NHUAC Holding Forum on Burien Annexation Thursday Night


Print This Post  Email This Post

The North Highline Unincorporated Area Council will be holding a forum on Burien’s proposed Annexation on Thursday, Oct. 4 starting at 7 p.m. at the North Highline Fire Station (1243 112th Street SW).

Here’s more from the NHUAC website:

Interested in the facts about the North Highline Annexation – then mark your calendars for Thursday, October 4, at 7 pm, and join us for an Annexation Information Forum at the North Highline Fire Station (1243 112th Street, SW).

The North Highline Unincorporated Area Council is pleased to host this event with Washington State, King County, and Burien City Representatives, who will be on hand to provide information, and answer your questions about this important issue that will be on the November 6 ballot.

We look forward to seeing you there.

For a copy of the flyer click here.

Print This Post  Email This Post

Comments

16 Responses to “NHUAC Holding Forum on Burien Annexation Thursday Night”
  1. John Poitras says:

    Lets see.. The NHUAC which is fervently pro-annexation is running a forum.. Representatives from King County who want to dump area Y are going to be there pushing annexation. How impartial is it going to be, or is it likely to be heavily weighted to one side?
    You decide.

    Considering the NHUAC acting in tandem with City Manager Mike Martin tried to ramrod the vote thru in August when there would be minimal turnout, they appear to have embraced democracy more fully but lets face it , the reality is the residents of area Y can thank the Independent White Center folks for forcing the city to move the planned vote to November despite heavy resistance from the NHUAC and city manager Mike Martin.

    A couple more things..

    The # scare tactic being used by the pro-annexation folks is that if you don’t vote to annex to Burien then since King County does not want you you will be absorbed by Seattle without a vote… This claim is PATENTLY FALSE although the County who really wants to get rid of the liablity of Area Y will do everything but tell you that scenario is an absolute certainty. However there is no statue in the land management act that allows for this to occur and there is a provision that if King County acts preemptively it is responsible for any loss in service and I doubt very much they would want that liability.

    The pro-annexation side also uses the theory that going with Burien will give them more control over what happens in Burien. .As a long time Burien resident I can categorically state that is false. In fact UNLIKE Seattle or many other cities there is no mayor in Burien it is run by the City Manager. The “Mayor”s job so to speak is spread among 7 council members and the current majority of 4 have been acting as a rubber stamp for the city manager for years. He does what he wants and only if pressed goes to his cronies on the council to get approval after the fact. If you think that is representative government then think again, because it isn’t!

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. Joey Martinez says:

    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=35.13.470
    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=35.13.480
    These ones talks about how the County can initiate the annexation process with an annexing city. It’s called “Annexation by Interlocal agreement”.

    What it means is that King County and Seattle COULD, in theory, annex North Highline to Seattle without a vote.

    Joey Martinez

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • John Poitras says:

      Joey These inter local AGREEMENTS are exactly that are not meant to suborn democracy.

      Do you know what the legal ramifications of this statement in the statute means>>>

      ” the designation or designations shall receive full consideration before a city or county may initiate the annexation process”

      That full consideration includes for one>>1) The legislative body of any county planning under chapter 36.70A RCW and subject to the requirements of RCW 36.70A.215 may initiate an annexation process with the legislative body of any other cities or towns that are contiguous to the territory proposed for annexation.

      Essentially what this means is the Seattle would have to AGREE to taking on Area Y and since they have already said they cannot afford it at this time that is a mute point. So no way would the county be able to foist Area Y off on Seattle without their city council agreeing to it and they won’t so no cigar there Joey.

      Further safeguards against this is that the residents of area Y can stop any forced annexation by referendum >>>
      (5) The annexation ordinances provided for in RCW 35.13.470(4) and subsection (4) of this section are subject to referendum for forty-five days after passage. Upon the filing of a timely and sufficient referendum petition with the legislative body, signed by registered voters in number equal to not less than fifteen percent of the votes cast in the last general state election in the area to be annexed, the question of annexation shall be submitted to the voters of the area in a general election if one is to be held within ninety days or at a special election called for that purpose according to RCW 29A.04.330. Notice of the election shall be given as provided in RCW 35.13.080 and the election shall be conducted as provided in the general election law. The annexation shall be deemed approved by the voters unless a majority of the votes cast on the proposition are in opposition thereto.

