White Center Now: The blog about White Center

The impending Burien annexation of North Highline South got a TV-news spotlight this morning, with live reports from KING 5’s Tim Robinson. The video of his story is embedded above (KING 5 makes its video clips available for embedding on any website – just click the “share” symbol on their video window). Interviewees included Burien city manager Mike Martin.

While the next official City of Seattle public discussion of a possible southern North Highline annexation vote is not yet scheduled, the issue has again surfaced on a community-group agenda in West Seattle. Following up on their appearance before the Highland Park Action Committee two weeks ago, Seattle-annexation supporters Mark Ufkes and Peggy Weiss of the White Center Homeowners Association are scheduled to speak to the Delridge Neighborhoods District Council this Wednesday. The group — which includes reps from neighborhood groups and other key organizations around eastern West Seattle — meets at Youngstown Cultural Arts Center in North Delridge (4408 Delridge Way), 7 pm Wednesday.

We arrived at the North Highline Unincorporated Area Council meeting late after covering the West Seattle crash involving a police officer – and walked right into that standing-room-only crowd. First one we’ve seen in the year-plus we’ve been regularly covering NHUAC.

No surprise, of course, given that the prospect of Seattle annexing northern North Highline annexation figured prominently on the agenda. 20 people spoke in the public-comment section – and by one tally announced at the meeting, 14 were pro-Seattle, 6 were pro-Burien.

Among the pro-Seattle speakers was Mark Ufkes, who brought literature to answer critics’ questions about the White Center Homeowners Association that he leads – as well as fellow Seattle supporters filling most of the seats.

King County (and former Seattle City) Councilmember Jan Drago was on the agenda too, speaking about the South Park Bridge (more on that later) as well as about annexation – on which, she said, she’d been misquoted; she contends she told Seattle City Council President Richard Conlin she would not oppose annexation, not that she supported it.

But the guest who drew the most interest was Kenny Pittman, the point person in the Seattle mayor’s office regarding potential northern North Highline annexation. He had briefly canceled his appearance earlier in the week; NHUAC president Greg Duff says he convinced Pittman to come after all. He showed up at 8:50 pm – luckily the meeting was running past the projected agenda times, which had him on at 8:25 (the meeting didn’t end until 9:45). But he had answers for most of the questions lobbed at him.

One question: What about Evergreen Pool, which has now been closed for almost half a year? If Seattle annexes northern North Highline, Pittman says, the budget would be drawn up to include full operation of Evergreen just like any city of Seattle pool. (The nearest one is Southwest Pool, in West Seattle’s Westwood neighborhood.)

Speaking of budgets, though – that seems to be the sticking point that has the prospect of an annexation vote looking a little hazier than it did when we broke the story January 27th that Mayor Mike McGinn was moving forward.

The next Seattle City Council discussion of prospective annexation won’t happen until a financial analysis is done, Pittman said – and he didn’t offer a firm deadline for when that financial analysis is to be complete. It’s definitely meant the process is not moving along at the clip previously discussed, which at one point was going to have the council take it up next Monday – March 8th – for a vote indicating potential interest in, well, a (northern North Highline voters) vote. Instead, the issue is still in the jurisdiction of the Regional Sustainability and Development Committee that Conlin chairs, and its next meeting isn’t until March 16th. (You can watch for its agendas here.)

Meantime, Pittman promised there would be information-laden community meetings and other outreach before a vote, and that northern North Highline residents will know, for example, the potential differences in tax rates that they’d be deciding between.

As for other possible effects, here are toplines from what else Pittman said:
*The North Highline fire station would not close – at least in the first decade or so; he didn’t rule out a longterm strategy change if the city someday decided a different station in a different location would make more sense.
*Highline Public Schools would continue to run the northern North Highline schools they run now.
*King County Housing Authority would continue to manage Greenbridge – it would NOT become part of the Seattle Housing Authority.
*Sewer districts in the area would be “franchised”; Water District 20 would be contracted with, the other water district would be folded into Seattle Public Utilities, which would then employ its three staffers.

