Finn Hill resident Kristin Terpstra has just about had it with a recent spate of burglaries in her neighborhood. To make matters worse, cuts to the King County budget and more promised next year will probably extend already long response times.

“Burglaries where all their TV stuff and electronics are gone – it takes hours,” she said.

But thanks to actions by her neighbors to the south, Terpstra may not have to wait much longer.

Kirkland City Council voted 5 to 2 to approve legislation to move forward with annexing the Potential Annexation Area of Finn Hill, North Juanita and Kingsgate neighborhoods following a City Council public hearing April 7.

The new rules adopt an official “Resolution of Intent” to annex the PAA and to be submitted to the Washington State Boundary Review Board for King County.

Council members Dave Asher and Jessica Greenway voted against the measure.

Impacts and Next Steps

The Council will ultimately decide whether or not to place the annexation on the ballot for PAA voters in

November. If it is placed on the ballot, a 40 percent minimum of voters who participated in last year’s General Election (6,770) must vote and at least 60 percent of that total (4,062) are required to pass annexation. As turnout increases, so does the number of votes needed to pass. According to King County, there are 20,149 active registered voters in the PAA.

“We value the involvement of residents of the city and those in the Finn Hill, North Juanita and Kingsgate neighborhoods as it has helped guide our discussions over the past four years,” said Mayor Jim Lauinger.

The Council is pressing ahead in an effort to qualify for state tax rebates before a January 2010 deadline. The state help could amount to more than $40 million, depending on how big Kirkland’s budget gap gets as a result of annexation.

If approved, Kirkland would swell in size from an estimated 48,410 residents to 81,426, according to 2008 numbers from the state Office of Financial Management. It would make Kirkland the 11th largest city in the state, larger than Bellingham, Renton or Kent and slightly smaller than Yakima.

Other Councilmembers disagreed with according the county residents such consideration.

“I’m not elected to represent the citizens of the PAA,” Greenway said. “It’s the biggest annexation we’ve ever attempted at the worst possible time.”

Public Reaction

The decision to go ahead with the next step of the process marks the end of the city’s public hearing process, angering a number of residents attending the proceedings. Houghton resident Carl Bryant noted four of the seven Council members were up for re-election in November and vowed their decision on the matter would affect his vote.

“You’re trying to dilute my vote,” he said. “This is supposed to be a democracy!”

Resident Bob Style, who was prepared to speak at length on the issue, was rankled by a time limit of three minutes imposed by Lauinger and blessed by a majority of the Council. He requested the state Attorney General and Olympia think-tank Evergreen Freedom Foundation to investigate the limit as a possible violation of the Open Meetings Act.

Over 40 residents from Kirkland and the PAA, in nearly equal number, spoke for and against the proposal. Proponents of annexation, nearly all from the PAA, universally claimed they were already Kirkland residents in all but official title. Others cited the city’s obligation to annex after a 1970s move took most of the area’s prime commercial zone, Totem Lake.

“Make the best decision for all concerned,” urged Juanita resident Robert Osrowske.

Some of the annexation’s opponents, which lately came to include community activist group Citizens for a Vibrant Kirkland (CiViK), criticized the perceived timing of the vote and the possibility Kirkland could grandfather in the Casino Caribbean, a cardroom located in the PAA. They also urged the Council to take a more cautious stance on the city’s finances, which appears to have another projected defecit, according to Councilman Asher.

“The city has never conducted a risk assessment of these numbers,” said CiViK boardmember Jim McIlwee. “What if they’re wrong?”

The following day, however, CiViK posted an open letter on their Web site supporting residents in the PAA if they voted to approve annexation.

Annexation Background

Kirkland’s latest public process to study absorbing the PAA began in 2006 – and prior to that two King County aided studies in 2000 and 2002. According to local blog KirklandViews.com, a public records request revealed the city had spent approximately $730,000 on studying the possibility as of February 2008 – not counting the thousands of hours spent by staff to review the matter. City officials weighed action last year in April, but Councilmembers Tom Hodgson, Lauinger, Asher and Greenway urged against proceeding at that time, thereby turning away about $2.5 million in assistance from King County.

The county then approached the City of Bothell to consider annexing the area, but deferred when it became clear the area wouldn’t be released by Kirkland.

Two special meetings were held in the 24 hours immediately preceeding the April 7 public hearing to get the latest financial analysis on annexation.

The Council reviewed a number of financial scenarios, one of which showed the annexation helping balance the city’s budget. The so-called ‘base case’ model reflects the currently adopted 2009-2010 budget – which includes an yet-to-pass voter approved private utility tax.

The BRB will review Kirkland’s notice and set a public hearing date to approve, modify, or disapprove the proposal.

Olympia May Weigh In

City Hall is also tracking legislation in Olympia related to the potential annexation. The bills in the state senate include proposals concerning fire protection services for unincorporated areas that can be annexed (ESSB 5808), extending a local sales and use tax that is credited against the state sales and use tax (ESSB 5321), and requiring cities and towns within King County to annex all potential annexation areas over 4,000 population before 2015 in order to continue to be eligible for state transportation grants and public works loans (2SSB 5433).

For more information, call 425-587-3000 or visit the city’s Web site here.