LETTER: Did Oct. 4 NHUAC Annexation Forum Violate PDC Guidelines?

Dear B-Town Blog:

The October 4, 2012 supposed informational forum sponsored by the NHUAC, struck me as a political rally put on by the King County Executive’s Office to promote the annexation on Area Y/White Center/North Highline to Burien.

The letter (download PDF here) from Dow Constantine /King County Executive read by Joe McDermott, that supposedly was sent out to every North Highline resident, was clearly a campaign effort at an informational meeting in a manner that makes the agency appear to be supporting a ballot measure. According to the Public Discloure Commission’s (PDC) Guidelines for Local Government Agencies in Election Campaigns, page 6 this activity is not allowed.

Also, I had questions about who was really sponsoring the production and payment for the mailing of this letter. Even though the letter supposedly was written and mailed to North Highline residents on October 1, 2012, none of my friends have still received this letter through the U.S. mail as of yet. So the question still remains who is paying for the production and mailing of this campaign material?

Additionally the according to PDC Guidelines, The King County Executive shall not use public resources to operate a speakers’ bureau in a manner that may be viewed as promoting a ballot measure. Karen Freeman’s presentation joined with that of Joe McDermott’s presentation – both from King County – appeared to be promoting a ballot measure.

Other things that bothered me about the Oct. 4, 2012 supposedly informational meeting were:

1. The letter and the way it was presented did not seem to be consistent with the normal practices of the agency (such as newsletters, websites, or some other format)? – This violates the PDC’s requirement.

2. Was the information provided in an objective and fair presentation of the facts? This is a requirement of the PDC. I did not feel it was. Is King County going out to all of the 6 areas that have not annexed to cities and delivering the same type of presentation and facts right now or is this presentation solely being used to promote a ballot measure to the residents of North Highline? Is the King County Executive personally sending to all of those residents of the six areas a letter telling them to annex up right now or even sending a letter telling them that their roads were going to be ground to dust? The message that most people took away from this meeting was that if North Highline did not annex now everything was going to immediately fall apart-roads ground to gravel. I saw no figures or future projection sheets or models of King County’s budget situation or no revenue in vs. expenses out sheet presented.

3. Do the materials accurately present the costs and other anticipated impacts of the ballot measure?-This is another requirement of the PDC. I did not see any budget sheets, spread sheets or cost analysis presented by the County on this ballot issue. What I did hear was a lot of scare stories about what was going to happen to Tier 5 roads.

I wrote to the County about who was paying for and sponsoring this letter that came from the King County Executive and was told this:

“Thank you for your email to the King County Executive’s Office.

State law prohibits the use of public facilities or public money for campaign purposes. However, public employees-including public officials-have the same right as any citizen to endorse, donate to, or volunteer for political campaigns. I have pasted the relevant state law at the bottom of this email. RCW 42.17A.555.

The letter from Executive Constantine that you cite was his own opinion and was produced outside of work, using his own time and materials.


James Bush, Communications Specialist for King County Executive Dow Constantine “

To me, as a citizen, this did not seem to be just a letter produced by just Executive Constantine on his own private time because for one thing he signed it Dow Constantine, King County Executive. It appeared to be a concerted effort by all of the representatives of King County at what was a supposed informational meeting to try to scare the residents of Area Y/White Center/ North Highline and the media into believing that annexation must happen right now. Eric Mathison of the Highline Times appears to have reported it that way from what he heard at the forum.

Its also interesting to note ALL the players in this dog and pony show were either former staffers or employees of Dow Constantine, like Sharon Nelson and Karen Freeman or Staffers of Staffers like Fitzgibbons and beholding to Dow Constantine politically like Joe McDermott. It looks like he put political pressure on these folks to help him convince the residents to vote for annexation so he could clear the big red ink off of the Counties balance sheet.

I am inclined to see this as a cheap media trick by the County Executive to influence this election. I also believe that what happened at that forum violates the rules of the PDC.

I also do not understand why the city of Burien did not attach some strings to this annexation so that if it did result in fiscal disaster that the county would be responsible for helping make up the shortfall. This IMO is a deal breaker and Mr Martin did ill served the current residents of Burien and the residents of Area Y by failing to negotiate this with Dow when in fact Burien is holding a very strong position from which to negotiate. Sharon Nelson’s consolation that if it doesn’t work out the city can lobby the state emphasizes this fact. Even if you support annexation its a no-brainer that the residents of Area Y should turn down the current annexation proposal and hold out for a better deal from the County.

John Poitras

[Have an opinion or concern you’d like to share with our 70,000+ monthly 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.]


