City’s Final Annexation Info Session is Thursday Night at Cascade Middle School


Print This Post  Email This Post

The City of Burien’s next – and final – Annexation Informational Session will be this Thursday night, Oct. 18, starting at 6 p.m. at Cascade Middle School’s cafeteria, located at 11212 10th Ave SW.

This is the city’s final informational session, designed to “inform North Highline residents about the upcoming North Highline annexation measure on the Nov. 6 General Election ballot,” according to an announcement.

City officials will be present to answer any questions.

According to the city’s release:

Only registered voters in the proposed annexation area will vote on whether to become part of the City of Burien. The proposed annexation area includes the unincorporated remainder of North Highline, which takes in White Center, Top Hat, Beverly Park, Glendale, and portions of Boulevard Park, Riverton Heights and Shorewood. If approved by voters, the annexation would likely take effect in spring 2013. Burien annexed the southern section of North Highline in 2010.

If the annexation is successful, Burien would grow in size by 17,300 residents. Its 65,000 residents would make Burien the 15th largest city in Washington.

The Nov. 6 General Election is being conducted entirely by mail. Registered voters will begin receiving ballots in the mail this week.

Ballots can be mailed back and must be postmarked Nov. 6 or earlier.

They can also be deposited in a ballot drop box before 8 pm on Nov. 6; one is located on SW 152nd St. in front Burien Library/City Hall at 400 SW 152nd Street.

For more info on annexation from the city’s website, click here.

Print This Post  Email This Post

Comments

36 Responses to “City’s Final Annexation Info Session is Thursday Night at Cascade Middle School”
  1. John Poitras says:

    The cities last disinformation promotion of annexation event.

    Be there and ask them what statute allows King County to annex Area Y without a vote.

    Ask what statute allows King County to force any city to annex Area Y without a majority vote!

    Ask why they are not telling you that any forced annexation by King County CAN BE STOPPED by a referendum within area Y and that the County has to pay for the referendum.

    Ask any of those things and see if they are willing to give you a straight answer.

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • 3TPDude says:

      What? Go off script from the traditional waving around of the hated/hallowed Berk report whilst pointing fingers and insinuating that everyone in the front of the room are liars and in Mr. Martin’s pocket?
      That might be a little hard for the same people who show up at every meeting asking the same question and then calling the answer a lie.
      Maybe you should actually show up at the meeting and ask those question yourself. But you’re not going to like the answer.
      Do your research instead of readin the Q&A page on the county website.

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • John Poitras says:

        I HAVE done my own research Dude .. You should to before blowing smoke.

        Are you attempting to perpetrate the lie that King County can force Seattle to annex area Y if Buriens attempt to annex it fails?

        Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • 3TPDude says:

          I and no one else has ever implied that Seattle would be forced to annex area Y.
          It is no secret that if ‘gifted’ area Y, meaning not having to pay for a campaign or vote, studies, public meetings etc., and the opportunity to absorb that tax base and commercially zoned land at basically no cost, that Seattle would have a hard time saying no. What politician or businessperson in their right mind wouldn’t take that deal?
          And all would take would be the owners of commercial and multi-family properties to band together:
          “Traditional Method: a petition (in form acceptable to the city) signed by owners of property representing 50% +1 of the assessed value of the entire area to be annexed, excluding certain government properties. This is the method most used by cities and residents to pursue annexation.”
          Would that outrage residential property owners? Yes. Could they stop it? Possibly. Just like it was possible to stop the construction of the third Seatac runway.

          Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          • Joey Martinez says:

            I’m wondering if those that are a part of the “independent white center” PAC would still be a part of said PAC if Seattle were the annexing city in the upcoming election? My bet would be that ZERO percent would be on this PAC and contributing. I’m even willing to bet Debi Wagner’s paycheck on that! ;-)

            Joey Martinez

            Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • FOUL says:

      King County’s not annexing anything.

