Jessie,
Please read the attached letter [dated Jan 31, 2002] and provide us with a response.

Thanks
Terry Persson
2821 N.E. 8th Place
Renton, Washington

January 31, 2002

To: Jessie Tanner

Subject: Statement to reporter

Jessie, in the January 29th addition of the Seattle times article (Utility Taxes: a bite here, bite there) you were quoted as saying "city government, is my view, is not a welfare-redistribution mechanism". Many who read this article translated this statement to mean you could care less about low income and retired citizens on fixed incomes who will have to pay the proposed utility tax. This is a regressive tax burden a most. Every time the city of Renton, King County , Q-west, Puget Sound Energy or any one else raises the cost of utilities, it is a major impact to the people who can less afford it. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out if the city raises utility costs (and does nothing to lower the percentage points currently charged) The City gains additional revenues for the general fund.

We raised this issue to Randy Corman and your administration many years ago when we were receiving double digit increases in the cost of utilities from the City of Renton. The recommendation from our citizens group was to lower the current utility tax so it would lessen the impact on those who could ill afford to pay. Nether you, Randy or any one else in your administration responded to our request for help. Again the city budget came first over the needs of the community.

One other item that has been bothering us lately. It's your attitude. It leaves a lot to be desired when it comes to who pays for the life style the community maintains for you down in the new city hall. As you stated in your opinion on the City Hall construction on the Mayors page, "one of the writers, I have a very nice office, befitting the Chief Executive Officer of the City of Renton". Many of us could not believe you put that statement on "your" city web page. Who do you think you are? Our thoughts are you must be going out to lunch with the wrong people.

As an elected official, (nothing else but) you need to set yourself down and rethink just who you really work for. The Citizens of Renton or "the city". You stated when I leave "I will leave a Legacy that few cities in this region can aspire to - a jewel of a City Hall". You will leave us with a jewel all right, a jewel of a liability the Renton citizens and their children will be paying off on and maintaining for many years to come.

By the way, who put together your response on the Mayors web page entitled Mayor, RENTON CITY HALL OPINION REGARDING PROJECT FUNDING page?. Our perception is you did little to author it. Many of us after reading this page picked out the words "befitting the Chief Executive Officer of the City of Renton" as your input.

Jessie, it's like your are on a guilt trip about your involvement in the purchase of the city hall. You keep trying to justify something that should not of happened. Between your staff and yourself, you might, before you leave, have a few citizens believing you paid nothing for the new city hall. Now I want you to lean back in that big office chair of yours and have a good day. Even if we are paying for it.

Terry Persson

Top of Page | Main Index

Kathy

Attached is a copy of a response (from Jesse Tanner) that refers to a [01/28/02] letter sent to him from Inez Petersen. It also had a cc to the President of the Renton Council. If you get a chance, please read her correspondence to obtain information from Jesse's administration. The content of her letter was in the nature of fact finding. But the response from Jesse leaves a lot to be desired.

Questions to you and the Council: Do you or any members of the council support Tanner's policy of not responding to (as he says "foolish and vituperative) requests for information? Is this policy of not responding carry through to all city department heads in the Renton City Hall administration?

It may be time for the Council to set a policy in place that directs the Mayor and City hall employees to respond in a way that is non combative. If the clerk reads Inez Petersen's request for information tonight, would you please ask that Jesse Tanners response to her also be read?

My perception is that the Committee of the whole needs to review Jesses attitude toward citizens who come before the council and also those who take the time to take pen in hand and ask for information that only his administration can provide.

Over the last few years we have noticed a change in Jesses attitude toward anyone who questions or challenges his authority. The task of the council is to make sure this attitude does not get out of hand before he leaves office. We have seen many times where he has challenged you and others (in a very abrasive tone) who have come before the Renton Council. This seems to be the old Freudian theory of you attack only those people you fear. It would be nice if the Council as a whole would request that he tone down his responses to citizens like Inez Petersen and respond in a non-combative way when transmitting a letter back to anyone.

Thanks ,
Terry Persson
2821 N.E. 8th Place
Renton, Wa. 98056
425-228-5848

Top of Page | Main Index

Don,
Did you ever get any feed back about the budget increase for 2002? Jesse has responded to a letter from Inez Peterson on this subject. Have you seen his response back to her? Copy of Jesse Tanners communication back to Index. He said he has a policy of not responding to "foolish and vituperative attacks and will not respond in the future. Is this a policy you support?

