The Kirkland City Council voted to approve the annexation of the Finn Hill, Kingsgate and North Juanita neighborhoods 4-3 Tuesday. The annexation, effective June 1, 2011, will nearly double Kirkland’s population. The decision ignited a rare applause from some in attendance during the meeting, bringing to a close an issue that has lingered for nearly 20 years.

But the move will also mean years of transition and further debate.

The population will grow from approximately 48,000 to 81,000 and make Kirkland the 12th largest city in Washington and the sixth largest city in King County.

Deputy Mayor Joan McBride, Bob Sternoff and outgoing Council members Mary Alyce-Burleigh and Mayor James Lauinger all voted in favor of the resolution to implement annexation with an effective date of June 1, 2011. Implementing an effective date and budget questions were the two biggest reasons prompting Council members Jessica Greenway, Dave Asher and outgoing Council member Tom Hodgson to vote against the resolution. The council took time to openly debate the issue and speak their minds before voting.

“We don’t have enough information on finances to make an effective date,” said Greenway.

The sticking point of the effective date dominated conversation. The June 1, 2011 date was debated against a July 1, 2011 – a month that makes a big difference. For citizens in the annexation area, the June 1, 2011 date means that they will have the chance to run for Kirkland City Council that November and will not have to wait a full calendar year without representation. But starting June 1, 2011 means that the city will incur additional costs.

“It is the price we pay for letting our new citizens run for office,” said Burleigh.

Transition and budget

The biggest hurdle for annexation has been how to pay for the transition and the city’s current budget gap. The council took up the issue of annexation after the measure failed by just seven votes in November. But the measure included a provision for the annexation area to assume shared responsibility for Kirkland’s bonded indebtedness. Those in support of annexation have argued that the measure would have passed without the provision, as happened with three Kirkland annexations in 1988.

The resolution passed by the council accepts annexation without the bonded indebtedness provision, which will mean less money for the city of Kirkland.

“We made a promise that there would not be serious cost impacts to the citizens of Kirkland. As of two meetings ago, we found out that there would be considerable impacts,” said Hodgson. “I still support annexation but I think we owe an explanation to citizens of kirkland.”

The council’s time this session has been dominated by budget issues and how to work annexation into that discussion.

“When they annexed North and South Rose Hill they had no financial plan. There may need to be a creative solution,” said Burleigh, who cited the last election and the fact that all the candidates that won supported annexation. “But the different employee groups of this city support annexation, the police support it, the firefighters support it, all the different groups are fully supportive. Annexation will save jobs.”

The council members voting against the resolution argued that the council should take more time to work the budget issues out.

“I would like to give this issue to the next council as they begin to consider the budget implications,” said Asher.

New council members

During the public comment portion of the meeting Tuesday, incoming Council member Penny Sweet encouraged the council to pass annexation: “We (incoming council members) understand how difficult of an issue this has been for the whole community. It is our belief that the time has come to make Kirkland a city and a community that includes everyone who calls this home. We are ready to deal with the challenges presented by annexation and we will see to it that Kirkland embraces it.”

Those words were enough to sway some council members.

“I am heartened that we had representatives from the new council speaking at the mic, urging us to move ahead,” said Lauinger. “They recognize the financial difficulties that we wrestle with … to delay the action doesn’t get us anywhere. There are never good times to annex.”

Prior to the vote to implement annexation the council had to pass an ordnance expressing the intent to annex. That vote was less contentious with Greenway being the only council member to vote against it.

“It really doesn’t matter whether (the vote to annex by Finn Hill, Kingsgate and North Juanita residents) failed by seven votes or one vote, we made a commitment to Kirkland citizens that annexation would include the assumption of municipal debt … and that vote did not pass. I feel compelled to stand by my commitment,” said Greenway.

Another big issue that came from the general election was the failure of an increase to utility taxes.

“That failure means the loss of $1.1 million from the PAA and $2.3 million from Kirkland,” said Greenway. “And that will get worse over time. When we first began talking about annexation, we made a commitment to Kirkland residents that it would not mean the loss or reduction of services and we now know that is not true. We will spend over $2 million on annexation start up costs at the same time we are laying off staff, reducing hours and cutting service levels.”

Public comment

Annexation was hot with speakers during the public comment portion of the meeting prior to the vote.

“I am disappointed when the issue of annexation came up you didn’t go to the citizens to find out what they wanted,” said Kirkland citizen Bob Styles. “You ignored their concerns and turned a deaf ear. The cities 2005 financial report identified the problems that annexation was too expensive.”

Styles singled out Burleigh and McBride, stating that they led the charge: “You became sheep being led to the slaughter.”

The head of the No Annexation Committee, Scott Brady, was a bit more measured in his plea for the council to vote no: “Many of the nuts and bolts issues of this seem to be unknown to people in the (annexation area). I strongly suggest that you create some sort of a probationary period where individuals who are found with code violations or other issues with the city be given a warning or several warnings before code violations are enforced.”

But others spoke in support of annexation, including King County Council member Jane Hague and Kirkland resident G.G. Getz, who spoke about her late friend and former Kirkland Mayor Chuck Morgan’s wishes. Morgan, who died in November, was known as “Mr. Kirkland” for all that he did for the city: “He would remind me that this is the final step in his vision,” said Getz.

Finn Hill resident Katherine Winder encouraged the council to take their time and make the right decisions. She brought tea bags to the council members with the word “energy” on them.

“You will need energy for annexation,” said Winder. “We will hold council accountable for response times.”

The annexation area is approximately seven square miles, extending north of Kirkland to approximately N.E. 145th Street.

Other council news

In other news, the council approved the city’s mid-bienium budget, 6-1, with Asher as the only dissenting vote. As a part of the budget, the council unanimously approved a 1 percent property tax increase, which means that an owner of a $500,000 house will see an annual increase of $6. The council also approved the usage of the Antique Mart in downtown Kirkland for public paid parking. The Antique Mart closed in September and is currently for lease.

The council meeting was the last for the outgoing members.