2 Responses to “LETTER: Did Oct. 4 NHUAC Annexation Forum Violate PDC Guidelines?”
  1. Fred says:

    Ivan Weiss/34th Dems wanna be leader and Vashon Island resident attacked the author of this letter on the B-Town Blog for writing this editorial letter. This was my response to him.

    To Ivan Weiss-
    You fancy yourself as a big cheese in the 34th Dems party and live on the elitist Vashon Island as does Sharon Nelson. Most of the decisons made by your Dems group favor West Seattle and your island. However, you always try to tell us in White Center and Burien how we should vote without asking our opinion on candidates or issues-or where we can get the best and most services for our population. You consider us the uneducated low, lives that live in South King County to politically manipulate. And every chance you get, you slither on our blogs and media sites to try to sway the conversation. You are a notorious drum beater and screamer. If you are so interested in our affairs, buy a house in one of the two communities, live with our problems, pay our taxes and live with our debts and dilemmas. Dare to live in communities that have great diversity, many people of color, new comers to the country with vast needs and no resources for them. Stop hiding on cushy, quaint Vashon Island.

    Also you, Sharon Nelson, Joe Mc Dermott and Brian Bennett/Burien City Mayor are deeply beholding to Dow Constantine for political position and power and do his bidding at the drop of a hat. Bennett is so hungry to advance in a State or County political position he would throw Burien and White Center under the bus in a heart beat. He wants to remain the new star boy on the Dems farm team. As to your quote by Mike Martin, Martin does not give a rat’s behind about Burien. He is a professional politicial who constantly drifts from position to position. He plans to retire in a couple of years and plans to leave whatever mess he has made behind for the residents of Burien and White Center to try to clean up. He knows Burien will be broke and frankly doesn’t care because he will have his pension and another city to live in.

    Notice that Sharon Nelson didn’t deny that Burien is going to be in very serious debt in 10 years a -23% deficit. An ethical politican would have urged Burien to try to balance out its budget problems before considering annexation. Instead, Sharon-who may not be in office in 10 years-urged Burien and the citizens at that meeting to go to Olympia and seek a bail out if Burien is broke in 10 years-which it will be. And oh yah, the State and County-who are also in money problems – will be just dying to give Burien carloads of money to bail us out. This wasn’t fiscally responsible advise but it promotes Dow’s agenda to get White Center off his hands. Ivan, Find a Vashon Island site to blog on and stay out of our business or move here and start paying taxes.

  2. Question Mark says:

    I’m a resident of the West Hill area north of Renton which is also the subject of an annexation vote in the November 6 election, in our case to the City of Renton. I agree with you (I think) that the city and county websites devoted to the remaining annexation issues are woefully out of date, incomplete and in some cases non-functional. For example, if anyone should try to use the King County annexation pages to determine whether their address falls within an annexation area, sorry that’s an error — the GIS web service apparently no longer exists.

    To one of your questions,

    Is King County going out to all of the 6 areas that have not annexed to cities and delivering the same type of presentation and facts right now or is this presentation solely being used to promote a ballot measure to the residents of North Highline?

    I can answer that we just received such a community presentation on October 16. Renton Patch (http://renton.patch.com/announcements/qa-renton-talks-annexation-with-west-hill-community-association) was kind enough to post a list of questions from our community which have been submitted to the city and the county in writing, and for which we hope to get written response soon.

    I get that the consequences of Washington State’s Growth Management Act raise discomfort in the urbanized unincorporated areas when it comes to the need to consider becoming part of a city through annexation or becoming a city through incorporation. The county is feeling some discomfort as well, since it faces somewhat of a double-whammy of expectation at the state level (backed up by consequent funding levels by the state) that rural services are its mission to provide, not more costly urban services. I suppose that the discomfort is also shared with the cities that are being asked to respond by embracing these new responsibilities.

    It’s definitely true that King County has decided facilitate annexation in the urban part of the county through it’s Annexation Initiative (http://your.kingcounty.gov/annex/). Probably the biggest failing of the initiative is that the conversation, began with the 10 largest urban unincorporated areas in 2004, has taken 8 years to come to a decision in the case of North Highline and West Hill. Community memory is sometimes fleeting, especially in such dynamic communities as ours.

    I’m not out to try to encourage anyone to vote one way or another. My interest, especially in my own West Hill community, is to try to encourage everyone to 1) get the facts, and 2) vote in the best interest of your community as you understand it. I would hate to see questions like that of annexation be decided by an uninformed majority or a minority whose aims aren’t in line with the will of the community.

    So, folks, find out what annexation might mean to you and your community, and make your vote an informed one.

    Best wishes,


Speak Your Mind

Tell us what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!