Thanks
Terry Persson
425-228-5848

Top of Page | Main Index

I can assure you that it is not council policy to not respond to citizens in a timely and friendly manner. I believe the council does this all of the time. However when the letter is addressed to the Mayor, we can not control his lack of answer or type of answer. We do try and keep the tone as mellow as we can, but according to the law we can not dictate the Mayor's manner. But I like your idea to have a council policy of the city responding to the public in a polite, timely and courteous manner. I will bring this up at our council retreat later this month.

Top of Page | Main Index

Don

Thanks for the feed back. I agree with you about feedback from council members. But law or no law, someone needs to take Tanner aside and demand that he tone down his responses to the public. Again I will say that over the last few years his attitude has become very abrasive when he communicates with anyone who challenges his policies or authority. A good example how abrasive he can get is when councilperson Kathy questions him about a policy or decision he supports. This is not a good way to run a pool hall. Many of you on the council have asked the question as to why haven't more citizens come down the Monday council meeting to voice their concerns about city budgets or policies, What we hear from the community is that no one wants to stand in front of a podium and let someone vent on them. What we can't understand is, why the members of the Renton City Council let his get away with it. Protocol is one thing in a meeting, but the existing meeting process leaves a lot to be desired. I like the fact that you will bring this and other things up at the next Council retreat, but Council as a whole needs to stand up on their own back feet and put a stop to any and all communications from Jesse that common knowledge dictates as abusive in nature.

It may be time for a few of us to come before the Council and express our concerns about tanners communications with Renton Citizens. Would you like that we go before a committee or the full council to express our thoughts?

Thanks
Terry Persson
2821 N.E. 8th Place
Renton, Wash. 98056
(425)-228-5848

Top of Page | Main Index

Dan Clawson wrote on Thurs, Feb 7, 2002, 8:58 AM
(This is Councilman Clawson's reply to the Inez Petersen letter of 01/28/02
annotations in red are her comments)

Dear Ms. Petersen,

The Mayor, his staff, and many of us Council members have spent enormous amounts of time dealing with your correspondence and numerous demands for information. [If you made a list of official responses from the city to me, the list would be very short indeed; I think you've exaggerated abit regarding the tremendous amount of time you have devoted to my inquiries. And wasn't it the mayor who recently said his usual policy was to ignore my letters?] We have 52,000 plus other constituents who need fire and police protection, water, sewers, roads, parks, services for seniors and children, and the many other services that only the City of Renton can provide. [And I think the budgeting process that makes all this possible needs to be above board.]

You have raised some issues in the past that needed to be brought out, and that is a service to the city. [Thank you.] But we must focus on taking care of the City's business by allocating our resources in the way that in our best judgment is fair and right. That means that sometimes your requests may be denied or delayed, as are those of many other citizens. [I-747 was important enough to the citizens of this state that a majority of them voted YES to the 1% tax limit. On that basis, I can safely say that the issue of the 1% tax limit is important to the majority of citizens in Renton as well. And as such, it should be important to city leaders.]

It is my understanding after reviewing the tax initiatives and reading a lot of literature on it from both supporters and opponents, including an email exchange with Paul Guppy, on one of the leading anti-tax crusaders, I have concluded that using banking capacity to catch up and go over 1% is consistent with state law. There is no "scam" as alleged. [I think city leaders are pulling a scam on the voters when they take blatant advantage of a loophole in the law. Giving it an official sounding name such as "banking capacity" may legitimize it in your eyes, but a loophole is a loophole is a loophole.]

Those who don't believe that banking should be allowed need to go to the Legislature or pass an initiative to that effect [it's already in the works, look for signature gatherers soon], or elect 4 Council members who will adhere to their interpretation of 747. [I wish the leaders we elected had the moral fortitude to follow the letter and spirit of I-747 on their own volition.] I am not one of them, as I made clear in my recent campaign, yet I was elected by a majority of voters. [Your advantage came not by viture of your platform but because you were the incumbant.] As best I can tell your point of view is only shared by a small although vocal minority, and does not represent the prevailing understanding of the citizens of Renton that I represent. [A minority point of view? Didn't the majority of voters say yes to the 1% tax limit?]