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. John Poitras says:

    I think the point is Dude that NO ONE on the Seattle city council is prepared to take on Area Y at this time or in the foreseeable future. However if you want to base it purely on semantics … Yes its possible .. However its more likely I could beat Tiger Woods in a head to head match-up than it is likely that Seattle city council would agree to a forced annexation attempt by King County who is dying to get it off their balance sheet.

    However even if pigs could fly and the Seattle City Council did cave in then it could still be stopped by a referendum request from Area Y which King County would have to pay for and that would ensure that there WOULD be a vote.

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. John Poitras says:

    Joey you are correct if this was Seattle in the upcoming election then its more likely a PAC would originate from Area Y residents in co-ordination with SEATTLE residents instead of Burien residents..

    HOWEVER there would STILL be resistance so if you are implying there would not be, then you would be wrong.

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Joey Martinez says:

      What I said was that those on “Independent Whitecenter PAC” trying to keep white center “independent” would be on the “pro seattle” Pac or not interested in the election.

      Joey Martinez

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. mike says:

    My perspective as a supporter of I.W.C. is I would support a Seattle annexation. The following (most of which I’ve been stating for months) are all very good reasons NOT to support Burien:

    Higher taxes for less services, higher utility fees, parking enforcement, car tab fees, CARES, taking money from a reserve fund because they’re going broke, having a city manager with a terrible record of mismanagement and cost over runs not just in Burien but other cities. Having Rose Clark, Joan McGilton, Gerald Robison and Mayor Brian Bennett, as council members that all support Martin and will vote for anything he says, AND being told we were “small minded and mean spirited” by martin if we didn’t support annexation. Why would we want those issues and attitudes over here in Area Y? Why?

    My opinion is Burien wants to be in the big leagues but does not have the skills to get called up. They can’t afford it and can’t manage it. Learn to balance your budget, learn how to manage a city and come up with a real plan for Area Y not just smoke and mirrors.

    Vote NO on annexation.

    Area Y Mike

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • 3TPDude says:

      ‘we were “small minded and mean spirited” by martin’

      Nice job of outing yourself as one of the West of Ambaum Burien residents who opposes annexation.

      So much for your credibility. Next!

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • Mike says:

        TP dude,

        Thats right, I live in area y and live west of ambaum (16th) i.e. Area Y Mike. Obviously you can’t come up with anything to refute what I’ve been saying so you just assume I have no credibility? You have the same bad attitude as Martin. Come on dude!

        Don’t want you or your pal Martin “assuming” who we are or what we want and mismanaging over here. It appears alot of people over there arent happy about trying to annex more or with the council and martins mismanagement. You can’t figure out how to run burien and we definitely don’t need more taxes and more fees and more government over here. You chose it, you live with it. Too late for you. Too bad for you.

        Vote NO on annexation…oh wait dude, you can’t vote on it…too bad for you.

        AREA Y MIKE

        Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • Joey Martinez says:

          Area y mike, attacking your statements is like trying nail Jell-O to a wall. Your group has thrown so much of it on the wall just to see what will stick its ridiculous.

          Burien is most assuredly NOT going broke. Burien is in better financial straits than almost any city in King County – in the worst recession since the Great Depression I might add.

          People are smart AreaY Mike. They can see through the BS your group is pushing.

          On NHUAC alone your group has levied almost every charge under the sun. If I were to buy what your group is selling NHUAC would be an “All powerful, corrupt, benevolent, powerless, group representing no one AND everyone that would a better job that Burien, and is great/terrible representing/repressing North Highline.”
          That’s just for starters…

          Joey Martinez

          Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          • Eaton B. Verz says:

            Joey,

            You seem to be the go to guy with all the answers on annexation. So please tell me how will C.A.R.E.S. deal with areas Y if annexation passes. Do they have a business plan if it passes? Do they get to renegotiate their contract? Are their facilities adequate? I have yet to hear this addressed at any annexation info meetings. Surely with all the research you do plus being a council insider you must have an answer. I’m being serious as a heart attack ,Joey. Please shed some light on this important topic for all of us, pro and con …….Everyone must be tired of calling each other names by now anyway. Thanks, Eaton

            Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          • Joey Martinez says:

            Firstly, not a “council insider”, far from it. I just pay attention to the packets and meetings. I ask questions of my legislators (local, county, state, and federal) and try and build a rapport with them. I tell them not only what I think is going wrong but what is going right.