But, it seemed clear, this discussion would all be moot if the forthcoming financial analysis suggested it wouldn’t make sense for Seattle to pursue annexation. And – “I don’t know what the breaking point is,” Pittman acknowledged.

“Could we just not be annexed by anyone, ever?” one attendee asked at one point during the night.

No one had a set-in-stone answer for that, either.

Thursday night’s North Highline Unincorporated Area Council meeting has Kenny Pittman, annexation point person for the Seattle Mayor’s office, back on the agenda, according to NHUAC president Greg Duff. Meeting’s at the usual time and place – 7 pm Thursday, North Highline Fire District HQ, 1243 SW 112th (map). In other annexation-discussion news, West Seattle’s Southwest District Council is scheduled to hear from guests on the topic at next month’s meeting, 7 pm 4/7 at South Seattle Community College, according to an announcement at the end of the group’s gathering tonight.

Update: Kenny Pittman will be at the meeting after all.

From North Highline Unincorporated Area Council president Greg Duff, the official agenda for Thursday night’s meeting. He says Kenny Pittman, Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn‘s point person on the potential northern North Highline annexation vote, asked to postpone his appearance till next month:

7:00 p.m. Call to order
Flag salute
Roll call
Approval of agenda
Approval of minutes

7:05 p.m. Public announcements
7:10 p.m. Public comment – 3 minutes for individuals
5 minutes for groups

7:15 p.m. Update from Deputy Jeff Hancock, KCSO
Report from KCSO Gang Unit

7:45 p.m. Update from Mike Martin, Burien City Manager
7:55 p.m. Jan Drago, King County Council
8:25 p.m. Treasurers Report
8:30 p.m. Committee Reports

1. Governance

2. Arts and Parks

3. Public Safety

4. Housing and Human Services

5. Public Outreach

6. Transportation

7. Steve Cox Memorial

8:40 p.m. Old business
8:50 p.m. New Business

Published online late tonight: Seattle Times (WCN news partner) columnist Jerry Large‘s account of his meeting with Burien leaders, to talk about their interest in annexing northern North Highline, instead of leaving it for Seattle. The column ends by saying the Burien council will talk about it “next Monday”; we’re guessing that means Monday, 3/8, as this issue is not on the next agenda.

King County Council staff confirms that our area’s newly appointed County Councilmember Jan Drago, previously on the Seattle City Council, is going to be at this Thursday’s North Highline Unincorporated Area Council meeting. Though the agenda’s not online as of this writing, NHUAC leadership also had said that Kenny Pittman, point person for the Seattle annexation-election proposal on Mayor Mike McGinn‘s staff, would be there as well. NHUAC meets at 7 pm Thursday, North Highline Fire District HQ.

(Photo courtesy Dina Johnson)
From left, Seattle annexation supporters Peggy Weiss, Mark Ufkes, Don Malo at last night’s Highland Park Action Committee meeting in West Seattle. Toplines of their appearance are part of the summary we’ve just published at WSB.

The West Seattle neighborhood closest to White Center, Highland Park, has its community association meeting tomorrow night – Highland Park Action Committee, 7 pm at HP Improvement Club HQ. HPAC chair Dan Mullins sent around an agenda update and we noticed the annexation proposal is among the discussion items. Mullins says the scheduled guest is Mark Ufkes of the White Center Homeowners Association. On other topics, Seattle Parks and police reps are expected too.

(SATURDAY MORNING NOTE: The full video of this meeting is now online at Seattle Channel – annexation was the last item.)

Two updates on what City of Seattle leaders are saying today regarding potential annexation of the north section of North Highline:

MAYOR MIKE McGINN: I was invited to one of his periodic group “media brown-bag” question/answer sessions. One of the questions I asked was, after he had laid out various priorities for the city, where did annexation fit in? He gave several reasons for why he was proceeding with the process of seeking a vote – including wanting to help the county, which needs to stop serving unincorporated urban areas. He did say, though, that the city needed to study whether it really makes sense, including finance-wise, and might have to slow down the process at some point.