Sincerely,
Dan Clawson

Top of Page | Main Index

Jerry,
Attached is a letter from Jesse Tanner the Mayor of the City of Renton to Inez Petersen (copy attached). Inez had requested information about the Renton budget for the year 2002. Please read it and tell us what he is talking about. He basically indicated that the increase in the Renton budget for the year 2002 was all a function of new construction. Is this true? If so what new construction? Myself, in reviewing your data sheet and information provided to us from Hazel Note (206-296-5145 who Scott Nobel referred us to) we feel again he is not providing us with the correct information. In your memorandum (dated 2/8/02 to me) the numbers say something else. This man is still challenging the King County Accounting staff. We are currently verifying the numbers once again with your office. If the 2002 budget increase is something else besides new construction, we could have an Enron situation in our community with the Council and Chief Executive Officer of the City of Renton . Even before the final budget was passed, they were reassuring the citizens (to build up their confidence) that 1% had not been violated in the submittal budget for the year 2002.

Thanks for your help.
Terry Persson
2821 N.E. 8th Place
Renton, Wa. 98056
425-228-5848

Attachment
Letter from City of Renton Mayor, Jesse Tanner
(in response to Ms. Petersen's letter of Jan 28, 2002)

January 30, 2002

Inez Petersen
3306 Lake Washington Blvd N #2
Renton, WA 98056-1978

Dear Ms. Petersen :

Since you have finally asked an intelligent question in your letter of January 28th, I am suspending my policy of not responding to foolish and vituperative attacks and am going to respond to your letter.

First, let me say that I-747 has become law and the City of Renton has meticulously adhered to that law. We duly increased our levy by 1% in 2002. In addition, as Mr. Jerry Crossler of the King County Assessor's Office has correctly pointed out, we then used 3.79% of banked capacity that we had not used in previous years. There is nothing in I-747 that prohibits taxing entities from using legal taxing authority that was banked in previous levies.

Also, as Mr. Crossler points out in his e-mail to Terry Persson, 5.01% of our overall levy was based on new construction. I do not believe that even Mr. Eyman would advocate allowing new property to go untaxed. The new development that generated this 5.01% of our levy is due to the untiring efforts of the City Council and this Administration to move this City forward and make it into the world class City that we want it to be.

I hope I have answered to your satisfaction the question you raised in your letter. If not, I suggest that further explanations and correspondence will be futile; therefore, I am re-establishing the policy outlined above.

Sincerely,
Signed Jesse Tanner
Mayor

Cc: Renton City Council and Jay Covington

Top of Page | Main Index

King ,

Would you please give us your justification for supporting this ordinance. As you know the majority of the Citizens in Renton voted against this type of property tax levy limit factor in the form of I-747. If you have trouble communicating via the internet, we would be happy to set down with you and listen to your response. Please give me a call if you would like this to happen.

Thanks ,
Terry Persson
2821 N.E. 8th place
Renton, Washington 98056
425-228-5848

An ordinance was read authorizing a one hundred six percent (106%) property
tax levy limit factor for 2002 to protect the City's future property tax levy
capacity. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL
ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: SIX AYES:
CLAWSON, NELSON, CORMAN, PARKER, BRIERE, KEOLKER-
WHEELER; ONE NAY: PERSSON. CARRIED.

Top of Page | Main Index

The mayor has pretty much told you the facts. The City of Renton took a 1% increase of their statutory maximum levy, which was $17,135,869. The statutory maximum levy is determined by calculating what the taxing district could have collected if they had budgeted to collect the maximum each year since 1986. In 2001, the City of Renton levied $16,488,544. That is $647,325 less than they legally could have levied. This unused capacity can be used by a taxing district by passing an ordinance stating such. The City of Renton passed their ordinance asking for the $17,135,869 plus a 1% increase, plus new construction levy, which all adds up to $18,158,514.

The fact that Renton could levy more than the I-747 limitation of 1% is due to their not levying their maximum in the past. Without the ability to do this, you encourage taxing districts to always levy to their maximum. The "banking" of this capacity in this way allows the taxpayer to keep the unused portion in their own pocket rather that the taxing district's pocket.

I know, at this point, you would like to have caught the City of Renton lying to you. It appears they have not.