            According to the contract with CARES they are able to renegotiate the contract if annexation happens. The renegotiation would occur at that time. As to what happens I don’t know.

            Honestly, CARES is not my first choice. I long for the days of the old King County Animal control. They were nationally renowned and what everyone else wanted to do and be. Unfortunately, that model was not sustainable. We as tax payers chose not to fund that service so it went away.

            I’ve looked into RAS-KC and have spoken to those who volunteer on the east-side and South King County (Auburn area). Asking as many questions as I could I got that RAS-KC is no where near as good as the old KC animal control. Those volunteers had many negative things to say about RAS-KC.

            This leaves Burien in a quandary. We’ve invested this much time and money, do we throw it away and start over or do we ALL as a community try and make CARES better.

            I’m personally of the opinion that we all as a community try and make CARES work better for what we want it to be. If we as Burien Residents can look ourselves and each other in the face and say that we honestly did everything we could to make CARES work and it didn’t workout then we should re-examine our options.

            Joey Martinez

            Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. Brad T says:

    WTH Joey! Amazing how you have no problem attacking Mike yet not one word has come from your lips refuting anything he just said! Nothing but personal attacks, funny how everything I have read is from the reports you all over there in Burien published. Now that we have established where all the Jell-O is from why not answer his questions. Sound pretty simple to me and if that group is pushing nothing but BS then that means the reports and people in Burien who have given this over to them must be the root of the BS would you not agree? I recently purchased a house in area Y and this concerns’ me greatly and I would like to hear what you have to say in the form of an ANSWER! Think you can handle that? Try not to be rude to me as well for wanting an answer. My opinion on you so far is you’re a rude young man who has no problem belittling people for speaking there mind and it just shows us all the type of salt you’re made of! If you don’t want to be labeled another windbag with no real answers then I suggest your stop drinking the Kool-Aid over there and be straight with people, then maybe we can get to the bottom of it all. @ 3TPdude do you even read what you type or are you just a small minded and mean spirited person yourself <<<<< here’s your sign!
    For the record I don't want any part of Seattle but after everything I have seen on here and from Burien council with all the name calling and drama and out right ignoring people’s questions how the hell could you even think we would want to be part of that dog and pony show! It blows me away I get on here and all I see is bullet dodging and name calling no serious straight forward answers. I think you all have showed us what needs to be done down south and when that boom finally lowers it will hit a number of you right on the head. Be smart people until we have answers to our questions in writing we must vote NO on annexation with Burien

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Coverofnight says:

      I’m with you Brad T……..WTH Moretaxes! I thought Mike gave a very simple and cogent response that hit the nail on the head for every taxpaying citizen of Burien who’ll dig deeper into their pockets to support the follies of Burien government. Instead, Joey and others use the standard liberal name-calling, scare tactics and the BHusseinO two-step to avoid giving straight answers.

      …and then he’s so sure about something that he’ll, “…bet Debi Wagner’s paycheck on it.” REALLY? Your public employee compensation package probably pays WAY more than Debi’s paycheck. Why don’t you put up or shut up with your own money? Oh wait, that’s how liberalism and socialism works; not generating revenue, but to use other people’s money! Joey, if you have political aspirations, there’s a good place for you…..Venezuela!

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  6. mike says:

    That’s just for starters Joey? more like Huh?

    Yes people are smart Joey and what I said stands true. The smart ones will see that.

    I see your still not providing anything to refute what I’ve been saying. Just smoke and mirrors Joey. And a bad attitude towards IWC, “my” group.

