OPINION: Does The City Really Need A Public Safety Levy?

At several meetings this month city staff has been saying they need more funding for Fire than what is presently allocated.  I get it. Our population is growing; and Fire Station #12 which services the burgeoning Overlake Urban Center and Rose Hill, Grasslawn and Viewpoint neighborhoods needs remodeling and expansion. No doubt we'll need a new fire station in Overlake some day, as well. Fire is drawing up a six-year Master Plan to plan for these needs.

No doubt accommodating Fire's needs will require significant funding so the city is planning a new safety levy to pay for it. But, do we need a levy?  No!

At Council's June 25th committee meeting, Finance Director Melisa Files reported the city is in excellent financial shape.  "Department budgets [like Fire] are running well and there's really no issues in our funds." She went onto say " revenues are up by 17%, from sales tax and development revenue." Ms. Files has been reporting high revenue growth for well over a year with no end in sight. Even more impactful, Ms. Files reported "we expect $20 million in property tax income over the next year." If that's not enough, the city has a "Responsible Government Priority" from which they can tap $31,707,604 from their "operation reserves."

Fiscal stewardship should be expected of a responsible government; allocations to Fire and Police should be priority #1. Our exceptional present and future revenues and "smart prioritizing" of other services should get us to our Fire goals without the need for a Safety Levy. When the levy is one day proposed, please vote "No."

-- Bob Yoder