One of the questions that has been kicking around in cyberspace since last Tuesday’s election is whether Renton, Kent, and King County should coordinate with residents of Fairwood regarding the 20-year-old Potential Annexation Area (PAA) boundaries. I’ve seen this question posed in newspaper comments and I’ve heard it at city hall.
Fairwood residents obviously still hold various opinions regarding whether to stay in unincorporated King County, incorporate a new city, or join an existing city. Of the ones that favor joining a city, there are those that have explained that they associate with Kent more than Renton. These citizens have expressed that this is due in part to the school district boundaries as well as proximity to Kent shopping and parks.
In response to a councilmember’s request, the mayor sent us a map today with the school and fire districts superimposed on the area of Fairwood that just voted on incorporation.
Here is the map, and you can click the link below to get a larger downloadable PDF version of this map.
Click here for the larger PDF version of this map. (You should be able to enlarge this version on your screen to see streets).
It is clear that the bulk of Fairwood is in Kent’s school district, but it was placed in Renton’s potential annexation area 20 years ago when the growth management law took affect. This is fine for residents who consider themselves part of the Renton community; there is no requirement that school boundaries and city boundaries align– and they in fact do not in many cases. However, for those residents who consider themselves part of Greater-Kent AND are part of the Kent School District, being part of the Renton PAA might seem goofy. This is the issue that may deserve further study.
I don’t expect anything to happen soon, as Renton, Kent and King County do not have a lot of money to spend on surveys and meetings, and it seems to me that Fairwood residents deserve a break in debating their future governance.
I think that all parties should remain open to redrawing these Potential Annexation Area boundaries in the future, to fit the desires of the various Fairwood neighborhoods. If and when Fairwood residents want to formally raise this issue, I’m open to discuss it. While I can’t speak for the rest of the Renton council, I think other council members would be open to this discussion as well.
I’m certain that Renton would have done a nice job servicing this area– and when we pre-zoned it, we designated it over 96 percent single-family. (We down-zoned some areas from the density allowed in King County.) But for those who want to be in an existing city, I’m confident Kent could also do a nice job servicing neighborhoods in Fairwood.
While there are those in Renton that would prefer not to annex any areas into Renton and there are some in Fairwood that would prefer to go to Kent, make a new and separate City, remain Unincorporated KC. We ran into the same question when we were working to annex the Benson Hill area into Renton. That question was “Why not go to Kent”? If Kent is willing to talk about the change, is there anyway to share the PAA thus allowing the discussion of what area may want to go where? Without any set decision you have 4 possibilities. Annex to Renton or Kent, a new city, remain Unincorporated KC. To get a consensus without bring in small parts at a time may be difficult to impossible and more expensive. Ref: East Hill. As long as there is more then 1 option to choose from, besides remaining in Unincorporated KC you will never see a majority of agreement and never get a simple majority (50% + 1).
Leave Kent with the malcontents who would not be happy with anything the city did after taking over — do you really want to subject your staff to that?
Renton already has enough on it’s plate – the Highlands and especially Benson both need work.
Renton has sunk a lot of police hours into Benson, and while the they’re still doing an awesome job with the people they have, we’ve noticed less police support in the rest of Renton.
Fairwood would have caused us to loose two million in services or and increase in new taxes and after raising taxes and fees on Renton families more that $400 per yes just in the last 18 months, I don’t think we’re in mood.
Ha HA – Highlands!
KCLS has decided it’s going to close down the Highlands library and move it a lot further south east along Cemetery road to service the boonies.
Have fun driving to Newcastle for books.
Re: Ha HA – Highlands!
Instead of making things up why don’t you show where this information comes from so it can be verified.
Re: Ha HA – Highlands!
The poster is correct – and I think I know who it is: JA
I’ve heard it independently from two council members from Bill P.’s presentation on Monday to the council. One framed KCLS’s decision as that KCLS has decided to close down the Highlands branch, the other member framed it as KCLS moving the branch to better serve King County and “the middle of Renton.”
Basically, if you live in the highlands, expect to drive to either Newcastle or DTR for library service in the next few years.
In *theory* KCLS would listen to reason, but look how far that got Newcastle and Vashon Island.