    So you agree that there will be:

    Higher taxes for less services
    Higher utility fees
    Parking enforcement
    Car tab fees
    CARES instead of KCAC
    Having a city manager with a terrible record of mismanagement and cost over runs not just in Burien but other cities.
    Mismanagement of public works projects, cost over runs and lost lawsuits
    And a majority of the council that will vote for whatever martin tells them.
    And don’t forget we’re “small minded and mean spirited”

    Hey at least we agree on these things Joey.

    The only thing you disagree with is Burien going broke. Okay, they may not be going broke but they sure as heck can’t afford to take on Area Y. They cant afford what they have now, and we cant afford higher taxes, more fees, lower property values and more taxation without representation Joey

    I heard IF we are annexed (God forbid) that Area Y residents wont be able to vote on Burien maters for two years? Is that correct Joey?

    Vote NO on annexation.

    AREA Y MIKE

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Joey Martinez says:

      Mike, . WHEN annexation happens ;-) you could run for council in 2013 AND North Highline residents would be able to vote for the 4 council seats opening up next year.

      Burien has shown how we can and will be able to come together as a community to support and take care of each other. It’s simply a matter of belief (I believe, you don’t). You will go from being represented by 9 Council members, 7 of which don’t live anywhere near North Highline to 7 council members – all at most 10-15 minutes away.

      It’s easy to blame Martin on everything that goes wrong in Burien. Martin has had some issues, sure, but to the breathe and depth that he’s been blamed for Burien’s current problems that’s just not true or even possible.

      If it were true (which it isn’t) shouldn’t Martin ALSO then get the credit for keeping Burien on sound financial footing? We’re doing better than almost every other city in King County. In the worst recession since the great depression we hadn’t touched our reserves until 2013 and that’s only projected as of now. I don’t agree with this, but, if you want to assign Martin the negatives then you need to give him the positives.

      The biggest issue is this myth/lie about the $400 in higher taxes for less services. That’s just simply not true.

      Parking enforcement – hasn’t been determined conclusively that Burien would do that in White Center. Businesses would be approached and a balanced solution that works for White Center businesses would be setup. Think of an employee or commuter taking up a valuable spot right in front of Full Tilt Ice-Cream. Parking enforcement would ensure quick and easy access to those businesses.

      Utility fees – Except for the 1st Ave Undergrounding, they don’t change. Currently, North Highline residents pay a 6% tax on City Light rates that goes to the Seattle general fund. Those dollars don’t flow back to North Highline. With a Burien annexation that money would be spent in the new Burien.

      Car tabs – yes North Highline would be paying $10 more per year. I’m personally not a fan of car tab taxes due to the extreme regressiveness of the tax, but it’s what Burien has to work with. That money is dedicated to pay for roads in Burien.

      North Highline currently pays a road tax on their property taxes that is way higher than what I as a Burien resident pays – and that includes my property tax rate that goes to the Burien general fund AND the $10 TID (car tabs)(Transportation Improvement District).

      CARES – See my post to Eaton…

      Lastly, how can you want an “Independent White Center” if you would want to be annexed by Seattle. That name just doesn’t make sense to me, never mind that it excludes the other North Highline communities.

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Joey Martinez says:

      Mike, . WHEN annexation happens ;-) you could run for council in 2013 AND North Highline residents would be able to vote for the 4 council seats opening up next year.

      Burien has shown how we can and will be able to come together as a community to support and take care of each other. It’s simply a matter of belief (I believe, you don’t). You will go from being represented by 9 Council members, 7 of which don’t live anywhere near North Highline to 7 council members – all at most 10-15 minutes away.

      It’s easy to blame Martin on everything that goes wrong in Burien. Martin has had some issues, sure, but to the breathe and depth that he’s been blamed for Burien’s current problems that’s just not true or even possible.

      If it were true (which it isn’t) shouldn’t Martin ALSO then get the credit for keeping Burien on sound financial footing? We’re doing better than almost every other city in King County. In the worst recession since the great depression we hadn’t touched our reserves until 2013 and that’s only projected as of now. I don’t agree with this, but, if you want to assign Martin the negatives then you need to give him the positives.