Jerry Crossler

Top of Page | Main Index

Hazel, per our conversation I am sending you the last input from Jerry Crossler plus one attachment from Jerry and Mayor Jesse Tanner. We are really trying to understand what they say but the numbers Tanner puts out just don't match what we have to pay each year. We really need your help in understanding how these percentages spell out in real money just what we as home owners must pay. At least you and Jerry are only ones so far who have responded when we have asked for specific information. We really want to thank you for that.

Thanks ,
Terry Persson
2821 N.E. 8th Place
Renton, Wash. 98056
Phone 425-228-5848

Top of Page | Main Index

Mr. Persson,

After reading all of the attached, here is a simple explanation for the numbers.

All the numbers and percentages given are correct. If you take the total amount levied by the city of $18,154,514 versus the $780,943 of new construction money included in that amount, you get the 5.01% increase referenced in Mayor Tanner's letter to you on January 30, 2002. Now add the one percent increase from the highest maximum allowable levy for the city (see Mr. Crossler's memo of 2/12/02) of 4.965%. The total increase would be 9.975% or a 10% increase.

The average residential value for the city of Renton for tax year 2002 is $203,000, which is a 10.9% increase over the 2001 average residential value of $183,000. Using the average residential values for both those years and the city's REGULAR levy rates (without bonds) of $3.27385 (2001) and $3.26036 (2002), the tax amount increase for the city's levy alone is 10.5%. Therefore, all the increases in values and taxes for the city are consistent with what Mayor Tanner and Mr. Crossler have told you. [Hazel was unaware of the statistics used by the mayor on his website; Tanner used different numbers on his webpage, so you have to take her previous statement in context. Her statistics are what deserve major attention.]
183,000 x 3.27385 = $599.11 (2001)
203,000 x 3.26036 = $661.85 (2002)

If you have any further questions, let me know.

Top of Page | Main Index

Inez ,

I received in the mail today my tax due statement from King County. Developed an Excel spared sheet with last years numbers and this years numbers. As you can see the City of Renton is the largest dollar increase from last year to this year. This is only one of my properties. All of the rest have dollar and percentage and dollar increases that closely match the ones on the spread sheet.

Take a look at the King County Levy rate for this year. It is lower that last year. But Renton came in at an whapping increase of 9 percent. Again it does not take a rocket scientist to compare the numbers and see the deception Jessie Tanner tried to communicate to you in his response of January 30th, 2002.

Both the Council and the Mayor should be admonished for their actions in putting together a budget that exceeds the charter the voters in our community directed them to take.

We talked to a few of them about the percentage increase and ask them not to vote for the 2002 budget until the total increase was 1% or less. They paid no attention to our input and instead used Banked capacity and a higher than necessary Levy Rate to increase the budget to an amount that is unacceptable to the Citizens of Renton. I think these Renton City Councilmen have forgotten just who is paying these taxes. At one time the lions share of the revenue for the city came from the taxes levied against the business in our community. Now in the last few years that has turned around and the home owner now pay the highest percentage of the revenue from levy rates to the City of Renton. They need to change their process and let the community be part of the development of next years budget. Tax increases that exceed inflation need to have the approval of the Citizens of Renton. What we currently have is budgetary approval process that excludes those who can ill afford to pay large increases in assessments leveled against their homes.

Top of Page | Main Index

Don, I am forwarding an E-mail from Hazel Newton who is an accountant at the King County assessor's. Please take a look at the percentage increases of more than 10% she calculated from last year to this year. I don't want to again tell you I told you so. I really have the feeling that you and the other council members knew before the budget was approved that the average increase would around the 10% mark. You folks have total control over banked capacity and levy rates that are submitted to the assessor's office.

This is why I contacted you and asked that you not vote for the proposed 2002 budget. I think it's about time the assessor's office creates a 101 class (for you on the Renton Council ) on what numbers make of the assessed levy rates. What's really disheartening is that you should already know them by heart. I appreciate the fact that you voted no on the 106% property tax levy limit factor but I am disappointed that you voted on a budget that drives up my home taxes by more than 9 percent.

Please don't come back with the statement that the levy rate was decreased. That only one part of the equation. If a person made it through high school he will not have any problem understanding the basic math the makes up the equation. Please do you home work before you approve another budget that takes funds away from us that we would rather use for things like food and shelter.

As long as Kathy Wheeler has been on the council she should also know what drives these numbers. It would be nice if you had the confidence that the others members on the council had the knowledge of just what drives the numbers that are submitted to the Kind County Assessor's office.

