Kenmore Undressed

Patrick O’Brien Speaks Out – No Voter Approval for the New Kenmore City Hall

Kenmore City Hall – O’Brien vs Van Ness

I have asked the Kenmore City Council candidates for positions #2 and #6 to comment here on KenmoreUndressed regarding their campaigns, philosophies and plans for the future of our city. I was hoping that Dianne Brennan, Laurie Sperry, Patrick O’Brien or Allan Van Ness would respond. I have also tried to contact Bob Hensel (who is running unopposed). Only one candidate, Patrick O’Brien has responded.

At the recent Kenmore City Council Candidate Forum, some sparks flew between Patrick and his opponent, Allan Van Ness, the sitting council member. Unfortunately, that particular venue did not allow some important issues to be debated very deeply by the candidates. One of the most contentious issues raised was that of the new Kenmore City Hall. Patrick O’Brien reached out to me after the forum to ask if I would post a piece that would explain his position regarding the handling of the new city hall. I agreed.

What follows is a statement from Patrick in response to Allan Van Ness’s statements on his website and at the recent forum regarding the city hall:

Why I’m running

After seeing our City Counsel blunder into a string of mistakes that’s costing us millions, people asked me to run again. The majority of the counsel is in need of removal due to their lack of openness, rampant spending, and non-public process. To best serve the Public of Kenmore the City Counsel must ask the citizens of Kenmore what they think about major projects, not with an open house but with a ballot! Multi million dollar issues (like New City Hall) certainly need to be stopped or moved forward based on the results of a public vote. Time was not the issue for voting as they have had years to ask you for a vote on this issue. My opponent Allan Van Ness promised to get the voter’s approval. He did not. He said the sale of the Kenmore Village property would pay for City Hal. It did not.

About Kenmore City Hall

The following statement is taken from Allan’s campaign website:

Throughout the years of planning I was opposed to the City Hall project due to its size, cost and the uncertainty of the economy and the use of long term financing. I feel the size is still bigger than we need, but now that construction costs have been reduced from $15 million down to $8 million, financially it makes sense to build now rather than to wait. The City has been saving for eleven years for this purpose. These savings plus the funds that will be available from the sale of the Kenmore Village property will be more than sufficient to cover the costs.

Timing: The City’s investment accounts are currently earning very low interest. The cost of construction will never be better. It makes sense to invest in real estate now rather than later. If we need to borrow until the downtown property closes, the interest rate is under 4%.

The significant public projects currently underway or planned in the near future (522 improvements, City Hall, Fire Station and Library) tell the retail, housing and construction industries that Kenmore is where they should be investing as well. Yes, the time is right.

Patrick O’Brien’s Response:

The new City Hall is emblematic of the current City Council’s pattern of not asking for voter approval before committing to a multi-million project. A new City Hall is not our top priority and, yet, the Council operates as if the City had no financial risk in building it. To this day, I don’t believe the Counsel knows if the public would have approved the new Hall. Even my opponent indicated that he originally opposed the project.

Regarding the cost of the new City Hall: During a recent public debate at the Uplake Community Center, my opponent used a figure of $8 million dollars for this project. If it were only true. The $8 million dollar figure does NOT include the costs of land acquisition, consultants, architecture, furnishings, maintenance or carrying costs on borrowed money. A figure of $17.5 million would be more accurate in spite of the claims that construction and borrowing costs are attractive. In addition, why did the City Council feel that using Kenmore’s cash reserves for this project was fiscally responsible? Instead of acting frugally and strategically by reducing city staff and maintaining the present location, the City of Kenmore is building a City Hall that is neither fiscally responsible or, at this time, necessary. We could have sold the Kenmore Village three years ago.

DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed in this post are those of the candidates and do not represent this author’s positions or opinions.

Share