Lake Forest Park council debates limited, six‑year property tax levy to shore up public safety and public works

Deputy Mayor Furutani presented a proposal on May 19 for a six‑year, time‑limited property tax levy intended to slow the city’s projected erosion of its general fund balance and cover rising public safety and public works costs.

"If you do that calculation, it's a fairly straightforward calculation...it would end up, generating about 1 and a half little over 1 and a half million dollars in revenue yearly," Deputy Mayor Furutani said, outlining a sample 32¢ per $1,000 levy rate and saying the levy would be indexed to inflation after the initial increase.

Why it matters: City staff and council members said growth in 911 dispatch, jail costs, insurance, prosecutor/public defender fees, training and the cost of recruiting and retaining police officers are primary drivers of the structural gap in the general fund. The levy concept is intended to fund three vacant police officer positions and seasonal parks maintenance among other core services.

Council reaction and requests: Councilmembers generally agreed a financing solution is needed but differed on timing and messaging. Councilmember Riddle and others asked staff for a clear household cost example; Finance Director Lindsey Vaughn and City Administrator Hill were asked to provide what the levy would translate to for typical homes and to compute how long current unallocated contingency would sustain operations if the city delayed a levy.

Councilmember Riddle asked for household impact calculations; a subsequent calculation presented by a councilmember during the meeting estimated a $320 annual increase for a $1,000,000 home at the 32¢ rate. Finance Director Lindsey Vaughn is preparing a more precise analysis, including a projection of when the city's fund balance would hit the minimum reserve under current trends.

Council members proposed alternatives and considerations: suggestions included narrowing a potential levy strictly to public safety items, structuring a ramp‑up so the levy phases in while preserving some unallocated contingency, or postponing a levy until more detailed outreach and data are available. Mayor French and several councilmembers emphasized that reserves exist for emergencies but that long‑term pressures are unlikely to abate.

Public comments before the discussion reflected fiscal concern: Alan Keyes told council members they have a "dual responsibility" to city government and residents and urged caution about asking voters for a tax increase amid broader economic uncertainty. Jack Tonkin urged sharper internal cuts — suggesting reductions in consultant spending — as another way to find savings.

Next steps and staff direction: The council did not vote on a levy. Staff were directed to develop more detailed materials for public engagement, including: a household cost table for sample home values, a projection showing when reserves/unallocated contingency would be exhausted at current spending trajectories, and options that would limit levy revenues to specified categories (for example, public safety only). Deputy Mayor Furutani said she will refine the one‑page summary and staff will plan community outreach before any ballot measure decision.

The Committee of the Whole scheduled further deliberations and asked Finance Director Vaughn to return with the requested fiscal projections and household impacts.