COUNCIL COMMITTEE: That dovetails with the conclusion of the Seattle City Council Regional Development and Sustainability briefing on the annexation proposal. The committee’s chair, Council President Richard Conlin, said they need to find out before proceeding further whether “this is something that is good for the people of Seattle and good for the people who live in that area.” Councilmember TIm Burgess said what he hadn’t seen yet was a plan regarding why annexation should be considered and how it would work. Bottom line, councilmembers say they’ve got questions and they have asked city staff for answers. One staffer also said that the timeline to proceed with a vote this year might be a little tighter than she’d said previously – she said the council might actually need to vote by mid-July on whether to seek a North Highline vote this November. Side note – during the committee meeting, Conlin said that now-County Councilmember Jan Drago had told him she supports proceeding with Seattle annexation. According to Full Tilt Ice Cream via Twitter, Drago was touring White Center today.

Reminder since Friday is only two days away – Friday is the next public discussion in Seattle city government of the proposal to annex the north section of North Highline. It’s a briefing before the Seattle City Council‘s Regional Development and Sustainability Committee, 2 pm at Seattle City Hall. Here’s the official agenda.

Jordan Royer – former Seattle City Council candidate and son of former Seattle mayor Charlie Royer — has an opinion essay at Crosscut today, titled “Why White Center and Seattle need each other.” See it here. Meantime, the next scheduled event in the process to determine whether there will be an annexation vote for White Center, Top Hat, Boulevard Park, etc., this year, is a week from tomorrow – the Seattle council’s Regional Development and Sustainability Committee meeting, 2 pm Friday, Feb. 19.

From a comment on our earlier report about last night’s North Highline Unincorporated Area Council meeting – NHUAC president Greg Duff says new County Councilmember Jan Drago has accepted the invitation to be at the next NHUAC meeting, 7 pm March 4, North Highline Fire District HQ. (Also to be attended, as we mentioned earlier, by Kenny Pittman, who’s the current point person for Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn on the proposal for the north section of North Highline to vote on Seattle annexation this November.)

From Thursday night’s meeting of the North Highline Unincorporated Area Council, held as usual in the North Highline Fire District headquarters on SW 112th – The meeting included discussions of both the impending Burien annexation of North Highline South (NHS), and the possible Seattle-annexation vote in what we suppose we can call North Highline North (NHN).

BURIEN ANNEXATION UPDATE: Burien City Manager Mike Martin took centerstage to provide updates to NHUAC – first, what’ll be happening before the scheduled April 1st date for NHS. During “the last three weeks of March,” Martin said, there’ll be a survey in the area, including door-to-door canvassing, to make sure residents know what’s ahead. City finance managers will be presenting an “annexation budget” soon. Burien leaders plan to “sit down with the community and talk zoning” soon, since obviously moving into a new jurisdiction means different standards and different jurisdictions. Martin also said Burien is pursuing money in the “second round of (federal) stimulus” to repave “most of the streets in the annexation area”; that could cost up to $5 million, he said, but it’s a “shovel-ready” project, so they are hopeful they’ll get the grant: “It would radically change many of the roads up here almost instantly.”

He also said the King County Sheriff’s Office is “doing some reorganization to meet the needs of the annexation,” but overall vowed to keep a promise made during the public forums that preceded the annexation vote – “This is going to be seamless … the level of service up here will be equal to or better than it was before,” with policing services likely featuring “the same people driving the same vehicles, just with new decals on them.”

Not so seamless, he said, is the transition for the parks, following the kerfuffle over Puget Sound Park, plus some transition issues, he said, involving the new county administration. And he noted that for the first time in years, Burien is hiring a fulltime city attorney. (Side note, Martin was not the only Burien leader present at the NHUAC meeting; City Councilmember Kathy Keene was there too.)

