As a former mayor who cares greatly about public safety, parks and open space and our transportation options such as sidewalks for getting around Redmond, I never thought I’d have to take a position that could be construed as being against them. What I am against is unwarranted and irresponsible tax increases: Proposition 1 and Proposition 2. Basics like public safety and transportation maintenance should be funded first. Why aren’t our substantial, increasing tax resources sufficient to cover such priorities? Because our current city leaders have been spending in the wrong ways, the wrong places.

This is an opinion that I can support with a good degree of expertise. During my 16-year tenure as mayor, 1992-2007, I formulated every budget with a commitment to the residents of Redmond and their top priorities first — being safe in their homes, walking around Redmond and enjoying our parks and open spaces. My first choice as mayor and now as a resident of Redmond is for those services and facilities to be paid as a top priority and from existing revenue.

While my knowledge of city operations and finances is extensive as a result of my many years in office, I have been challenged to decipher the latest information that average taxpayers are expected to base their decisions on. I find that it’s more bureaucratic rhetoric than financial substance with clarity. If you attended the two open houses on the levies as I did, you likely encountered lots of “spin” but no specifics about actual costs. It was like looking at a restaurant menu with lots of choices but no prices!

The mayor and the council should not put citizens’ top priorities of personal safety and cherished parks on tax-raising levies instead of funding these with existing and sufficient revenue sources. The choice to take these forward as ballot measures may be “strategic” for politicians, but it looks much more like “bait and switch” to me! Could it be that your elected officials have been spending your city dedicated taxpayer dollars on the wrong things and in ways inconsistent with most citizens’ priorities?

You be the judge. Given a chance, how would you have voted (had you been asked) on the $24 million already spent by the mayor and council on the downtown park and the $12.5 million approved just last December to develop the park for a total of $36.5 million? Why isn’t the new downtown development footing the bill for the amenity that it seems to benefit most by? And how can the city leaders find a total of $36.5 million for a downtown park but cannot find the $2.4 million they are now asking us for to develop two small neighborhood parks on land that was purchased more than nine years ago when I was in office and to update longtime Westside Park?

How would you have voted (had you been asked) on the city’s contributions of more than $800,000 to OneRedmond, an economic development organization that continues to create more gridlock, more demand on services and faster deterioration of our roads? Is that how residents prioritized having their money spent? If so, that is a complete turnaround in the eight years since I retired from office.

Although the city has done citizen surveys, the mayor and council fail to recognize and acknowledge the residents’ growing dissatisfaction with their performance with regard to impacts of rampant growth, everyday gridlock and communication without real engagement with residents. Perhaps they are not asking the right questions, or perhaps they are not listening.

Bonds and levies are mechanisms that should be used for the extra things we want, not basic safety, services and maintenance. If “money is tight,” it’s because of unwise spending choices not insufficient revenue.

It’s time for a wakeup call for the mayor and the council. Vote “no” on both Proposition 1 and Proposition 2! In fact, it’s time to think about who we elect to make the important decisions on our behalf.

Rosemarie Ives

Mayor of Redmond, 1992-2007