Sakai bond measure: The argument against

Supporters, and opponents, of the ballot measure for a $5.9 million bond measure to purchase the 22.87-acre Sakai property for a public park have submitted their "for" and "against" statements to the Kitsap County Elections Division to be included in the voters guide for the Feb. 10 Special Election. Here is the statement from the "no" campaign, the Committee Against the Measure (Chairperson Jean Capps, Committee Member Tom Cappadona).

Supporters, and opponents, of the ballot measure for a $5.9 million bond measure to purchase the 22.87-acre Sakai property for a public park have submitted their “for” and “against” statements to the Kitsap County Elections Division to be included in the voters guide for the Feb. 10 Special Election.

Here is the statement from the “no” campaign, the Committee Against the Measure (Chairperson Jean Capps, Committee Member Tom Cappadona):

Argument Against the Measure

We all love our parks.

Why Overpay for this Property?

Proposition 1 is a bad deal. The Kitsap County Assessor values the land at $1.8 million dollars. The Parks District wants to pay $6 million! Why? Instead of incurring more debt, let’s raise money to buy it outright. Islanders would adopt this challenge.

We Are Blessed With Many Parks and Acres of Open Space.

We own 1,479 acres of parkland. We own swimming pools, offer hundreds of programs for all ages. We run Fay Bainbridge and Ft Ward parks. We support this understanding that we will face parks ‘maintenance bond’ soon.

Bainbridge Island Is Becoming Unaffordable. Income Inequality is Real.

On this ballot are two other tax issues: a $16 million Fire bond and a Levy. Soon we will vote on a new Police Building bond issue.

And a likely School Bond issue. Income inequality is a growing issue on our Island. We must pay attention to the financial burden bonds place on retired residents, seniors, young families. When we continue taking land off the tax rolls – as this measure would do – we shift property tax burden to fewer and fewer people.

Vote No. Let’s Go Back to the Drawing Board on This Property.

Let’s send this issue back to the community for a thorough discussion.

Placing these issues on the low-turnout February ballot is not an honest way to have a community discussion about our park budget priorities. The only beneficiaries are bond sales firms and their lawyers.

Rebuttal to the Argument For

Vote No. Remember: You and I are the buyers. The Park District is our Agent. The property has been for sale for many years. Why should we put our children into debt to buy property for 3 times the valuation? We already own 13.8 acres right down the street! The trails can be paid for with grants! Vote No on this foolish bond issue.

Time for Community investigation, discussion and common sense evaluation. Vote No.