My bombastic take on it:
http://goodrenton.com/articles/2010/11/10/highlands-library-to-close/
You could also drive to Fairwood, probably the a bit shorter than Newcastle.
why does the city feel the need to be so greedy, thy dont want any annexation but government feels it needs to be so intrusive
Ultimately, the citizen ends up getting the government they deserve. Watching this in action in Fairwood over the last 20+ years is quite a case study. I say just let it slide into King County’s black abyss and forget about it. It actually reminds me of the “city” of Brier up near Lynnwood, ended being a pocket of West Virginia in the middle of West Washington. They only make it with the cops on a 25 steep drop speed trap. You can hear the sound of banjo playing..
I know this because I spent a few years there.
Have fun, Fairwood, hopefully my car wont’ break down when I pass by.
-H
Believe in Renton
As it stands the governance choice preference breakdown in Fairwood looks something like this:
34% want to annex to Renton (8% more can be convinced to vote for annexation)
31% want to remain in unincorporated King County
27% want to incorporate the city of Poorwood
8% admit they are clueless
If we add a fourth governance option we will get a choice preference breakdown something like this:
33% will want to annex to Renton
30% will want to remain in unincorporated King County
26% will want to incorporate the city of Poorwood
5.5% will remain clueless
5.5% will want to annex to Kent
How does this improve the situation?
note the totally inadvertent, implied, ironic similarity between affinity for Kent and cluelessnes
What those of us who actually like Renton want is a governance choice preference breakdown that looks something like this:
51% want to annex to Renton
41% want to remain in King County – Stockholm Syndrome anyone?
8% remain clueless – or prefer Kent – it doesn’t matter what the resolutely uninformed want as it is no longer 2008
At the risk of stating the obvious, we get the desirable two decision scenario by REMOVING a governance option, not by talking about ADDING one.
The pro Renton faction of Fairwood residents tried really hard to drag the people who are responsible for annexation strategy at City Hall toward the two option scenario. It is high time that City Hall started listening a little closer to the pro Renton faction and less to the ‘experts’ who organized the embarrassing outcome of the latest Fairwood governance election. Those guys just got their a**es very thoroughly and publicly kicked.
I get that the PAA vivisection suggestion is intended to excise some of the Renton haters from the PAA so that a future vote would result in a less embarrassing loss. While this is sort of a laudable goal, I would rather crush the fantasies of the foolish Fairwood Fanatics by making it blatantly obvious to even the most enthusiastically innumerate among them that a tiny, poor city on the jobless, residential edge of the growth mismanagement area is never, ever, going to be viable.
Believe in Renton
The fans of PAA vivisection apparently don’t get that the Renton haters are concentrated in the north part of Fairwood, not in the southern part nearest to Kent. Splitting off the area south of S 200th, which already has Kent street addresses, or the area south of S 192nd, which is in FD 37 / Kent Regional Fire Authority may, upon superficial analysis, appear to be removing Renton haters from the PAA, and there are a few residents down there who think that now that Panther Lake has annexed to Kent, they should as well, but the hardened core of the Fairwood Fanatics would still be in the heart of the PAA after gerrymandering the boundary. Shearing off the southern area of the PAA is at least as likely to make the next incorporation election successful as it is to make the next annexation election successful. The whole conversation is counterproductive, if you like Renton.
The discussion that people who believe in Renton should be having is: “How do we get the greedy county and the bungling BRB to support Red Mill-esque 60% petition annexation(s)?”
The previous feasibility studies all depended heavily on the imagined tax revenue of the slowly collapsing Fairwood business district. The staff at City Hall need to get on board with the idea that there is a way to nibble enough of this area out of the county and into the city so that any possible future feasibility study will have to report what is obvious to anyone who can reliably add 2 and 2 and get 4, a City of Fairwood is a financial nightmare who’s most unreasonably optimistic income estimate is one third that of any similarly sized city in the county.
Renton needs Fairwood (and West Hill and East Highlands and the PAAs need Renton), not for the imaginary surplus revenue, but because Renton, and the 140,000 citizens in the city and the PAAs, are now sealed in the political power vacuum created between a city of 612,000 to the northwest and a city of 123,000 to the north and a growing city of 114,000 to the south. We need to step up our annexation game or accept that we are never going to get our share of state and federal transfer payments without which we won’t be able to resolve our very real infrastructure and service delivery challenges. We will forever be stuck behind the Renton S curves, no matter how cute our slogan may be.