I have attached an Excel spread sheet that shows the increases on my home as an example of the percentage increase. I have tried to put it in format that almost anyone could understand. If you need help, please call me? All my neighbors have about the same increases. During the 2003 budget you folks need to take input from the community and not just from the Renton Administration.

You know the old saying about asking the fox just how many hens there are. The citizens of Renton are starting to use the word "deception" when it comes to the numbers you folks are giving to the press and others as decreases when in fact they are really increases when put into the final equation at the assessors office.

If for any reason you can find fault with the numbers from the assessors office or my spread sheet, please feel free to give me a call.

Have a good day ,
Terry Persson
2821 N.E. 8th Place
Renton, Wa. 98056
425-228-5848

Attachment: Excel spreadsheet from Terry Persson

Top of Page | Main Index

Inez ,

King Parker just gave me a call. We talked about the 2002 budget; and he indicated that the public has every chance in the world to provide input. I can't find fault with that statement. Input from the people in our community indicates that these meetings are not conducive for the average person to attend. A structured environment for the untrained speaker leaves a lot to be desired. Now on the other hand, a Town Hall approach would let someone come in and just voice their concerns about the increasing city budget and residential taxes.

He stated that we should be thankful that the values of our homes are increasing each year. This is true if you intend to sell your home and move someplace else. Many of have planned to live our retirement years in the homes we built and paid for. Many of the retired in our community are on fixed incomes, and the taxes from the increased assessments are forcing many to sell and move away. He stated that he was a fiscal conservative. But being on the council has changed the way he now feels about who should pay for what.

It was a good conversation, but I came out of it with a mindset that he really does not understand the variables in the equations the King County Assessor uses to bill us annually. But he really knows how to use of banked capacity. Hopefully he will now look into it and in the future really understand what we have been saying for many years. King needs to educate himself and then hold a few classes for his peers on the council. I myself find that educating these councilman has been quite an experience.

Terry Persson

Top of Page | Main Index

I understand that the City of Renton has $5.8 million in "slush fund" reserves. Can you tell me how you justified the City's "greater than 1%" property tax increases, when you already had that much money in excess? It would appear that you not only taxed us far in excess of the 1% voters approved, but you also had excess money sitting there that could have been used to reduce our tax burden. I would appreciate feedback on this issue, especially if I'm in error in my assumptions.

The mayor should be able to speak to this issue easily. And certainly the three members of the Finance Committee (Parker, Persson, Clawson) should be able to speak to this issue. And certainly the rest of the council ought to be able to speak to this issue, since they voted yes to the budget and yes to Ord No. 4930. You can ignore my request because the subject is sensitive or you can answer it honestly. I hope you do the latter.

Sincerely,
Inez P. Petersen
3306 Lake Wash Blvd North #2
Renton, WA 980561-1978
425-255-5543
webgirl@seanet.com

Top of Page | Main Index

For your information and review. This is information you should already know about. If you don't understand the data from Hazel Newton, I will be glad to review and explain it to you.

I would like some day to thank you in person for the recent 9% tax increase my wife and myself received from just the City of Renton's portion of our 2002 property tax statement. . We are not happy campers at all. We have talked to you many times before about these excessive increases and you just passed them off as being another bump in the road.

You need to get out in the community and see just how many bumps in the road you are creating. Please give me a call if you have any questions.

Thanks , Terry Persson
2821 N.E. 8th Place
Renton, Wash. 98056
425-228-5848

Top of Page | Main Index

King,
I am forwarding to you information that we received from the King County Assessors Office. Please take a close look at the percentages in red. Also for I have an attachment that shows the 9% increase that I told you about. This is related directly to the levy rate you authorized for the year 2002. I would really like to someday to sit down and have that cup of coffee with you.

Have a good day , Terry Persson
2821 N.E. 8th Place
Renton, Wa. 98056
425-228-5848

Top of Page | Main Index

Good morning to you, as always you ask good questions and questions that I have asked of myself, and others. We actually have at least a seven million dollar budget surplus, just hate to call it a slush fund. Anyway we will be asked to discuss this and other topics on our 2/28 council retreat.(public invited) As I am sure you have read in the paper the Mayor is proposing using the money for a swimming pool, veterans memorial park and building new park shop facilities. While I support all these efforts, I am of the opinion now is not the time to use our surplus money for those projects. I will ask that the money be saved to be used to pick up any budget shortages we may have in the future so we do not have to cut services or add taxes. I firmly believe this is not the time to spend any more money on new projects until we find out where we are during this next year.

