How does the closing of County parks affect the annexation issue? Kirkland has not accounted for taking over patrolling the parks. It along with other recent gerrymandered figures invalidates the latest estimates for cost of services for PAA, a fact that the supporters for annexation are ignoring because it doesn’t promote their interest. The city’s 2005 report showing the $4 million shortfall for the operational budget is closer to the truth. And, that doesn’t include the cost for new equipment or facilities.

The voter’s pamphlet Pro statement on annexation claims property taxes will decrease by 14% if they annex. How can they possibly believe what they claim? The annexation issue requires the PAA to assume the city’s bonded debt. If they annex, those who are and will become city residents will also have to pay for the current $10 million shortfall in the city’s operating budget and the additional $4 million it will take to provide the equivalent services promised when the annexation was first promoted by the city. Taking over policing the abandoned parks was never address.

To patrol the area, it will require Kirkland to divert police resources from Kirkland. They must rob Peter to pay Paul at least for two years, maybe more. Almost all of the supporters for annexation are Paul’s. They would like nothing more than Kirkland taking over the parks but they don’t consider how the additional cost will address their property taxes. You can believe that the City of Kirkland will and raise fees and taxes accordingly. Their statement their property taxes will go down 14 percent is nonsense.

Robert Styles, Kirkland