Don’t change the PAA at all. Long term, it is in the best interest of Renton to keep the Fairwood PAA just the way it is. All I am suggesting is that the city’s annexation experts treat the people who hate Renton as poorly as they have treated the folks who have donated thousands of dollars and thousands of hours to the effort to annex Fairwood. The folks who work at Renton ought to try believing in Renton as much as many of Renton’s future residents do.
Re: Believe in Renton
Does anybody know if the Red Mill annexation petition is still valid?
Re: Believe in Renton
The original Red Mill annexation petition has expired. Both the BRB and the county indicated that they would oppose Red Mill, which were two of the reasons that the Renton Council decided to follow the advice of senior city staff and allow both the Red Mill and Greater Fairwood annexation petitions to expire and instead created a single annexation by resolution election for the whole of Fairwood.
Is there enough fight left in the pro Renton residents of Fairwood to collect more signatures for a Red Mill like annexation? 4,133 Fairwood residents voted to annex to Renton. That is nearly 25% MORE votes for annexing Fairwood to Renton, which failed, than for annexing Panther Lake to Kent, which succeeded. Despite all of the hate speech that some Fairwood residents direct toward Renton, there is still more support for annexing Fairwood to Renton than there was to annex Panther Lake to Kent. It would be surprising if there were not at least a few annexation by petition efforts by some of the neighborhoods nearest to Renton. There are some fairly smart and determined folks in Fairwood who may have enough initiative to build a series of smaller annexaitons that might eventually achieve the original goal of the Red Mill annexation. To unify Fairwood in Renton, by separating a few of the residents up there from the fantasy of a City of Fairwood once and for all. In reality, Red Mill changes nothing as there is just not enough revenue for a city, but there are about 50 die-hards who think a severely underfunded pseudo city (under their control), is better than being the most influential neighborhood of Renton and their psychosis is contagious.
When an annexation petition effort would get started is anybody’s guess, but if it waits too long, there will be yet another incorporation election to defeat.
General Election KING COUNTY 11/22/2010 9:46:38 PM
Official Final 11-02-2010 Page 28 of 28
PROPOSED FAIRWOOD ANNEXATION AREA
Ballots Cast/Registered Voters: * 10138/14045 72.18%
Proposition No. 1 Annexation to the City of Renton
FOR ANNEXATION 4133 42.40%
AGAINST ANNEXATION 5614 57.60%
* Reflects the voter registration count as of October 21, 2010 following the official logic and accuracy test
http://your.kingcounty.gov/elections/elections/201011/Respage28.aspx
Official Final KING COUNTY 11/24/2009 10:04:48 AM
11-03-2009 Page 61 of 61
ANNEXATION
FINN HILL, KINGSGATE AND NORTH JUANITA ANNEXATION AREA
Ballots Cast/Registered Voters: * 10813/19231 56.23%
Proposition A Proposed Annexation, Assumption Of Indebtedness, And Adoption Of Zoning
Regulations
YES 6291 59.94%
NO 4205 40.06%
PANTHER LAKE ANNEXATION AREA
Ballots Cast/Registered Voters: * 6215/12785 48.61%
Proposition No. 1 Proposed Annexation To The City Of Kent
YES 3330 56.40%
NO 2574 43.60%
PROPOSED FAIRWOOD INCORPORATION
Ballots Cast/Registered Voters: * 8737/14189 61.58%
Proposition No. 1
FOR 3907 45.53%
AGAINST 4674 54.47%
http://your.kingcounty.gov/elections/200911/Respage61.aspx
I’m in northern Fairwood and I don’t hate Renton. They better annex all of Fairwood to Renton. Kent is such a bad place, and will keep people out of Fairwood (a big down for Renton, as the best rated schools in the area are in Fairwood)!
Corman, please annex Fairwood into Renton. I suggest annexing the southern portion (Meeker Middle) area into Kent, but the main Fairwood area must be annexed into Renton OR made into its own city (my preference).
Out of all of Renton (excluding the highlands), Fairwood has the best tech talent (and the best Kent schools) and I don’t think that it should be added to a lower end city that won’t do anything for us called Kent. I know Renton will provide us better roads and traffic lights (please, the lights look like they’re from before you were born).
I don’t like Kent at all, and as explained above, many Fairwood residents prefer going to Renton, and please keep it that way. Or don’t even bother annexing us at all.
And Fairwood is closer to Renton downtown than Kent as well!!