Kirkland City Council Should Hold A Public Hearing Prior to Adding a Sunset HCC Provision to State Legislative Agenda

This very much looks like a political run around and power grab by some folks that will benefit in some way that isn't immediately apparent.... The city of Kirkland has for many years supported individual neighborhoods, each with its own character. It is certainly not clear that there is a pressing need to change Houghton's character, or the legal agreements signed a few decades ago - especially when the agreement was voted into continuation in the last general election by the residents of Houghton. If the city council wants to make a change - They really should engage with the citizens. It is a democracy after all. Maybe the Kirkland city council needs to be changed to a group that represents its constituents?

Houghton resident since 1966. I know the history. The current council does not represent Houghton residents' best interests

Stop the Steal!

We have the right to choose for ourselves whether to keep the HCC. This was part of the agreement when Houghton joined with Kirkland. One has to wonder why the City of Kirkland is trying to overturn that vote and who will benefit from it.

I am in favor of a movement to incorporate as the Town of Houghton if the legislature takes action to cancel our votes and renege on the longstanding cooperative structure. A deal is a deal.

This tactic is an end run around previous agreements made in good faith. The Kirkland city council is being dishonest and disingenuous in an attempt to change lawful agreements in "the dead of night." This community needs an open hearing on this subject (only)

There is no resolution or other Council Action that I can find that would document Kirkland's City Council attempting to get the State Legislators to disband Community Councils. We have asked for a public hearing prior to this happening and have not yet heard anything. We are told, instead, that this is part of adopted Resolution R-5434 titled " Affirming That Black Lives Matter And Approving The Framework For Kirkland To Become A Safe, Inclusive And Welcoming Community." City Council Members stated repeatedly that this resolution was to have a laser focus on redressing the conditions that Black residents of Kirkland have expressed. Council members discussed why it was so important to focus on the current black experience and redressing wrongs. They did not even want to broaden the Resolution to include Hispanic or Asian experiences. They argued that this was similar to addressing past wrongs redressed after the Japanese Internment camps, etc. But then, somehow, Larry Springer and Penny Sweet's 10(+) year ambition to sunset HCC becomes part of this resolution. There does not appear to have been any discussion in public stating that this would become part of the resolution. The reworded Resolution just came up for a vote with one slide as overview and a vote on budget allocation. ​ This has not been the transparent process that Kirkland professes. This does not keep laser focus on the experience of Black people in Kirkland and their feeling of safety in the community. I believe the council should have listened more when they were invited to the BLM teaching gathering and should have attended (they later claimed to have not been invited, but the invitation is captured on Zoom during the prior meeting. Rather than embracing immediate opportunities to engage with the black community, KCC uses this resolution to make a 4th attempt to get out of agreements made with the citizens of Houghton. If I were one of the Black members of our comm

I'm really discouraged with the Kirkland City Council.

Deferring public hearings to the state legislative process is simply a way to deflect hearing from the people the KCC represents.

KCC has plenty of real estate to worry about in Kirkland without also ruining Houghton.

Kirkland must honor it’s commitment to the residents of Houghton. This type of behavior is what makes people not trust politicians. Keep your word.

Resident of Houghton since 2015

Real public hearing needed. A new transfer station does not belong in Houghton.

I find it tragic that the City of Kirkland governance has chosen not to protect and enhance the character and charm of Kirkland's unique asset - the downtown core.

I can’t believe that you would ignore the will of the people in a free and fair election, and try to eliminate the Houghton Community Council after 76% of the community voted to retain it.

KCC needs to listen to the voice of the PEOPLE and also honor the agreement made with the City of Houghton when they agreed to annex into the City of Kirkland.

I am disappointed in the Kirkland City Council for the way in which this question is being handled and hope they start listening rather than making decisions unilaterally.

Houghton residents deserve in the least a public hearing by the City Council before any further move to sunset a contract for a duly elected body.

Kirkland must stand by its original agreement with Houghton. A deal's a deal, no reneging!

Let the outcome of the voters stand and focus on more important things for the future of Kirkland.