Would you support raising taxes in order for the city to continue its level of service to residents into the future? If not, what other options does the city have, to avoid the projected crossover of revenue and expenditure?

Position 1

John James

I have shared with many citizens that I have talked with since the beginning of my campaign that I do not believe that now is the time to raise taxes during an economic recession and that the City of Sammamish has to learn to live within its means.

The responsibility falls on the City Council to be prudent with our money and to prioritize projects and services needed.

Unfortunately, if property values do not begin to increase we will have to make some painful cuts.

A viable Town Center in the near future would provide for a more diversified revenue base with the addition of more retail taxes that could be collected.

However, I am still a believer that the majority of the citizens are for a parks bond to provide more amenities for our community, and I would support a new vote with the right mix of needed projects.

Erica Tiliacos

I am not in favor of raising taxes.

The question suggests that efforts to control expenses will inevitably lead to a degradation of service.

I don’t necessarily believe that to be true.

Our city needs to fully test and revisit the assumptions that have gone into estimating the crossover point and think holistically.

For example capital and operating expense decisions needn’t be made in isolation.

We need to deploy our capital in a way that helps us lower the growth in operating costs.

I don’t believe we have fully incorporated this type of thinking into our long term planning, nor have we made a thorough prioritization of all our capital and operating expenses.

There are many things we can do to impact the cross over point long before we look at revenue enhancement.

However, they require that we think strategically, set our priorities and more efficiently deploy our limited resources.

Position 3

John Curley

Read my lips — no new taxes.

We have lived high on the real estate hog for far too long. And now we need to diversify our revenue streams.

How about flexing that AAA Bond muscle or God forbid we follow the path of almost all our neighboring cities and pay a utility tax.

I don’t like paying taxes any more then you do.

But a utility tax should be on the table as an option.

However we pay the bills we know they must be paid.

Tom Vance

This is an invitation to take an ideological stand.

We have a real city with real problems to solve.

I will do what is necessary to solve the problems we face, especially during a difficult economy.

Rather than increase taxes, our focus should be on controlling expenses for the next few years.

I would also like to further councilor Lee Fellinge’s ideas for instituting an on-going six year economic forecasting horizon as a guide to developing our biennial budgets and to avoid financial surprises.

We need to consider the impact on the crossover as we make all of our budgeting decisions.

We can still carefully select and manage our roads and parks capital projects from dedicated capital funds.

During the next few years, we can consider a new parks bond.

Parks and recreation projects can be carefully chosen, fully funded and maintained – and voted on by the electorate.

Position 5

Don Gerend

Currently Sammamish residents pay lower taxes than nearby areas in unincorporated King County, and are receiving better services.

The major source of revenue for the city is property taxes, and the average increase in property tax cannot exceed 1 percent per year by State law.

The major expenses of the city are police and fire services, and, to maintain the current level of service, those expenses (largely salaries and benefits) have been increasing much faster than 1 percent per year.

The city’s options are to somehow reduce the police and fire expenses while maintaining current levels of service or eventually find new sources of revenue.

A possible new revenue source is a city utility tax, which is authorized by state law, but thus far Sammamish is one of very few cities that haven’t utilized it.

I would support this tax, if necessary, to maintain current level of service.

Michael Rutt

I oppose property tax increases or surcharge taxes on utilities.

Currently we lack services and amenities in Sammamish – I’m not in favor of reducing them more.

City Council must prioritize, become more businesslike, eliminate uneccesary spending, develop new revenue sources.

Utilizing current assets and infrastructure is of the utmost importance.

By planning the Town Center without an economic development plan, we are moving forward with our eyes closed.

Sammamish households and businesses need an economic stimulus.

The city needs to become less regulatory in its policies, which currently discourage growth, including economic growth.

Land use regulations and zoning must encourage small local businesses.

I would look within the community in decision making processes and to attain goals by volunteering, donating, and promoting public/private partnerships.

This would nurture a participatory, involved public, interested in the common welfare of Sammamish.

We need a “can do” attitude. “Can’t” should be eliminated from our vocabulary.

Position 7

Tom Odell

Raising taxes is the last thing I would do.

As a former financial controller I feel every single budget item — large and small, capital and operating — must go under the microscope and the impact of its reduction, deferral, or outright elimination on the city be evaluated.

Capital projects need to be assessed for their impact on the ongoing operating budget.

The city’s extensive use of consultants also needs to be reevaluated. They often come with a cost premium.

Sammamish has grown substantially in the last 10 years.

It may now be time to review the current business model.

We may actually realize savings — and possibly improve services — by doing more on our own.

This said, pooling of services with adjoining cities should also be considered.

As the financial crossover point approaches we must continually review service level affordability.

Each $100,000 annual reduction in the budget helps delay the crossover.

Jack Barry,

No! I have been clear in every communication that I stand for no new taxes, yet we need vision and resource for the future direction of our city.

We can manage or mitigate the fiscal crossover in 2014 by being “forward focused” now.

Like any household or organization, we need clear priorities and a disciplined approach to spending.

Because we have some time for thoughtful action, I propose this approach for the city: (1) establish focus groups similar to the current Sammamish Homeowners and Ebright groups to help set priorities for spending and cuts; (2) search hard for state and federal grants to meet specific needs, and (3) use additional resources and citizen input to guide a realistic and transparent “crossover plan,” well ahead of the fiscal curve.