Why did we not use this money to balance the 2002 budget????? Good question, the answer is that the information prepared and given to the city council during budget time was that our revenues were going to be down and we were told they were unsure if we would balance our 2001 budget with anticipated revenues.

I am sure you can understand the learning curve of a new council member, you want to believe the information given to you, but after two years you will see a different style of questioning on the budget. Myself and at least two other council members are going to ask that the 2003 budget process include asking the citizens what they think before we consider the budget. So we will see, hope I have answered your questions.

Top of Page | Main Index

To: Renton City Clerk

Under the State's open meetings/open records statute, I am requesting meeting information about the February 28, 2002, council retreat (where will it be held, what time, etc.). I'm assuming that the public may attend.

Thank you for your help,
Inez P. Petersen
3306 Lake Wash Blvd North #2
Renton, WA 98056-1978
425-255-5543

2002 Council/Staff Retreat
Hilton Garden Inn, Renton,
Agenda

Thursday, February 28nd
7:30am Continental Breakfast
8:00am Welcome/Overview of & Confirmation of Agenda
8:15am Envisioning Renton's Future
-Building on the Successes of the past Decade
- Renton's Value as Seen by Others
- The Future
- How do we get There?
11:30am Break for lunch (Rotary, etc.)
1:30pm Mayor's Perspective 1996-2001
Remaining 2001 Successes & accomplishments
2:00pm Emerging Issues (In addition to those identified in the morning)
- Other Issues?
5:30pm Adjourn
Friday, March 1st
7:30am Continental Breakfast (Council only)
7:30am Council only discussion
9:00am Improving Communication & Working Relationship Between Council & Administration
10:30am Business Plan Update
12:00-1:00pm Working Lunch
Complete Business Plan
1:00pm Other Issues (As identified by Council and staff)
5:00pm Adjourn

Top of Page | Main Index

Inez ,

We need an answer from each member of the council on the very questions Don responded to. Then "maybe" the Citizens of Renton will come to the conclusion that a change in the budget process needs to happen. Deception that has permeated the Mayors office for years. Answers like "we were told" leaves me with the impression that Tanner's budget director had no problem in leading them around like a bunch of lost sheep.

One councilman pleading ignorance to the budget process will not help those who can least afford to pay. He was informed before the budget was approved that there was a problem with the numbers and that someone in effect was cooking the books. I hate to say this, but first we had Enron, now we have the Renton city budget process.

If Don really means what he says then he needs to recommend that the council hire an outside consulting firm to review the 2003 budget. Jessie Tanner's administration does this all the time. So the council should be able to do the same. This firm would review the numbers and make recommendations back to the council (not Tanner's Group) as to its content and make recommendations as to what levy rate number should be approved for submission to the King County Auditors office. This process should be completed at least a month before the budget needs to be approved. Part of the consulting firm's responsibilities would be to sit down with each councilperson and make darn sure they understand the budget before they approve it. Then the newly educated council members can present the numbers to the Citizens of Renton. One thing that will come out of this is they will now understand the levy rate number they authorize and what the impact will be on the average home owner. This new process should give the council ample time to receive input from the Citizens of Renton.

As to creating a Rainey day fund. Look what happened at the state level.

Those who want to be elected to another stay on the council or want to run to Jessie's position should be prepared (if this budget process is not cleaned up) to answer some very hard questions as to who do they truly represent. If they wake up and take the time to understand how these budgets effect the community, then the only answer is the citizens priorities come before the needs of the city.

Top of Page | Main Index

Subject: 02/28/02 Council Retreat
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 21:19:11 -0700
From: Ine Petersen webgirl@seanet.com

To: jtanner@ci.renton.wa.us, kparker@ci.renton.wa.us, tbriere@ci.renton.wa.us, rcorman@ci.renton.wa.us, tnelson@ci.renton.wa.us, kwheeler@ci.renton.wa.us, dclawson@ci.renton.wa.us, dvpersson@ci.renton.wa.us

Dear mayor and council members:

I hope your agenda covers the subject of excessive property taxation of Renton residents. If the people in Renton understood what Terry Persson has been discussing with you and if they could compute their own numbers (like the ones Terry computed for you on your own property), you'd have a tax revolt on your hands.

