Debating the Community Center

Posted on by
2

There was a debate Monday night over the pros and cons of the proposed public-private partnership between Sammamish and the YMCA for a $30m community center. The City Council authorized an advisory vote in the November election.

The election statement, and the pro and con arguments, appear in the King County Voters Guide here.

The City Council’s resolution authorizing the advisory vote is here.

As we’ve previously written (and here), we think an advisory vote is a waste of the $50,000 it will cost to hold it.

We weren’t able to attend the debate but it was video taped.

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Revisiting the “Notch”

Posted on by
Reply

Sammamish is once again interested in annexing the so-called Notch. This post, which has a link within it to another post, explains my view about the Notch.

Annexing the Notch at the current R-1 zoning doesn’t bring anything to Sammamish. Annexing the Notch as R-6, in neighboring Trossochs, doesn’t bring anything to Sammamish, either.

The Notch should be annexed as a mixed use development patterned after Juanita Village in Kirkland. See the earlier post for descriptions.

I’m one of the 47%–but I pay taxes at a higher rate than Mitt Romney

Posted on by
3

Update, Sept. 24: This article analyses Romney’s 2011 tax return and concludes that but for the sleight-of-hand, his tax rate would have been between 12% and 10%.

Original Post:

By now, most are probably well aware of Mitt Romney’s astounding statement about the 47% of the voters who support Barack Obama for reelection.

Here’s his quote:

“There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what.All right — there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent on government, who believe that, that they are victims, who believe that government has the responsibility to care for them. Who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing.”

Having long ago concluded that Romney is a duplicitous, say-anything-to-win politician (hardly unique, by the way) who doesn’t appear to have any core values except to shifting positions in order to win, yes, I will be voting for Obama, no matter what.

I have news for the governor: My wife and I:

  • Are not dependent upon the government. I have my own business.
  • Don’t believe we are victims.
  • Don’t believe the government has a responsibility to care for us–yet. But when it comes time to collect Social Security, Medicare and maybe Medicaid–for which we’ve paid taxes our whole working lives–you bet, we expect to be able to tap these funds.
  • We’re fortunate that we have our own house and can buy our own food.
  • We’ve been paying for our own health care, an individual policy that has gone up generally 20%-30% per year (expletive to you, Regence Blue Shield) when the CPI index has consistently been below 5%.
  • And, oh, by the way governor: We also pay taxes, at a tax rate higher than you paid in 2010. I bet our tax rate would be higher for the last 10 years–if you’d release your tax returns.

My 92-year old mother doesn’t pay income taxes, but according to you she is a freeloading moocher. Until March, she still lived in and paid for her own apartment. She now lives in a 24-hour healthcare facility, paying for her own room and board from her life-long savings and herĀ  Social Security earned from a lifetime of working. When the savings is gone, Medicaid will kick in–provided you aren’t elected and gut this program. She paid taxes that went toward Medicaid. Soon it will be time to benefit from it.

My 86-year old mother-in-law also doesn’t pay income taxes, so according to you she, too, is a freeloader. She has her own home, living off Social Security and her savings. Both use Medicare. Both have supplemental health insurance. Both get supplemental financial support from their children. But according to you, governor, they are dregs of society.

There was one Tweet that neatly sums you up, governor: You just tied 47% of us to the roof of your car.

Here’s more on why a Community Center advisory vote is a bad idea

Posted on by
5

I previously posted why the idea of a non-binding advisory vote is a bad idea for the Community Center. Here are more reasons.

The non-binding advisory vote only truly “works” if the vote is affirmative. It doesn’t work for a whole host of reasons if the vote is negative.

If the voters reject the Community Center, the City won’t know why. Is it because the voters:

  • Didn’t like the cost, some $30 million?
  • Didn’t like the size–is it too big or too small?
  • Didn’t like the pool–is it too small to offer competitive swimming, or should there be one at all?
  • Don’t know what happens to the staging area for the Fourth of July fireworks, which is where the Community Center is supposed to go–where do the fireworks go when displaced by the Center?
  • Don’t like that 75% of the capital costs are being paid by the City for a facility to be operated by a private entity?
  • Don’t like the very idea of a public-private partnership?
  • Don’t know when the facility will break even? The YMCA at the July 16 meeting doesn’t have a firm projection when the facility will break even. The absence of a firm business plan is, to me, rather alarming.
  • Don’t like competing with the privately-owned Pine Lake Club and Columbia Club?

The City won’t have a clue why this might be rejected.

The voter’s pamphlet language hasn’t been made public yet but presumably this will be an up-or-down, yes-or-no vote. Will the public even have answers to their questions in order to make an informed decision? I consider this highly unlikely, so the citizens will be voting on an “idea,” not a business plan.

As I noted previously, this issue has been studied to death by the City. A Community Center has been talked about since the very first City Council (1999-2001). That’s 12 years, for Pete’s Sake. The City has plenty of information with which to make a decision. The Council should be able to make a decision.

But an advisory vote is a classic move by government to delay action and make no decision. When desiring to avoid a decision, create another committee–or go to the voters.

The election Nov. 6. No action of any kind will likely be taken until 2013–if at all, should the public reject this.

This is a a bad idea from the get-to. This is the City Council avoiding its responsibility. How disappointing.

Joel Hussey in 45th; Glenn Anderson for Lt. Gov advancement

Posted on by
3

Sammamish voters north of SE 8th St. are in the new 45th Legislative District boundaries. Joel Hussey, a Republican, is running for State Representative and should be one of the two to move on to the general election. He’s running in the Top 2 primary against incumbent Richard Goodman (D) and another Democrat. The primary is August 7 and voters already have their mail-in ballots.

Among his endorsements: Sammamish City Councilmen John James, Ramiro Valderrama and John Curley; Kirkland City Councilman Toby Nixon, himself a former 45th District State Rep.; Sammamish’s Dino Rossi; and State Reps. Jay Rodne and Glenn Anderson (of the 5th LD, which until redistricting, represented most of Sammamish).

I’ve know Joel for probably 15 years or more. We’re both in commercial aviation and I can tell you that Joel is a man of high integrity, who understands the need to compromise to get the job done, and who is fiscally conservative–which this state needs right now. He is more socially conservative than I prefer but he is not so dogmatic as the extremists would like.

Glenn Anderson should, along with incumbent Brad Owen, be the two finalists for the General Election for Lt. Governor. Anderson is one of those truly vanishing species: a moderate Republican who is by standards of today’s Republican Party a liberal. Anderson, whom I actually worked against in the 2004 election, has grown for the past eight years and has some interesting ideas should he be elected to succeed Owen, who has been in the office 16 years.