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. Bob price says:

    On Looker
    In reading John Poitras’s comments he continues to state that anything that goes against his thinking is fixed. He makes a great Monday morning quarterback for everything that happens that don’t meet his approval. Every voter that is registered to vote on this issue should be interested and be able to get information on it from some place and this is why these meetings are held. At no time have I heard anyone tell people how to vote at these meetings only that they should seek information to make a choice on the vote. Mr Poitras would be glad to suppress any information on these things. Its a good thing hes not in a position to control information meetings because if he was we would still be in the horse and buggy times. good Luck. And yes the country is going to try and remove the unicoporated areas shortly and they and the State could just do it if they need to. Wake up.

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • John Poitras says:

      Bob you remind me of Bush.. All hat and no cattle.. Do you live in a fact free zone where anyone that agrees with you is right and anyone that questions your tunnel vision world is wrong?

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • John Poitras says:

      Well Bob I heard what happened at your “informational” meeting .. It was exactly what I predicted it would be.. I am sure you were slurping down that kool aid with the rest of the poor naive saps that think annexation is the cure to the ills of the world..

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. Fred says:

    To Joey-
    You had your big chance to be the main speaker/expert for the forum on pro-annexation and turned it down. But here you go once again blabbing off your mouth about what might happen in theory. Seattle has no interest in Area Y because Seattle has no money to take care of it. If it wanted it so bad, it would have put it on the ballot for annexation. No politician in King County is going to risk assigning Area Y to Seattle without citizen input because they want to get re-elected. Only if someone finds an active gold mine larger than the ones in South Africa under DubSea’s Coffee Shop, is anyone going to actively start trying to annex Area Y. Joey-that is not likely to happen in the near future. So get real.

    To Bob Price-
    You are the biggest blabber mouth I have ever seen at public events. Every time you stand up to ask a supposed question, the question never comes out of your mouth. Instead you give your same old scare um speech-the roads in Area Y are going to be ground to dust, the police are all going to be fired or laid off, the area is going to be over run with criminals, King County is going to skip town and leave the area in ruins and big bad Seattle is going snatch Area Y-so annex now. Bob, the White Center Blog searched for weeks for someone from the pro-annexation group to speak at this forum. If you had the truth about this issue, why didn’t you volunteer to be on the forum panel? And why didn’t you bring your fact sheet and independent report to support what you had to say?

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Joey Martinez says:

      Fred, you remind me of a crotchety old timey person “jabbing” your finger at everyone you don’t agree with.

      I had other committments that I was unwilling to break for a forum style I didn’t believe in. I asked, instead, that the Blog do a “politi-fact” style fact checking session to look into what both sides are saying. While it may have been boring and “wonk-ish” it would have been, in my opinion, what this issue needs/needed.

      Instead we had a sensationalized, boxing match style argument, that I don’t really feel helped the issue.

      I’m also disappointed that the editors of this blog would disclose who had been approached on either side to either side. To me that speaks to the level of trust I can have in an organization, or lack thereof.

      Joey Martinez

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • Joey –

        For the record, I personally did not disclose your name to anyone in regards to this forum.

        How they got that info is unknown to me, so please don’t blame us for the leak.

        thanks,
        scott

        • Joey Martinez says:

          Mr Schaefer, if it wasn’t your organization then I do apologize.

          Thanks,

          Joey Martinez

          Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          • Eaton B. Verz says:

            Joey, you remind me of a crotchty old fart who like to point his finger and accuse people of things without the facts!! You have the makings of a great polititian, Joey!! You brighten my day! BTW.. long break???

            Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          • Joey Martinez says:

            Thanks Eaton! Nice to be appreciated! 😉 My facts are the law and say that it’s possible to annex North Highline into Seattle or Burien without a vote. Mr Poitas/Forest spelled that out nicely for me. Thanks for agreeing Mr Poitras/Forest.

            Up until Sunday I had been swamped in all aspects of my life. I hadn’t even attended a City Council meeting since June until this last one (Oct 1st).

            Joey Martinez

            Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          • Coverofnight says:

            Do I get to comment on what I think of Joey Moretaxes……..?

            Actually, my mother always said that if you can’t say something nice about someone, don’t say anything at all……looks like I’ll be silent on this one.

            Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • John Poitras says:

        Joey your comment sounds like a bunch of sour grapes to me. I found the format very fair and informing.. I could not think of a better format. Although I understand you would rather have a captive audience being fed the pablum and kool aid that is the standard fare of pro annexation proponents such as yourself.

        Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • John Poitras says:

          Anythings possible (more taxes) Joey except in this case extremely unlikely. I think you are just playing with semantics to score some points..

          I will be sure to pass you comments on to William I am sure he will get a big laugh from your pontification.

          Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0