Bremerton Car Tabs Discussion Recorded

We recorded the Kitsap Sun editorial board’s discussion with Bremerton council members on a proposed $20 car-tab fee. You can watch the video and the live blog and comments written during that discussion by clicking play on one of the features below:


Live blog:

– Angela

11 thoughts on “Bremerton Car Tabs Discussion Recorded

  1. Hey Guys…the live blog discussion posted here is not about tabs, but about the interview with Mr. Moseley regarding WSF. Can you fix this? I would really like to read the one about the tabs.


  2. Colleen, what were you looking for? Different questions? More explanation? The editorial that came from the meeting and our group’s discussion should be up Sunday.

  3. Hi David,

    The conversation was very disjointed. Certain aspects of the proposed fee were only brushed upon and never really explained or expanded upon. Sharon while well intentioned with her questions had the conversation all over the map.

    I found Mr. Woffords reference and attempted tie in to the reduction in Fire Department response times due to road conditions to be quite a stretch. Reductions or lack of increases in department staffing due to budgetary constraints has a much greater impact when it comes to response times.

    The comments regarding the savings due to a pool closure is another distractionary scare tactic to try to sway voters into voting for the tab fee and was not really necessary to this conversation.

    Personally, I am for the car tab fee as long as the funds are used directly for what they are intended…roads. Sidewalks, not so much. I look at it as a user fee. The users are Bremerton residents who own vehicles. While I would appreciate new, safer and or better conditioned sidewalks, a specific tax on vehicles should not be paying for them.

  4. Also, if I did not have to spend so much time babysitting the Bremerton School Board, I would defiantly increase my attendance at City Council meetings…but alas…I am torn. Education IN the school is more of a priority to me right now than the sidewalks OUTSIDE them.

  5. Steve Gardner is working on a more in-depth look at the tab fee for the paper, possibly for this weekend, so hopefully he’s able to get into some of those specifics. As far as responding to the reader questions during those meetings, that’s something we’re still figuring out. It’s enough to do the interview with the councilmembers without following the live chat. We’ll work on it.

    On your second point (and I think you mean ‘definitely’ attend those meetings, though you may act defiantly while there), it’s a credit to you for being involved and having those priorities. It is a time squeeze to watch every meeting, even our reporters can’t get to every one of them.

  6. Please ask the City Council if they raise car tabs $20 this year and the state also raises car tabs next year to pay for the ferry system, do they think this is fair to the Citizens of Bremerton? I would love to hear Mr. Wofford comments on this.

  7. David, thanks for asking and thanks for responding. It is nice to hear that Gardner has had a good work reason for being so neglectful of us over here at the Bremerton Beat. Promises of Port Orchard humor that still has not come to fruition……sigh…..If he keeps it up I will personally nominate his name for the next On Notice Board. (laugh)

  8. “The comments regarding the savings due to a pool closure is another distractionary scare tactic to try to sway voters into voting for the tab fee and was not really necessary to this conversation.”

    We can add ‘Mind Reader’ to your list.
    Colleen…Try to contain your chatty …”sigh’ … It doesn’t add to the conversation and gets tiresome, well intentioned as you are.
    Sharon O’Hara

  9. Colleen,
    You are correct in your assertion that road condition being a delay in emergency response is a distraction. Give us some facts Mr Woffard, where, when. Of course the Fire Chief or Police Chief will make a command performance when called upon. Speed humps cause a huge delay in emergency service response, are we going to remove them first? If the council had done their job when the budget was originally being approved and used other available funding like a percentage of REET money to maintain roads instead of pet projects like the 5 million dollar park on top of the funnel, and the endless bucket of the boardwalk we cannot afford at this time, they would have some juice in this proposal. As devised this is a very regressive tax. If overlayed roadway surfaces increase property value why not propose a property tax dedicated to roadways? Perhaps because the out of town “investors” would refuse to support it. If construction and permitting is dramatically dropped off would not a decrease to Community Development Dept and Engineering be a logical point to cut?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Before you post, please complete the prompt below.

Please enter the word MILK here: