The reason I am sending you this information is to refresh your memories on the discussions that have taken place in the council chambers and in other meetings regarding the excess property tax collections of .38 cents per $1,000 property tax valuation (or $4.94).
The reason for the timing of this email is that the administration will soon be presenting the 2012 budget for the city. If in fact, the administration decides to include the .38 cents/$4.94 in the proposed budget, then I would strongly recommend that you reject the budget as it would be built on additional taxes being collected without voter approval.
My wife and I first discovered this issue when we went to pay our property taxes last April. Suzanne (Berrios) first contacted the King County Assessors office to get answers on why our property taxes were higher and they in turn told her to contact the city of Kent. She contacted the city of Kent and was then directed to contact Capt. Larry Rable with the Kent Fire Department for the explanation. It was implied that the new Regional Fire Authority had increased the property taxes. I then spoke with Capt. Rable and he offered to bring documentation showing the breakdown of the property taxes for both our business and our home for this tax year. Not only did Capt. Rable show up at my business to show me this information, but so did Fire Chief Jim Schneider and another deputy fire chief. It was at that point that I knew something was not right. They proceeded to show me the documentation outlining the designation of the collected property taxes. It was at that time that I came to the realization that there were excess tax dollars collected by the city of Kent.
I immediately contacted Mayor (Suzette) Cooke and expressed my concerns. She then agreed to set up a meeting with her and the finance director on May 5. I then contacted by phone or in person all seven council members. I expressed to them individually my concerns and asked each of them, “Why did you agree to take the additional tax payer’s money?” The responses that I received were as follows… One referred me to the Sept. 21, 2010 council meeting video below which clearly addresses the excess taxes and is confirmed by the city finance director. Another member’s response was, “I know it was wrong but, we couldn’t get two more votes to agree not to collect the excess taxes.”
Two other members responses were, “What were we to do because the city needed the money.” Another made the statement that they knew it was wrong but the budget was a mess and they needed the money. One council member refused to respond to the question all together. The last council member expressed that they had warned the taxpayers that the passage of the Regional Fire Authority would mean higher taxes for both individuals and businesses. What they failed to tell the taxpayers was that the taxes would be higher because the city would be collecting the excess .38 cents (or $4.94 million) that they did not plan on using for the fire department.
On May 5, I had my meeting with the mayor along with the city finance director, Schneider, Rable, the chamber executive director and the chamber legislative chair. I began that meeting expressing my concerns with what happened with the property taxes and asked the mayor the same question I had asked each council members, “Why would you have ever collected those excess taxes?”
She gave the following three responses… “Auburn did it.” “We needed the money.” “We told the taxpayers what we were doing.” The fire chief then presented the breakdown on how they collect their taxes and he came up with the same conclusion that there was an excess of about $5 million collected in property taxes by the city of Kent that had not been designated for the fire department. He refered to this as the X factor. During that meeting, a heated discussion broke out between the fire chief and the finance director regarding the management of funds during the final year that the fire department was part of the city of Kent. The meeting ended shortly after.
As a follow-up to that meeting, the Chamber of Commerce shared the information regarding the excess dollars collected by the city of Kent with it’s members and conducted a survey asking it’s members for feedback on what should be done regarding the excess funds that may be collected in the future. The survey came back with an overwhelming response that the excess funds not be charged against future property taxes. So, the executive director submitted a letter to both the City Council and administration expressing the wishes of the membership to not collect the excess tax dollars and not include them in the future city budgets. To this date, it is my understanding that there has been no response to the letters by either the council or the administration.
When I recently asked a council member, “Was it legal what they did by taking the excess property tax dollars?” Their response was, “It became legal when we voted to accept the budget. But, it was not ethical.” A day later, I asked the same question of another council member and they responded with the same, “It was not ethical.”
Since when did behaving ethically become optional for our council members?
During a recent council meeting, one council member repeatedly asked, “What programs would you suggest we cut in order to honor the request not to take the excess property taxes?” That question doesn’t even make sense given that the excess taxes should not have even been added to budget to start with. The real question should be, “what would this current administration and council have done if the fire department had never left the city of Kent?”
They would have had to work to balance the budget with the money available to them. In this same meeting, the same council member made the statement that the city’s property taxes actually went down this year. The fact is outlined in the videos below. Les Thomas points out in the second video, that the tax rate should have been $1.10 per thousand valuation not the $1.48 that was collected.
We all have been faced with the daunting task of managing the money available to us during this tough economy. I know that as a school board member, this has been especially difficult for us during the past three years with the level of state and federal funding being reduced. But we were forced to make tough decisions to balance the budget. This administration and council is responsible for doing the same. I know that in the case of the Kent School District, we started making adjustments at administration and worked our way down in order to avoid as much impact as possible in the classroom.
I want all of you to know that my wife and I care about and support our community in many ways. This is why we are so concerned with how this has developed into an issue of ethics. As I have already indicated in the last council meeting, council members, Thomas, (Debbie) Raplee and (Ron) Harmon have already agreed to vote to withdraw the .38 cents/$4.94 million from the 2012 budget. We will pray that at least one more council member decides to do what is ethical for the community they represent and live in.
I would like to thank everyone for taking the time to both read this letter and review these videos. I hope they will again serve as a reminder of the facts related to this issue.
Below are the links to two city council meetings in which there were discussions around what should be done with the extra tax dollars that the council approved to take from the taxpayers of the city of Kent through this current year’s property taxes.
1. This is the City Council meeting that took place on Sept. 21, 2010Â where Councilman Harmon suggest what to do with the extra $4.94 million that was going to be collected from the taxpayers in 2011 through property taxes.
Fast forward 56 minutes into the meeting to see council member Harmon’s presentation. Please make it a point to wait for the important question that Thomas asked immediately after the presentation to the city’s finance director which confirms that the information was accurate.
2. This is the more recent public meeting on June 21, 2011 where there was an attempt to do the right thing for the taxpayers. Go to minute 40 to hear the presentation from Thomas on the .38 cents/$4.94 million.
It’s about 17 minutes of material to take in.
Jim Berrios
Kent
Â
Talk to us
Please share your story tips by emailing editor@kentreporter.com.
To share your opinion for publication, submit a letter through our website https://www.kentreporter.com/submit-letter/. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. (We’ll only publish your name and hometown.) Please keep letters to 300 words or less.
