City of Issaquah - Proposition No. 1 · King County

Labels are based on a detector's reading of the text and are not a claim about the author.

The statements in this pamphlet are printed exactly as submitted. No spelling, grammatical, or other corrections have been made.

Hide highlighting appears humanappears AI-editedappears AI

Statement For · Jeffrey Newell, Robin Beukers, Donovan Richards

statement likely AI

Committee: Jeffrey Newell, Robin Beukers, Donovan Richards

This is a renewal–not a new tax–and an investment in the parks, trails, and gathering places that make Issaquah a great place to call home. After years of planning and community input, residents identified clear priorities: three turf fields with sustainable cork infill at Issaquah Valley, Clark, and Grand Ridge elementary schools; a rebuilt mountain trailhead; new Cougar & Squak Mountain trail loops; a restored Ek House gathering space at Confluence Park; an all-abilities playground and dog park; and new pickleball courts. Maintenance is built in from the start. Without this renewal, completing these community priorities could take more than 30 years. Issaquah’s natural beauty and exceptional access to parks and trails are part of what makes our community–and our homes–so desirable. Renewing this bond protects and strengthens that investment for the next generation. A community is only as strong as the places it holds in common: a shared trail, a shared field, a shared bench in the shade. Places to play, gather, explore, and belong. Vote Yes to renew our investment in Issaquah. Supported by: Issaquah FC, Issaquah Little League, PTSA, Issaquah Alps Trails Club

Rebuttal of argument against

This wasn’t guesswork. Years of planning and extensive resident surveying shaped this list. These projects are the priorities Issaquah residents identified–not a City wish list. “Not yet” means delaying investments our community has already prioritized, potentially for decades. Far from ignoring the will of the people, this renewal reflects it: fields, trails, playgrounds and gathering spaces residents asked for. The planning has been done. The priorities are clear. Vote Yes to honor that process.

Statement Against · Steve Pereira

statement appears human

Committee: Steve Pereira

The Issaquah Strategic Park Plan is in place. This specific proposed bond fails because it only asked what we could do, but did not ask to prioritize projects that will achieve our stated goals and outcomes. This needs to happen before selecting $18.5M, and will show measured progress. It uses 20 years of future Parks bonding capacity, but not that it best meets our citywide 20 year goals. It is good that there are many aspirational goals, outcomes, and values in our Parks plan: Connectivity. Vibrancy. Resiliency. Balance. Peaks to Creeks Plan. We need to prioritize before spending if we want to show progress. Develop and implement benchmarking and Level of Service (LOS) measures that will inform and prioritize funding decisions and projects. This is not an argument against specific projects. We should proceed with purpose and intentionality, or no funding amount will allow reaching our goals. Bond spending may only be used for new capital projects, though needs to connect with our broader Parks Strategic Plan (Ex: Facilities, Maintenance, Operations, Programming, etc.). Ask only that we vote ‘Not yet’.

Rebuttal of argument for

Issaquah’s Strategic Park Plan is ambitious, comprehensive, and possible. It should guide inform project selection priorities, and track progress of its systematic City 20 year Parks implementation vision. This proposal does something, but needs a citywide conversation to determine and select the most pressing needs are selected. High inflation costs necessarily need drive selection for the best Parks. Not yet.