The city's portion of my property taxes was $1168 last year; this year it is $1308. That's an 11.9 percent increase. I live on a fixed income. My taxes have doubled since 1994. If they double again in another 7 years, one third of my fixed income will go toward property taxes; and I won't have enough income left over to continue to live in my own home. This situation cannot continue.

Please get in touch with reality. Put greed and ego aside and do the hard work of making do with a reasonable tax. This issue is going to haunt those of you who plan to run for office at the next election.

Sincerely,
Inez P. Petersen
3306 Lake Wash Blvd North #2
Renton, WA 98056-1978
425-255-5543

Top of Page | Main Index

Subject: Information to respond to
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 18:59:44 -0800
From: "terrypersson" terrypersson@msn.com
To: webgirl@seanet.com
CC: "Don Persson" dvpersson@msn.com, "McKenna, Rob" Rob.McKenna@METROKC.GOV, "Paul Guppy" pguppy@washingtonpolicy.org, "KING PARKER" kparker@ci.renton.wa.us

Inez,
I was out on the net and had some spare time, so I developed a small relational data base program (see ATTACHMENT) and computed the percentage increase for a few of the citizens of Renton. It not to hard to figure out in your own mind the amount of additional dollars the city will collect. It really to bad because that increase will be leveled against those who can ill afford least to pay.

Take a look at the Clawsen percentage. If it was not for him dragging down the average it would be a lot higher. It's no wonder he brushed off our challenge to the 2002 budget. Did not have time to get into Kingsley or Nelsen homes. Did come across a Release of Federal Tax Lien statement in the King County Department Recorder's Office that needs further investigation.

Amended post . . .
Inez,
I added your name to the little program I put together yesterday and included them on the attached spread sheet. 48.5% of your increase is due to the hard work our Renton Council did (per Jessie Tanner) in keeping our taxes down. If I get a chance later on I will do a run on Tanner's property taxes.

If you have any questions, please give me a call. By the way your tax parcel number is 3342100091 and you can look it up on the net at http://webapp.metrokc.gov/KCTaxunfo/

A better resource . . .
Inez,
This is a better E-Mail to get to the Tax resource links. You will log on to the King County Taxes page. Go to the Treasury Division (Property Taxes), click on Search for your Property-tax information. Then all you do is put in your Parcel/account number 3342100091
www.metrokc.gov/taxes.htm

Top of Page | Main Index

King ,

Attached is a pie chart and a bar chart that even you should be able to understand. And if you have time please click on sheet one and see a bar chart that shows the percentage increase over last year. The Pie chart demonstrates the percentage breakdown of what makes up the total dollars we must pay out in property taxes this year. The Bar chart indicates the true Levy percentage increase authorized by you and the rest of the council on my property taxes. Is there a reason that the City of Renton gets the lions share of it? Have you figured out yet what drives up the percentage value? And this is just on our home.

My neighbors (who have received their property tax notices) who have reviewed their new taxes for 2002 and they are not pleased. Many were under the impression that from your conversation and others on the Renton Council, their tax increases would be marginal at best. Shame on them for trusting those they put their trust in.

Please call if you have any questions.

Terry Persson
2821 N.E. 8th Place
Renton, Wash. 98056
Home Phone: 425-228-5848

Attachment: Pie Chart / Bar Chart (see both sheets)

Top of Page | Main Index

Kathy,
King and Don are having a hard time in responding to our questions about the large increases on Renton City Levy (Dollar to be paid) for the year 2002. Would you respond to the question as to why you voted to increase the average residential property taxes by more than 10.5%? Per the Assessors numbers, using the average residential values for both years and the City of Renton's regular levy rates (without bounds) of $3.27385 (2001) and $3.26036(2002), the tax amount increase for the city's levy alone is 10.5%.

Tanner is still telling everyone that the increase property taxes is due to the County reassessing the value of our residential properties. This is true to only to one part of the equation. The driver of the dollar value is the levy amount that you authorize to be submitted to the Assessors office for collection. The AV number in the other part of the equation and is available to the Renton Budget Director (from the Assessors Office) well before Thanksgiving. Tanner and the budget director (from the number she submits to you on the Council) both at this time know what the average property increase will be on the homeowners in Renton.