Clyde Hill News: Resident vote on property tax hike possible this November
Activist organization files claim of “significant compliance issues” against city’s comprehensive plan
The city council will consider when a significant city property tax levy recommendation from Mayor Steve Friedman and his administration will go on the ballot in front of voters.
According to a document from two council members and the city administrator included in the agenda for the Tuesday, May 13th, city council meeting:
“Asking the voters directly for their opinion is the only way to conclusively determine if raising taxes is a viable option for solving the City’s budget challenges.” (link)
More details and context on the proposed tax increase, below, along with news of a legal filing against the city related to its Comprehensive Plan, as well as other items of potential interest to residents.
Also, Happy Mother’s Day!
Disclaimer: while I am a council member on the Clyde Hill City Council, I write this newsletter in my capacity as an individual resident. Any opinions expressed are my own and not necessarily the position of the city. City information and references here are from public sources. I welcome email responses — and if the topic is about city business I will respond from my city email account.
Getting specific on asking residents for more money
More clarity on the timing and details of a key administration proposal for addressing the gap between Clyde Hill’s revenues and expenditures may emerge from a discussion at Tuesday night’s city council meeting:
The Mayor and the City Administration have recommended asking voters to approve a Levy Lid Lift [property tax increase in excess of 1%] to solve the long-term financial sustainability needs of our City. The timing of this request has not been answered. Does Council support asking voters to approve a levy lid lift, and if so, what is Council consensus on timing? (link)
The proposal discussed at previous public meetings involves an approximately 50% increase in the city’s property tax levy on Clyde Hill residents.
A city may ask its voters to authorize a property tax increase larger than the 1% limit imposed by state law. “Levy lid lift” refers to “lifting” the 1% “lid” on increases to the property tax levy. (link)
Clyde Hill voters would need to approve this proposed increase. In order to convince residents, the city “needs a sales pitch,” according to City Administrator Dean Rohla (link).
The document in the agenda packet notes that
During a recent public comment, a resident expressed preference for putting a proposal on the ballot sooner rather than later.
Context
Clyde Hill’s operating expenditures have exceeded its operating revenues since 2020 (setting aside an American Rescue Plan Act grant for ~$1m):
The administration’s point of view is that Clyde Hill has a revenue problem. It has recommended a “levy lid lift” and a new stormwater fee and declined to offer material spending cuts or different ways of doing business to address the gap. (link)
Other tax increases, fees ahead
King County residents will vote on three separate ballot measures this year that, if enacted, would increase most Clyde Hill residents’ property tax bills by at least $1,500 a year. More details on these measures in this previous newsletter: link.
In addition to these county measures, city staff have indicated they will ask the council to approve a new stormwater fee on residents by July or August. If approved, residents’ property tax bills would increase even more. Key details and specifics — including the final amount and the plan to communicate to residents — are still under development; preliminary plans shown at a previous city council meeting (link) estimated the additional cost to each household to be at least $600.
FutureWise files complaint
An activist organization has claimed that Clyde Hill’s 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update has “significant compliance issues” (link) in a “Petition for Review” it filed with the state’s Growth Management Hearing Board.
FutureWise is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that actively engages in political lobbying activities related to its goals for land use and housing issues (link). It recently resolved a case with the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission (link) concerning a delayed lobbying report by paying a fine. FutureWise considers “passing Middle Housing to allow more homes in all neighborhoods (HB 1110)” among its “recent victories.” (link)
In a post on its website about its petition, FutureWise criticizes Clyde Hill’s comprehensive plan, alleging that Clyde Hill’s plan does not comply with the state’s Growth Management Act. For example, it claims (link) that
The city has not created adequate capacity for housing [that is] affordable to families earning below 50% of area median income
And that Clyde Hill’s plan
maintains a “primarily single-family” vision that conflicts with housing diversity requirements.
Also on the agenda
The full agenda for the meeting is available here: link.
Codifying the city’s flag policy
In a move for transparency, the council will consider “an ordinance to formalize the existing policy which specifies the allowable flags to be flown at City Hall.” (link)
The possible action reflects resident feedback to the city in 2023 about the Pride Flag flying in front of City Hall.
Public hearings
The city will hold a public hearing ahead of considering a change to the city’s 1999 code related to intersection safety and sightlines
in order to be compliant with current regulations and guidelines… [The change] is particularly relevant given the 2016 Washington State Supreme Court decision, Wuthrich v King County, which states that a municipality has a duty to take reasonable steps to address impacts of roadside vegetation on intersection sightlines and traffic safety. (link)
More background on the topic is available in a previous newsletter here: link.
The city will also hold a public hearing on a proposed “Middle Housing, ADUs, & Unit Lot Subdivision Ordinance.”
Clyde Hill must update its development regulations to comply with the requirements of [state] legislation by June 30, 2025. Should the City not adopt required code changes by that date, state model ordinances will supersede non-compliant local code requirements. (link)
Based on the memo from city staff, it appears the council will not vote on the draft ordinance.
Thank you for reading! Please feel free to share this newsletter with your friends and neighbors. If you are not already subscribed, signing up is both easy and free.
Dean Hachamovitch