Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Levy request is a referendum on PenMet

The PenMet vote is NOT about whether we value our parks. Instead, it is a referendum on how this public agency makes decisions and spends our tax dollars. A NO vote does not take away PenMet’s $8+ million budget — it only stops a 30% increase. The PenMet park I live next to is part of my daily life. Prior to 2021, I would have supported park measures, but observing how PenMet functions has raised serious concerns.

In 2021, PenMet terminated the Park Host program at the neighborhood park without explanation. Residents pleaded for PenMet to reconsider. A petition of 500+ signatures was ignored. Since then, paid employees are opening and closing the park, often overtime, at an estimated cost of $60,000 yearly. The expense of replacing a low-cost program providing resident supervision was questioned from the beginning, but PenMet opted to have taxpayers ‘absorb’ the cost. Now, in these challenging economic times, PenMet is asking for 30% more — in effect a taxpayer bailout for its own irresponsible spending and management decisions.

As a public agency, PenMet deserves scrutiny for its unhealthy personnel management and excessive turnover. Departing employees have been compelled to sign separation agreements with non-disclosure statements (why would a public agency require an NDA?) at public expense. Turnover causes PenMet’s high unemployment tax rate, which our taxes pay. In 2020 PenMet had one Executive Director at a yearly salary of roughly $110,000. Since then, salary for the current Executive Director has increased to almost $200,000, while additional positions at executive-level salaries have been added — for the same properties. Over the same period, maintenance workers (average salary $30,000) have been understaffed and were so unhappy that they unanimously voted to unionize. PenMet is top-heavy in managerial positions and compensation, while maintenance personnel who actually serve park patrons are low priority.

Deferred maintenance of existing properties is prevalent, to the tune of $6 million, but this didn’t just happen to PenMet beyond their control — they created it with their priorities.  Don’t judge PenMet based on Sehmel Park — look at other district properties and note the moss on roofs, shoddy repair of facilities, etc. Note how Peninsula Gardens, purchased in 2012, has languished from a once lovely place to its current state. Yet PenMet still doesn’t even have a plan for Pen Gardens, and in the meantime, revenue from this prime parcel is gone. While neglecting current properties, PenMet instead seeks additional projects, paying excessive planning and consultant fees accordingly. A responsible agency would take first take care of what they already own.

PenMet’s state financial audit (for 2019 and 2020) showed irregularities, with high six-figure errors in several categories. The Community Recreation Center has diverted ~ $4 million from the 2023 general fund to construction, despite supposedly being funded by bonds. Badly delayed, it is now embroiled in a contract dispute — just in Phase 1!  Legal costs paid by PenMet consistently exceed budget amounts, for multiple employee and other avoidable issues created by poor management. Ultimately, taxpayers foot the bill.

Craig McLaughlin has documented concerns about PenMet’s finances and their lack of public transparency.  Know that this is NOT a renewal of the levy itself — if this levy lid lift fails, PenMet’s income is slightly higher in 2024 than in 2023.  Yet, even with the same income and probable additional revenues, PenMet claims that it will be unable to continue existing levels of service? This measure increases your taxes 30% immediately in 2024 — and likely accumulates to 70% + by 2029. PenMet income has far outpaced household income in the last 5 years, a trend that will continue with this measure.  As many families struggle to pay just for gas and groceries, how can PenMet justify receiving 30% more?

This levy lid lift measure is an important opportunity to hold PenMet accountable. If any of these issues give you doubt or cause for concern, know that this election is the only opportunity you will have to get the PenMet’s attention until the next (assumed) levy lid lift measure in 2029. Worse yet, each PenMet board member is elected to a six year term, so they have very little incentive to be accountable.

This is the tip of the iceberg — the more that you learn about PenMet’s management, the more concerned you will be.  A No vote tells PenMet to manage taxpayer resources responsibly and get its house in order.  A Yes vote sends the message that these concerns go un-noticed and unchallenged by constituents — putting the public at great risk for future mismanagement.

Peggy Power

Fox Island

Gig Harbor Now accepts signed letters to the editor of up to about 800 words. Submit them on the Contact form by selecting “Letter to the Editor” from the Purpose dropdown.