      The biggest issue is this myth/lie about the $400 in higher taxes for less services. That’s just simply not true.

      Parking enforcement – hasn’t been determined conclusively that Burien would do that in White Center. Businesses would be approached and a balanced solution that works for White Center businesses would be setup. Think of an employee or commuter taking up a valuable spot right in front of Full Tilt Ice-Cream. Parking enforcement would ensure quick and easy access to those businesses.

      Utility fees – Except for the 1st Ave Undergrounding, they don’t change. Currently, North Highline residents pay a 6% tax on City Light rates that goes to the Seattle general fund. Those dollars don’t flow back to North Highline. With a Burien annexation that money would be spent in the new Burien.

      Car tabs – yes North Highline would be paying $10 more per year. I’m personally not a fan of car tab taxes due to the extreme regressiveness of the tax, but it’s what Burien has to work with. That money is dedicated to pay for roads in Burien.

      North Highline currently pays a road tax on their property taxes that is way higher than what I as a Burien resident pays – and that includes my property tax rate that goes to the Burien general fund AND the $10 TID (car tabs)(Transportation Improvement District).

      CARES – See my post to Eaton…

      Lastly, how can you want an “Independent White Center” if you would want to be annexed by Seattle. That name just doesn’t make sense to me, never mind that it excludes the other North Highline communities.

      Joey Martinez

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • mike says:

        The thing about the informational meetings is that its mostly burien residents. They are mostly shut down by martin. They are the ones telling anyone from area Y that being part of burien is a bad idea. The meeting I attended there was multiple burien residents that got up and requested that the council take the annexation vote off the november ballot. Only 3 listened. The rest including the mayor voted to move forward. It really opened my eyes to what they are about when they didn’t do what their constituents asked. That proved to me that all the negative things about martin and his cronies not listening was true.

        The whole annexation debacle has been an ugly showing of what getting the wrong people in office can do to a city. It has been really sad to watch the residents over there get whip sawed by politicians that have their own agenda.

        That along with all the things I’ve stated above are plenty of reasons to vote NO on annexation

        Area Y Mike

        Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. John Poitras says:

    I just want to say a couple of things..

    1. CARES requires you pay it $100.00 if you bring in a stray… this to me is outrageous and discourages people from trying to help distressed animals out.
    The worst part is that even if you have the money and care enough about animals to turn a stray in to CARES their contract only requires them to keep it for 72 hours and then they are free to euthanize it. Also as far as actual dangerous Animal Control goes.. CARES is understaffed and is very spotty about when or if they will even respond to a complaint.
    As far as RAS-KC goes, contrary to what you say Joey they in fact offer a much more comprehensive animal control service with more officers being available for more days and hours than under the old KC animal control. They also actually respond the same day to animal control issues even for nuisance dogs that won’t stop barking, If you had attended the presentation they gave at an NHUAC meeting earlier this year you would know this. They don’t charge for dropping off strays and their euthanasia rate is among the lowest in the nation. CARES is not even in the same ballpark. Also changing from KC animal control to CARES was a Mike Martin decision, the taxpayers of Burien had no say in it.

    Mike Martin has proved time and time again to the residents of Burien he cannot be trusted. His latest fiasco is that he is now trying to sell the idea of allowing a land developer to turn a profit by building apartments in TOWN SQUARE in the middle of downtown Burien.. This was NOT IN THE ORIGINAL VISION OF WHAT TOWN SQUARE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE!
    In my opinion Mike Martin is the best reason NOT to vote for annexation because the city council does not run the city, Mike Martin does and time and again he makes decisions that are not in the best interests of the residents, and there is no reason to believe he will not be even worse if you give him an even larger city to mismanage.

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Joey Martinez says:

      I’m going to leave the CARES thing alone because I’d rather they or someone else answer.

