Last week, the City of Kirkland marked a major milestone with the annexation of more than 31,000 new residents and 200 businesses from the Finn Hill, North Juanita and Kingsgate neighborhoods.

The annexation pushed the city’s population well over 80,000, making it the 12th largest city in the state and the fourth largest in King County. Some city officials say this makes Kirkland a major regional player, with an opportunity to compete for more grants and funding for things like road projects.

For many residents and city officials, annexation is an exciting step and one the city has taken several times since incorporation in 1905.

However, amidst the buzz of all the excitement and city-held annexation celebrations last week, several residents expressed outrage.

Some newly annexed residents were upset at the most visible aspect of annexation – the increased Kirkland police presence in the new area.

Just one day after annexation took effect, one person commented, “Shame on the City of Kirkland for the way they are treating their new taxpayers and new neighbors. Today while traveling from my Finn Hill home to Home Depot and back, I observed four different Kirkland police hiding in church parking lots on 145th; a private drive on Simons Road and two suburban neighborhoods with radar guns and cars pulled over with lights flashing like it’s Christmas.”

But many voted in favor of the annexation for this increased police presence, as the King County Sheriff’s Department had just three deputies to respond to the three large areas.

Others are concerned about the city’s taxes on annexation area businesses and a council of seven for a city of over 80,000.

The main concern we have heard from those who opposed annexation has been the way the council seemingly pushed annexation through after the public vote failed in November of 2009.

The initial vote for annexation and shared responsibility of the city’s bonded indebtedness needed 60 percent to pass – the vote failed by just seven votes.

But the vote surpassed a simple majority, or the 50 percent needed to approve annexation without the assumption of Kirkland’s current debt. So the council repeated history, voting in December of 2009 to annex without putting the burden of the city’s previous debt on the new residents.

This also occurred with the annexation of South Rose Hill, North Rose Hill and lower Juanita neighborhoods in 1988.

Trepidation, anger and discontent are normal reactions for anyone opposed to change. And during the immediate transition it’s a good thing to express those emotions, let city officials know those concerns and keep them to their promises.

But with annexation now behind us, we need to move forward.

A good example of a proactive response to the annexation is Kingsgate resident Jason Gardiner, who filed to run for city council. Gardiner is getting involved in his new city, despite voting against annexation.

The fact of the matter is that Kingsgate, Juanita and Finn Hill residents are now Kirkland residents. Becoming involved in the process of governance at the city level is the only way to properly make a statement of how you feel about the changes.

Residents of those neighborhoods had to drive to Seattle in the middle of a work day to voice their concerns and attend a King County Council meeting as an unincorporated area. Now it is just six miles to the south on Tuesday night at Kirkland City Hall.