LETTER: ‘Some Facts The Berk Report Failed To Mention About Annexing…’

Print This Post  Email This Post

Some Facts the Berk Report failed to mention about annexing AreaY/White Center-Part 1:

While the Burien City Manager and the media have quoted the Berk Report as stating that the Annexation of Area Y/White Center would be revenue neutral or even make some money for the City of Burien, there is no evidence to support that these claims are true for the long term future of Burien. Additionally, there are some missing facts and missing actual costs from the Berk Report that suggest their analysis is incomplete and flawed. It is strange that Berk never bothered to request information from King County that breaks out the actual costs that were needed to run White Center for the years 2009, 2010. (If you are buying a house and you want to know how much it costs to heat it, you don’t guess, you ask the owner how much he pays in heating bills.)

The following facts are missing from the Berk Report and warrant serious consideration;

  1. White Center has more housing units per 1000 citizens than Burien but generates significantly less real estate tax revenues. The housing values for White Center are less than Burien’s and a greater number of units pay little to no taxes as compared to Burien.
  2. White Center generates 50% less taxable retail sales revenues per citizen than Burien does. Therefore, White Center will contribute significantly less to the sales tax revenues of the city than the city currently takes in.
  3. As reported in 2009, the average and median family incomes are significantly lower in White Center than in the base City of Burien. These families have greater economic needs and have less money to spend in the city.
  4. White Center has 3 times as many children living with unemployed parents than the base City of Burien has. This suggests that there are 3 times as many human services needs in White Center-food, clothing, housing, medical-than in the base City of Burien(the city before the annexation of Area X). In 2000, 22% of all of the households in White Center received economic or medical assistance from the Department of Social and Health Services and required translators in 25 different languages. Since the onset of the Recession in 2007, the number of families needing service has significantly increased.
  5. White Center has approximately twice as many people who did not graduate from high school than the base city of Burien. This means that in hard economic times they will have more difficulty securing employment at or above the minimum wage. Many of the families in White Center are new immigrants to the U.S.A. and cannot be immediately employed. Additionally, the area has a high percentage of undocumented people living in it.
  6. The proportion of the population living below poverty level is larger in White Center than in Des Monies, Sea Tac, Normandy Park, or Burien/Boulevard Park. It is 4.5% greater than Burien/Boulevard Park.
  7. White Center has a higher crime rate than Burien for thefts, domestic violence, family and juvenile issues, gang related activities, illegal use of controlled substances/drugs and drunkenness. It is hard to compare the statistics for White Center vs. Burien because the King County Sheriff’s report does not display the data in the same way for both areas. However, for 2009-2010, when Burien annexed Area X/ Boulevard Park, crime in Burien increased significantly in these areas: Domestic Violence 31.8%, Gang Activity 62.2%, Car Theft 65.8%, Forcible Rape 205.9%, Residential Burglary 70.3%, Adult Charges/arrest 37%. The basis of population, White Center Area and Boulevard Park areas have always had a higher crime rate than the City of Burien prior to annexation. This means that there are greater police service and legal costs to keep these areas safe for citizens and their property.

Therefore White Center will never be paying or carrying its own weight in taxes to fund the City of Burien. The area will always need more resources than monies/revenues it contributes to the cost of running the city. For this reason, both Ron Sims and Dow Constantine have tried to get rid of White Center. They claim that the whole of King County cannot afford to adequately support the Area Y/White Center. The Berk Report used the City of Burien’s estimates of what the City Manager believes it will take to fund services in White Center. Some of these numbers are so far off projected amounts from the Seattle Study and the actual costs of King County that it makes one wonder how Berk could have accepted them with a straight face and put them into their report. As an example, Seattle projected-on the low end-that Human Services for White Center would cost $1.7 million ongoing and $88,000 one-time start fee. And the needs mentioned in the previous facts support that projected cost. Mike Martin/Burien City Manager claims that the Human Services for White Center can be handled for $100,000 per year. Clearly someone missed some important facts in making up that dollar amount. Human Services is not like Burien’s mismanaged, underfunded Animal Control. We cannot ignore human needs or plan to get rid of the people in three days. This is just one example of projected costs by the City of Burien that makes no sense in the Berk Report.

All of the Hocus Pocus talk about sales tax credits for 10 years is just funny money numbers because Burien will have gained no long term extra revenues from the annexation-only extra debt.. And it will have an area of the city that cannot pay its own way. It is equivalent to a kid borrowing his allowance in advance to buy a car on credit that he will never be able to afford the monthly credit payments, insurance and maintenance costs on. By the end of 2023, the City of Burien will be -23% in the hole/in the red annually in its budget. Currently, Burien spends twice as much as it takes in-in revenues. This means that if it cost $30 million to run the city in 2023, the city will be $7million short (-23%) of what it needs. However if Burien annexes White Center, it will be actually be $53 million short of what it needs, because there is a minimum of $46 million dollars–a low end estimate-in infrastructure repairs that Burien will never be able to pay for plus the additional $7 million it cannot come up with from its revenues. I would hardly call this a revenue neutral situation as a result of annexing Area Y/White Center. It is important to note that the projected cost for infrastructure repair to White Center varies from $46 million to $77 million-no one is sure of what it will be.