SEATTLE ANNEXATION? Martin spoke to this a bit before finishing his NHUAC briefing: “Just buckle up … this is going to be one of those times when rumors fly.” He alluded to being a bit mystified as to how this suddenly emerged on a Seattle front burner, with a move under way to have an election in the north section of North Highline as soon as this November, since his perception from previous conversations was that it “wasn’t really high on Mayor McGinn’s agenda. … But I think the (Seattle) council for whatever reason wants to take a shot at it, and we’ll see where it goes.”

Later in the meeting, NHUAC members discussed the new twist during the “new business” section — a more formal briefing/discussion is planned at the March 4 meeting, when the point person for the Seattle mayor’s office, Kenny Pittman, will attend the North Highline meeting. A considerable amount of semi-heated discussion centered over what NHUAC could officially say/do to remind the Seattle government that it’s on record as recommending the entire North Highline area become part of Burien; the contents of a letter reportedly sent to Seattle a few years back was the topic of intense discussion between members Russell Pritchard and Heidi Johnson, until some research could be finalized, and it was determined that it wouldn’t be a violation of NHUAC’s contract for them to remind Seattle that after community surveying and research, they had recommended the Burien alignment, so a letter to that effect will go out. (While Pritchard wanted to be sure the message was sent in the strongest possible terms, Johnson reminded her fellow councilmembers that they are required to stay away from whatever could be construed as political advocacy.)

ELECTIONS: It was noted along the way that the day the annexation is to take effect, April 1st, is a meeting day for NHUAC; part of its membership, including president Greg Duff, lives in the area to be annexed. The public vote for councilmembers will be coming up in the third week of May, and an official announcement will go out soon.

HICKS LAKE NAME CHANGE? Dick Thurnau from Friends of Hicks Lake briefed NHUAC about efforts to change the lake’s name back to its original name, Hicklins Lake, in honor of Leonard Hicklin and family, who settled in the area in the 1880s. They have a hearing before the Washington State Board on Geographic Names in Olympia on May 21st and Thurnau would like to receive e-mails supporting the name change – you can write to him at:

hdthurnau@juno.com

The sooner the better!

*A few more items were on last night’s agenda – we’ll write about those a bit later.

(1:56 pm note – will continue to add more as the day goes on – just now adding the PPT from today’s briefing)

11:35 AM: Lots of information in the briefing that just wrapped up before the Seattle City Council – first formal briefing since it was revealed last week (we broke the story at WSB) that Seattle’s new Mayor Mike McGinn wants White Center annexation to go to a vote this fall.

Despite what information was presented, it wasn’t enough for councilmembers including Council President Richard Conlin, who concluded by saying – “We need to have a LOT more information,” particularly regarding what the annexation would really cost Seattle. And concern also was voiced regarding whether enough information is getting to the White Center residents who would vote – mayoral adviser Kenny Pittman acknowledged he had not spoken to the North Highline Unincorporated Area Council yet, but had received “e-mail over the weekend” and was going to be on their agenda in March (though their February meeting hasn’t happened yet). The timeline is a fast one – it was explained that the Seattle council needs to vote by early March on expressing an interest in putting annexation to White Center voters, even though a final vote on asking the county to put it on the ballot would not happen until August. Between now and that March 8 vote, Council President Conlin’s Regional Development and Sustainability Committee will discuss the issue on February 19, then vote March 2nd on indicating an interest in a vote – again, no strings attached. The big gap between March and August, it was explained, is to pursue the rest of the process, including going before the Boundary Review Board.

ADDED 11:53 AM: A lot of data points from the meeting: Seattle leaders say White Center would get a higher level of police and fire services if annexed, and say that any existing King County Sheriff’s and North Highline Fire District employees who would stand to lose their jobs because of annexation would be first in line, depending on seniority and qualifications, for jobs with Seattle Police and Fire. As for sidewalks – that’s one big question, the capital needs of the potential annexation area.

