To the Editor
March 4, 2014
Mullet is confident with record as moderate, fiscally conservative Democrat
Terry LaBrue, a Republican campaign consultant, recently wrote a letter to the editor and I wanted to respond to his questions about my vote against placing a 2/3 vote threshold for tax changes in our State Constitution.
During my time on the Issaquah City Council, I never once voted to increase property taxes. Last year, I was one of the few Democrats who broke from party leadership to support a Republican budget that reduced the Business and Occupations tax on the service industry. I have a long history of opposing tax increases at the state and local level.
However, I have been consistent in my opposition to Tim Eyman’s 2/3 requirement to raise taxes. I opposed it during my campaign and I opposed it on the floor of the Senate this session.
I don’t pursue fiscally conservative policy because of an initiative, that’s just what I believe. I’m confident with my record of being a moderate, fiscally conservative Democrat. I know that the people of the 5th District are more than capable of keeping me accountable without Tim Eyman’s help.
Our district’s voters want legislators to work together, in a bipartisan and fiscally responsible way, to make Washington a better place to live and do business. I promise to continue acting on your behalf in that manner.
Sen. Mark Mullet
Why take a swing at Tim Eyman?
The Feb. 26 issue of The Press had a cartoon on the Opinion page that seemed to take a swing at Tim Eyman.
Do not folks understand that like the rest of us, Tim only gets one vote to address any item on the ballot? So, what is the purpose of attacking Tim? Most people are in favor of less taxation.
The vote is NO on annexation to Issaquah
This past fall, both Sammamish and Issaquah were meeting in council and talking to the community regarding their positions on annexation of the whole of the Klahanie Potential Annexation Area. The Issaquah City Council made a promise to release the potential annexation area to Sammamish if the annexation vote in February were no.
Well, the residents of the potential annexation area have voted, and the vote was no. The democratic process is complete.
Now, it is time for Issaquah and the King County Boundary Review Board to release the Klahanie Potential Annexation Area, in whole, to the city of Sammamish.
Sammamish is eager to begin the annexation process and we, the residents of the potential annexation area, need to move on and see this issue of annexation finally resolved.
Just looking at the map, a grade school child will tell you which city the potential annexation area should belong to.
We are not children. All the questions have been answered.
We choose Sammamish.
It is time for Issaquah to release the whole Klahanie Proposed Annexation Area to the city of Sammamish.
Open letter to the Issaquah City Council:
As a resident of the Klahanie Potential Annexation Area, I believe I represent the feelings of most residents in saying enough is enough, Issaquah, free us from your potential annexation area.
You promised in 2002 to transfer the potential annexation area to Sammamish and you didn’t do this. You rejected us in 2005, and now you asked for our 60 percent vote to annex to your city (and assume our share of your bonded indebtedness). Well, you only received a 49.5 percent vote to annex.
Clearly, the majority of us are willing to take our chances that Sammamish wants us and we want Sammamish. Sammamish promised to do whatever it can to “fast-track” annexation into their city, but we need Issaquah to help facilitate that.
All along it was clear that annexation to Sammamish makes more sense than annexation to Issaquah, because of the ability of Sammamish to better provide service delivery to us, be it roads or police or trail connections or simply lifestyle desires.
In his campaign for mayor in October, Fred Butler said, “I would support removing Klahanie from our PAA if Klahanie citizens vote not to be annexed to Issaquah.” That is as clear as it can get. He says remove Klahanie, not gerrymander the borders between the two cities. His recent comments about taking a look at the distribution of votes implies a possibility of splitting up the potential annexation area.
The memorandum of understanding the two cities signed in 2002 states that Issaquah would transfer the entire potential annexation area, or perhaps all of the area north of Southeast 48th Street extended to the east. So, Issaquah council and mayor, don’t equivocate; get on with it and get together with Sammamish and release the potential annexation area from your jurisdiction as fast as possible.