A salary study for City Council members was requested by Kathy Huckabay during the Sept. 20 meeting (at 184 minutes into the meeting on the video tape).
Members are paid $850/mo; the mayor gets $950/mo.
Huckabay asked the staff to conduct a salary review as part of the current budget process. Staff said it is undertaking a salary review study for employees. Her current term expires next year. She has not said whether she will seek reelection or retire,
“In that salary review, are you going to be reviewing city council salaries?” Huckabay asked. “Next year is an election year. It would be really important for potential people who are running for city council to understand what the salary schedule is.
“I understand Issaquah hired somebody and they did a salary study and they came back with an adjustment.”
Huckabay didn’t say what the Issaquah adjustment is. Huckabay asked a question about storm water costs immediately after her salary review question. Staff answered the second question but not the first.
The City of Issaquah will host, sponsor and broadcast one of three candidate forums for its City Council election, but Sammamish won’t.
Sammamish said it will broadcast a forum, but only is someone else pays for it. CJ Kahler, treasurer of the Sammamish Rotary, which is co-sponsoring with the Sammamish Chamber, the only candidate forum set so far in our City Council elections, won’t allow videotaping the forum unless Sammamish pays for it.
Four years ago Sammamish said it wouldn’t allow a candidates forum in its chambers for some obscure reasoning. Now it says it will, but it won’t pay for videoing it and broadcasting it.
Is Issaquah about to equivocate on prior indications that it would release the Klahanie Potential Annexation Area if it lost the vote February 11?
It did lose the vote-albeit by a mere 32–but outside the margin for a recount. Despite Mayor Fred Butler pledging during his successful campaign for election in November saying he’d release the PAA and not gerrymander it, Butler’s been silent so far.
Councilman Paul Winterstein appears to be equivocating, however. According to The Issaquah Reporter, Winterstein told the county that “Winterstein testified that Issaquah hasn’t had time to analyze the election results and sort things out”
What’s there to sort out? Issaquah lost. Period.
Butler’s silence is disturbing. He needs to step up and honor his campaign pledge. One of the issues in the annexation vote was the inability to trust anything Issaquah says it will do. Butler, as the first new mayor in some 16 years, immediately stepped up to resolve the water wars. It’s already past due to step up and take moves to honor his word on annexation.
As for Winterstein and the Issaquah City Council: enough, already. You lost, and that’s that. Stop holding the PAA hostage. You could have annexed the area in 2005 if you weren’t greedy about the debt issue. Give it up now.
You’ll note that I’ve marked “SE 48th St. Extended,” which bisects the Brookshire precinct at the very southern tip. There has been discussion that this portion of the Klahanie Potential Annexation Area could be retained by Issaquah while the rest goes to Sammamish. This hardly makes sense to me, given that this is just the extreme southern tip of the PAA.
If there was any last-ditch hope by supporters that remaining votes would bring an affirmative vote to annex the Klahanie Potential Annexation Area to Issaquah, it’s gone.
Today’s vote count (Friday, Feb. 21) saw only three more votes added to the tally–one for the “Against Annexation” side and two for the “For Annexation” side. The vote now is 1,534 Against Annexation and 1,504 “For Annexation.” The spread narrowed one vote to 30 and the percentages are now 50.49% Against Annexation and 49.51% For Annexation. This is outside the requirement of 0.25% for a mandatory recount.
The election is certified on Monday. There could be a couple more votes come in, but hardly enough to change the outcome.
Now it’s up to Issaquah’s City Council to throw in the towel and give up the Klahanie PAA to Sammamish.
Today is Thursday, Feb. 20. A mere seven more votes were counted in the Klahanie annexation vote: two more “For Annexation” and five more “Against Annexation.” The spread is now 31, up from 28 yesterday.
I can now provide this analysis of How Issaquah lost Klahanie.
It had to come as a shock to Issaquah government officials: residents of the Klahanie Potential Annexation Area sent them packing in February 11’s annexation vote.
It wasn’t just that residents rejected the prospect of assuming a portion of Issaquah’s current debt load—that happened in 2005, despite overwhelmingly approving annexation itself. This time, the election night results presented a shocking six vote margin in favor of annexation. The results from the next day narrowed this to one vote. The next day, the vote counting swung in favor of “Against Annexation” with a 34 vote margin. And it got worse from there.
How did Issaquah lose Klahanie?
Arrogance. A sense of entitlement. A sense of what Klahanie could do for Issaquah, not what Issaquah could offer Klahanie. Past statements making it clear improved roads and parks for the area weren’t in the cards. An aggressive Sammamish offering an alternative. A history that demonstrated Issaquah had trust and integrity issues. A nasty fight with the Sammamish Water and Sewer District that revealed the worst of Issaquah government. And an effective citizens uprising in the form of Klahanie Choice.