The Berk Report failed to mention this scenario when it stated that annexing White Center would be a revenue neutral situation. However by 2023, Mr. Martin/Burien City Manager will have retired and moved away but those of us left living in the City of Burien will be left with this Black Hole-sucking deficit caused by the annexation of AreaY/White Center. The citizens of Burien and White Center deserve better than what is being offered to them by Mike Martin/Burien and King County.

– C. Edgar

Data sources:

  • 2011 Library Service Area Analysis-King County
  • Seattle-2011 report
  • King County Sheriff’s Office-2009-2010 crime statistics
  • Berk Report, 2011

[Have something you’d like to share with our Readers? Please send us your Letter to the Editor via email. Include your full name, and, pending our review, we’ll most likely publish it.]

Print This Post  Email This Post


15 Responses to “LETTER: ‘Some Facts The Berk Report Failed To Mention About Annexing…’”
  1. Burienite says:


    I suspect if Ms. Edgar had it her way, there would be a “City of Lake Burien.”

    While I don’t completely agree with moving forward with another annexation, I grow weary of her rants. Just seems like a tired, grumpy old lady…

  2. Get a clue burien city council says:

    Yeah when someone provides a thoughtful commentary backed up by actual numbers it definitely can feel like a rant.

  3. Thom Grey says:

    Yawn, Yawn… Dude Burienite,
    Your approach seems to be to ignore the details of the blog posting/editorial and attack the messenger. So Duh Burienite, why didn’t you give us some facts for why you are not in favor of annexation-in your blog rant–in more enteraining manner…..

  4. NumbersDance says:

    Actual numbers were present, it’s true, but the line “Therefore White Center will never be paying or carrying its own weight in taxes to fund the City of Burien” still seems like quite a leap to make. I definitely hear what Burienoid is saying – sounds like a hefty dose of NIMBY and nothing more.

  5. Bonnie Moormeier says:

    C. Edgar makes some excellent points. I hope the Burien City Council will do its homework and look at all the facts before rushing into a decision. Many believe it is too soon to take on another annexation without knowing the full impact of North Highline. There is no reason to rush – Seattle isn’t interested and White Center isn’t going anywhere. I grew up in White Center and live in nearby Shorewood and I can tell you firsthand that there are many issues that need to be addressed before making such an important decision. First and foremost should be what is in the best interests of the current Burien residents – we are the constituents that our elected representatives should be listening too. As residents, we need to communicate in a respectful, reasonable and intelligent manner and they (our council members) need to listen. There are good reasons we choose to live in Burien vs. White Center. That is what Ms. Edgar has done, so let’s continue the dialogue.

    • Eaton B. Verz says:

      Bonnie you are absolutely right. The problem is that this is already a done deal in the councils eyes. They blindly follow the path Mr. Martin leads them down. The best thing we can do is vote the present council out. Two positions are open this election and it’s up to us to send a message, and if those people don’t listen to the citizens, blow them out too. We just gotta exercise our right to vote!

  6. citezens for inpeaching mike martin says:

    Aren`t half the people in White center living on welfare anyways?

  7. Btowner says:

    And …………why does Seattle want to dump White Center???? I think Edgar covers all the
    points that our city council has conveniently or lazily left out….which is it? Why do some city council members want this so bad? Which council members are against and for? Makes me wonder, which silver tongued serpent, is pitching this nice shiny nickle to the city council. I think Mr.Martin is fixed on the nickle. Is the council listening to the serpent or its people? To the city council I say this “Burien has come a long way in its short time as a city… please do not allow Seattle to set Burien back 20+yrs”. Remeber what it was like 20 years ago if you were here. Remember the neglect we recieved from Seattle and King County. Its pretty evident why White Center is in its present state. Seattle and King County need to know that Burien is not its dumping ground. Which city council members will deliver this message?

  8. Eaton B. Verz says:

    Which city council members will deliver this message?

    Well, from what I have personally heard they are all for it except Lucy K. and jack Block and I just have not heard which way they are leaning. Time for a change!

  9. Tired of same stuff says:

    This arguement has been going on for 4 years plus. All of the things mentioned have been addressed in the past. Crime numbers cited don’t match up to the facts. The crime rates are about the same but more property crime in Burien and more violent crime in White Center, The the Crime rate JUMPS when you go over to the Seattle side.

    Mr Martin is not driving this, his boss THE CITY COUNCIL IS….

    The main issue is the loss of political power by Lake Burien, Maplewild and Seahurst groups

  10. Tired of same stuff says:

    Actually most bosses would let you keep your job, unless you drive for living.

Share Your Opinion

By participating in our online comment system, you are agreeing to abide by the terms of our comment policy.

...and oh, if you want a picture to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!