      As for blaming Martin for the apartments in Town Square. That is totally incorrect. I could theoretically blame you for the apartment idea Mr Poitras. You spoke out against the city buying back the property. The alternatives WERE: the city buys back the properties from the developer, forces them to sell to another developer, or allow them to sit on the property.

      The city was prepared to purchase the property back, but you spoke out against the idea Mr Poitras. The council, instead, decided to give them “one last chance” to come up with something and start in the relatively near future. Giving the developer one last chance does two things. 1) It prevented a potential lawsuit from the developer and 2) it shows us what the potential is in the immediate future.

      Now, Burien has a choice. Do we go forth with these “High End” apartments, or do we continue to wait?

      If I remember the vote to hear this idea out it was unanimous meaning the council members YOU supported directly in the last election went along with this idea. Is your argument now that those council members who agreed to hear out the apartments idea under Martin’s thumb?

      Joey Martinez

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • John Poitras says:

        Yes Joey the vote was to hear them out.. Not to cave in totally to what the developer feels is most profitable for them! Its called NEGOTIATING.. Something Mike Martin is REALLY BAD AT!
        Can’t we find a middle ground where the city puts up some financial guarantees and we can get a movie theater or something artistically innovative?

        If you want to be part of the solution Joey start by joining “Dreaming of a better Burien” where people are actually coming up with alternatives to this really bad idea of building high density housing in the middle of olde Burien.

        Yes Joey I did speak against the idea of the city trying to force the developer to sell the property back to them because the developer who I spoke with at the time was going to slap the city with a multi-million dollar lawsuit. and we all know what Martins track record is with losing lawsuits.. Martins preemptive attempt to make the developer go away was always a losing proposition. If the only alternative is to wait then lets wait …

        Elizabeth .. I went out of my way to not make this a barbed or negative post but I really had to respond to explain where I was coming from because Joey was clearly confused.

        Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  8. elizabeth2 says:

    OK, guys. Please give it a rest! This back and forth chewing on each other and throwing veiled barbs is really tiring. I do not think this is an attitude that serves any helpful or educational purpose.

    Joey – I hope you never want to run for office again because your posts reveal much more about your character than perhaps you are aware.

    Although you clearly know your stuff, I feel you are negative, unkind, snearing and not what I would ever want for a public official.

    I am not saying others are not equally guilty, but they, I hope, are not looking for a political future.

    Enough is enough guys. There is no education or pleasure to be gained reading your posts.

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  9. Joe Wills says:

    I can tell you ALL how CARES will handle our animals if the annexation goes through. AND yes I have done my homework. Debra will ask Uncle Mike for more money. Then the citizens of White Center will loose KCAC service and have the same NO service we have. Their animals will be picked up (maybe) their calls will be answered (like ours are not) the animals will be kept for the 72 hours and euthanized like ours currently being done. I am sure Debra has some friend in mind she will hire as another Animal Control officer that has NO experience in this field. Just like the current Animal Control officer, Then White Center will be getting the same treatment we are getting. Nothing! For probably another 10K per month. That’s what will happen.

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  10. Fred says:

    To 3TPDude-
    It is clear from your comments that you have never attended one of the City’s informational meetings because the only ones who get to stand at the front and talk are Mike Martin and the Police Chief. Anytime Mike doesn’t want to answer a question he says”End of discussion” And citizens never get the answer. Also, you are the guy who claimed to have seen the event at the White Center Jubliee Days and then gave the wrong location of the event. It was obvious that you weren’t there. You’re a guy who doesn’t always have his facts straight before he opens his mouth.

    Joey-
    The citizens never chose to give up King County Animal Control or voted to get rid of it. Mike Martin exclusive-ly decided to get rid of King Counry Animal Control. Also, it is clear that you don’t understand all of the taxes, fees and franchises that you have to pay for in Burien. Everything will not stay the same for the people in Area Y. They currently do not have all of these hidden fees, taxes and franchise fees. These are clearly ear marked to go to Burien. Please do not lie or deceive the readers of this blog on this issue by saying”Utility fees – Except for the 1st Ave Undergrounding, they don’t change.” This is a flat out lie or ignorance on your part.