Interesting note relating to a discussion that’s been ongoing in comments here: Seattle says they’ve been told by Burien that though the Memorandum of Understanding wasn’t officially finalized by Seattle council members, Burien intends to honor it, and not pursue annexation of White Center – if Seattle hasn’t done it by then – until after 2011, per the terms of the agreement. Also, existing card rooms in the area to be annexed would be allowed to continue to operate, though no new ones would be approved, and the revenues Seattle is counting on the area generating, it was noted, depend on those businesses, among others.

The annexation area would NOT include the South Park Bridge – that would remain an unincorporated small sliver under terms of a different city-county agreement sometime back that apparently says that once the SP Bridge is replaced, then the city would consider annexing the area.

And White Center schools would remain in the Highline Public Schools district, until and unless Highline and Seattle decided otherwise (with approval required by the Puget Sound Educational Service District).

The ideal scenario that Pittman described would include the annexation – if approved by White Center voters this fall – NOT taking effect till early 2012, so that the city budget process could proceed with detailed information on how to handle the transition.

ADDED 1:56 PM: After the briefing, we asked for a copy of the PowerPoint that Christa Valles from Council Central Staff had shown – just received it and converted it to PDF; you can see it here. During today’s briefing, Valles repeatedly said she was recommending that the mayor’s office commit more resources to the process – both to get information to the council, and to the people directly affected by the potential annexation.

When we broke the news Wednesday on partner site West Seattle Blog that Seattle’s new mayor wants White Center to vote on annexation this November, we got word that the Seattle City Council would get briefed during its morning meeting tomorrow (Monday 2/1). We now know from the online agenda that the discussion is set for 10:30 am. If you can’t be there, you can watch live online via the Seattle Channel.

Got first word in a comment on an earlier story – then got a copy of the letter the commenter mentioned, and we have just spoken with the adviser to Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn whose name is on the letter: Seattle wants White Center to vote on annexation this November. The process will start with senior adviser Kenny Pittman briefing the Seattle City Council next Monday. We’d heard from one councilmember, Jean Godden, just last week regarding the annexation issue. Pittman says of course other hearings and discussions will be involved – public meetings, the Boundary Review Board, etc. – but ideally, annexation of everything between the current Seattle city limits and the soon-to-be northernmost Burien border will be involved. Here’s the letter:

We have a message out to Burien City Manager Mike Martin for comment and will be contacting Seattle Council President Richard Conlin. While Burien, King County and former Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels had agreed last year to a “memorandum of understanding” giving Seattle what amounted to first right of refusal on this area, the Seattle Council (with only Godden dissenting) had declined to approve it. ADDED 3:30 PM: Speaking for Seattle Council President Conlin, Rob Gala says, “(He) is ready to put this before the council – we’ll start talking about it right away. He’s been an advocate of annexation for a while, and we’re ready to put it before the people for a vote.”

The topic of White Center annexation came up when we covered a brownbag lunch meeting with Seattle City Councilmember Jean Godden at the West Seattle Chamber of Commerce offices today. WS business lawyer Jerome O. Cohen (at left with Godden) opened the subject by nothing that the WS Chamber, where he leads the board of directors, is trying to build stronger ties with White Center. Godden described WC as a “lively area” and mentioned a recent visit to Salvadorean Bakery. She then recalled last year’s vote in which a majority of councilmembers voted not to approve the Memorandum of Understanding that had been worked out by then-Mayor Greg Nickels as well as other parties interested in the area, giving Seattle a certain period for first right of refusal on White Center annexation. “I don’t often brag about the 8-1 votes where I’m the 1 – and there are few,” she said, indicating that one, in which she supported approving the MOU, was different – she believes her fellow councilmembers were trying to send a message, but not the one that she thinks the rest of the world drew from what happened. She says it’s up to new Mayor Mike McGinn, as well as the people of White Center, to indicate they would like to talk about annexation, but notes the legislation is still in effect with the tax changes Seattle wanted and needed for annexation to be possible. One sticking point right now, she indicated, is the South Park Bridge – if Seattle annexed all the unincorporated area to its immediate south, the bridge would become the city’s $110 million problem. But federal help might be on the way, she noted. (She is vice chair of the council’s Transportation Committee, now chaired by West Seattle’s Tom Rasmussen.) Overall, she said, White Center “seems like something that ought to be part of the city” – provided its residents agree.

