it and they copy them and they say, well Redmond does it or Bellevue does it and they copy broken things. It’s like this head tax. Seattle put an employee head tax on their (businesses), well Seattle’s figuring out that that’s a bad thing to do now.

Parking: The parking in downtown needs to be cured. I’m sure there’s a way to do that where everybody’s happy. The people who live downtown, they probably don’t have enough parking for visitors either. So parking downtown would help with that as well.

I’m sure everybody in downtown – businesses, residents and everything else – would be more than happy to figure out where we’re going to build a parking garage. Maybe there should be several of them at each end of town, but there’s a way to do that that’ll look nice. That’s what architects are for. If you just fixed the parking I think a lot of it would take care of itself down there. Everybody really wants it down there – I don’t know why it’s so hard to figure it out.

The businesses down there spend a ton of money. They probably wouldn’t care so much if there was a head tax if the money was used to promote their businesses. Right now … (shoppers) can park for two hours, maybe four hours. But they get in a shop, they start looking around, they’re relaxed, they like what they’re seeing and they’d probably eat lunch, but no, they’ve got to go move their car. They go out, they move their car, they can’t find any place (to park) so they go somewhere else. There just needs to be long-term parking.

Dog parks: I think there should be an off-leash dog park. We have plenty of parks. I can see a big concern of people saying, well where are you going to put that park? (The city previously considered Crestwoods Park as a potential site for an off-leash dog park). The people who use Crestwoods said, well I don’t want dogs there, I don’t want their poop here, I don’t want that. So there’s a whole lot of people who think they’re going to be losing a park if it’s given away like that. So you need to find a park space or a space that’s really not currently being used for any specific reason.

McBride: The impact of the private utility tax (on the ballot in November) will be about $6 per resident and the interesting thing about this tax is that you can make it less. The less energy that you use the more the tax will go down. So it is much different than, lets say property tax, which just continues on. What we will lose if it doesn’t pass are – they are pretty incredible cuts. No more concerts in the park. Imagine a quiet summer in Kirkland, no singing, no gathering, these important community events. Our parks, there will be litter and we would not be able to clean the bathrooms. We will lose our ability to have the Juanita Bay Park Ranger and senior and youth services. Some of the most vulnerable populations where we provide important services will be very much impacted. There will be public safety issues. Pedestrian safety, something that Kirkland has worked very hard to build up. But we are just getting ready to tear that down. So I am very supportive. I personally will be voting for it. I realize that it is completely up to the voters and I trust their judgement.

On annexation, I have been very supportive of getting that on the ballot. It is actually not up to me since I don’t get a vote. We have put it on the ballot, and the annexation residents will be deciding whether they will join the city or not. I hope they do. I think it is good for the long term Kirkland. I realize that there will be some short-term issues. Luckily the state government is going to kind of back fill for that. They are going to help with the cost of annexation for the first ten years and we are very lucky to have that. It is not a good idea to walk away from $4 million provided by the state, especially in this economy. So I am hoping for a positive vote but either way it is up to those folks in the annexation area. If they join they will be joining the best city on the Eastside. If they do not I wish them luck. Either way Kirkland will remain a wonderful city with a small-town feel, whether we are at 75,000 plus or we are at 50,000. We are a town of great institutions and great history. And we will continue to be a well managed city with or without annexation.

What is one thing the council has accomplished that you agree with and disagree with?

Morgan: It’s the PAA thing. For the city to just come through and say okay, we’re going to annex you and these are going to be your new rules. I think I would have just left the PAA zoning alone. There’s a lot of people who won’t vote for annexation because they think they’re going to lose all their zoning and all the stuff that goes in it. There’s some people who will think, yeah we should annex because I don’t want another 60 foot building in front of me. Those are all good things, but I think they could be worked out. And if the city has a hard time revisiting things, well, maybe that’s what they need to change.

I go back to what haven’t they done. There’s so many things that haven’t got done that it dwarfs anything they may have done.

McBride: One of the things that I agree with most has to do with the previous question. I very much support the city or Kirkland putting the utility tax on the ballot and also the annexation question. Our form of government asks city council members and elected representatives to make a lot of decisions and we do that. But we come to a place where on some questions, where we really need to know the will of the people. And on these two issues we really needed to have permission. And so, I think it was a good time to put these questions on the ballot and I think it was the right thing to do. I know it was difficult for some council members to go forward and trust in the wisdom of the residents of the annexation area for that questions and trust the wisdom of our residents on the utility issue. But the one thing about putting it on the ballot is that if it wins, “yes,” if it doesn’t “yes.” It is out of our hands and I think it was absolutely the right thing to put it on the ballot.

One thing I had trouble with this year had a lot to do with the downtown. I could bring up the Bank of America cause we waisted a lot of valuable time on the Bank of America. But what came after, in many ways, was more concerning. We went into the downtown plan, first we kind of froze the plan so that there couldn’t be any development and then we decided to change a lot of set backs and a lot of step backs. And instead of using the planning commission, the body that is supposed to make these recommendations, the city council decided to do it and bring that to the diet. I don’t think that was the best decision that we have ever made. We are not planning commissioners, many of us have been planning commissioners, but this is definitely a job that you want a lot of residential and business input. You want your planning commissioner, who has been trained to look at this and then in turn they bring a recommendation back. That is not what happened. And I am not completely happy with the results of that. What happens when you try and do things too fast, without going through the process, is that you leave a lot of things undone. And we have a huge parking lot of issues we didn’t even get to. And yet we completely sort of rejiggered the downtown. And I don’t think that was our best moment. I don’t think that was a shining star for the city of Kirkland City Council.