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  11. Ghost of Maplewild says:

    Talks are already in the works to dip into the city’s reserve fund. Robison suggested that the city should dip into reserves for the next two years and use that time to figure out how to solve Burien’s structural deficit.

    McGilton wants to add a 6 percent franchise fee on the transmission portion of Seattle City Light rates. Thats on top of the under-grounding fee we are paying for already.

    Plus they are talking about adding another $10 to our vehicle tabs.

    None of this sounds good to me. Martins only concerns lately have been annexation and his auto mall/NERA.

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • John Poitras says:

      Interesting that Mike Martin continues to confide and confer with Gordon Shaw who was removed from the council by the voters and is a big pusher of the auto mall/ NERA.

      I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that Shaw was the guy who lobbied for hiring him and saddled us with Martin in the first place?

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  12. Brad T says:

    Fee’s Fee’s and more Fee’s @ Joey you sure sound confident in the up comming vote with a statement like this (Mike, . WHEN annexation happens you could run for council in 2013 AND North Highline residents would be able to vote for the 4 council seats opening up next year.) Sure sound like you all have made up everyones mind for them and in truth is thats what has been going on down there for quite some time! It really amazes me at how cavalear you are about all of this! Keep talking and treating people the way you do and some day you will make a great mid level politician or even better you can be the new Mike Martin we will call you mini he! Indeed you are right those seats are coming up soon and there will be new fresh faces I promise you that. Too many people are done with the way things are going and the way many good people have been treated by the current council and the rest of there cronies. Those videos are all there for people too see and they don’t lie! Wake up people if it sounds to good to be true most likey it is. Vote no until the real information is on paper not a forum.

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  13. mike says:

    Does anyone know why you can’t post under “Please Welcome Our Latest Advertiser, the ‘Independent White Center PAC’”?

    I would like to know why IWC listed who paid for their signage and the “Vote yes” signs does not list who is paying? Isn’t there a law stating they must put who paid?

    Area Y Mike

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  14. Fred says:

    TO Mike-
    If you want to see who pays for things through a campaign go to the State of Washington PDC site. However, even stranger is the PAC-Political Action Committee-that Calls itself People for Burien which was organized by Jerry Robison/City Council member and Liz Giba/Fire Commissioner through his law office address and is now being run by Steven Lamphear. They have now put out pro annexation signs in Area Y that don’t state who is paying for them. This is of course in complete violation of the PDC-Public Disclosure Rules. Still stranger, some of these pro-annexation signs state that our firefighters support this. So which firefighters?-I don’t recall that the Fire Chief endorsed this. In fact Fire Station #2 was against annexation because it would cost them money they do not have. Again, not to disclose which firefighters they are referring to on these signs is in violation of the PDC rules-if the firefighters are even supporting this at all.
    You might want to contact the PDC about why these signs are up without stating who is funding them or even sponsoring them. They are not legal signs. Why are they being allowed in King County?

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Mike says:

      Thank you Fred.

      I sent an email to the director of compliance at the PDC. Shouldn’t the illegal signs be removed by robison and giba until they are in compliance? Nothing about this annexation process passes the smell test with me. It stinks up the whole thought of being part of such underhanded and dishonest council members and representatives.

      Area Y Mike

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Ghost of Maplewild says:

      Does not surprise me one bit. I could also bet that Martin is in on this as well somehow. Severe conflict of interest if this is true. And if it is true I am EXTREMELY disappointed in other council member for allowing this to happen without speaking up.

      Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  15. FOUL says:

    The PDC sign regulations pertain to signs endorsing candidates.

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  16. John Poitras says:

    Are there any regulations to stop the NHUAC goons from trashing and stealing our “NO ON ANNEXATION” signs which were legally in place? These zealots seem to think thats A-OK.

    Rate: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0