Given that White Center, Boulevard Park and surrounding areas are governed directly by King County, the choice of King County Executive should be taken very seriously.  The two candidates are Susan Hutchison and Dow Constantine.  Constantine is a fixture of West Seattle and White Center politics, so he is a known commodity.  Not so, Susan Hutchison, who hails from the East Side of the County.  Candidate Hutchison has run a “feel good” campaign, emphasizing her position to “bring people together.”  Her website’s issues page contains four short paragraphs, with the following priorities:

Jobs & the Economy:

Susan will help give small businesses the tools they need to create jobs…

Improve Transportation:

Susan will quickly implement simple changes to encourage transit ridership…

Budget Reform:

Susan will identify waste and restructure the budget to ensure our tax dollars are being spent effectively.

Protect Our Environment.

Susan will forge partnerships between environmental, labor and business groups as we work toward our common goal…

That’s it folks, Susan Hutchison’s platform for managing one of the biggest governmental entities in the country. In her defense, it might be said that she is offering as much detail as the two lightweights who are currently vying to be Seattle’s next mayor.  But then, that’s not much of a complement.

I will forthrightly state that I do not like Ms. Hutchison’s right-wing politics and that on that basis alone, she should be disqualified for the position.  Seattle and King County residents are a tolerant, liberal community.  To have a George Bush conservative speaking for us, just does not sit well.  But what about her competence?

Ms. Hutchison has never held public office.  She has never had to struggle with the political realities of governing a complex political entity whose ambits include not only roads and sewers but social services, neighborhoods and law enforcement.  It is difficult to see how her experience on the board of the Seattle Symphony prepared her, in the slightest way, for such a weighty role.

I often disagreed with former King County Executive, Ron Sims, but I found him thoughtful, intelligent and most importantly, quite knowledgeable on any issue relating to his role as Executive of the very large and expansive King County.  On the issue of affordable housing, we know nothing as to where Hutchison stands?  Does she support the Greenbridge and High Point housing/community developments?  If so, on what basis?  If not, why not?  Where does she stand on the issue of incorporation which raises the hackles of so many of White Center’s residents?

And what of her experience dealing with communities of color or economically distressed areas?  How does her “bringing people together” chirp really address the many challenges that White Center faces?  The fact is, nothing in her background begins to give her a serious understanding of White Center or similar communities.  There is no on-the-job training for such issues.  And Ms. Hutchison has given no indication that she even remotely cares about such issues.  In the end, Hutchison is what she was in her prior role as newscaster, a pretty face with a vacuous resume.

From the Seattle mayoral debate that’s under way right now at the Cinerama downtown – The first audience question was regarding annexation of the remainder of North Highline. Joe Mallahan says he’s not sure that Seattle is the best option for that area, adding that some in the area have told him they want to wait and see “how Burien does” with the rest of North Highline. Mike McGinn says it’s up to the people in that area to decide. We had asked the campaigns via e-mail to answer this question and had only received McGinn’s response, which to elaborate on that point, was that he does not plan to aggressively pursue it – if citizens in that area ask for Seattle to annex them, he’d see how it goes, but he said he looks forward to working with them however things turn out. (When the video stream of the debate is done, we’ll link back to it here, assuming it’s archived, and we’ll look for the time code so you can see their answers for yourself.) UPDATE: The question was asked by WCCDA’s Virgil Domaoan, according to the WCCDA website, which also notes the time code at which you’ll see the answer is around 26:30 – video link’s here.