The Burien City Council had a retreat on January 28, 2012 at the Environmental Science Center. These retreats are open to the public but most citizens do not know about them and the retreats are not broadcast or videotaped. However, it is important to know what is going on at them. For example at this last retreat, Jack Block put forth the idea that the City Council meetings should be changed from Monday to Tuesday or some other night of the week. The reason for the change that was given by Jack was that the City Staff needed more time to prepare for meetings. However, Mike Martin/City Manager told the Councilmembers that there was no need to change the meeting night and his staff could be ready on Mondays just as they have been ready for more than 11 years. Councilmember Lucy K. made it clear the she could not change the night of the meetings from Monday on her calendar due to other professional, business, community and personal commitments. One of the councilmembers attacked her for daring to say this.

So what is the change of the Monday night meeting really about? Well one of the councilmembers – maybe jokingly –said that it was so that some councilmembers could watch Monday night football. However, it is important to remember what happened in the last election cycle, Nov. 2011. Five of the city councilmembers joined together and held a fund raiser to defeat Lucy K. Why? Because she dared to question or voted against their pet projects-the annexation of Area Y, the problematic, badly run animal control program in Burien and against renewing the City Manager’s contract. She won the election by 64% of the vote. Citizens like her because she represents their vote on many issues. The four remaining Councilmembers who wanted her gone are still looking for ways to get rid of her voice and the citizens she represents. Changing the meeting night so that she can’t attend seems to be one way to eliminate her voice and vote. This Council is desperate to silence anyone who questions or speaks out against the annexation of Area Y. They forced Doug Moreland off of the Economic Development Partnership Advisory Board -because he and members of that group presented a report to the Council that stated the annexation of Area Y did not make good economic sense for the City of Burien in the long term. This is exactly what the Berk Report and what some members of the Boundary Review Board have also noted.

So if you are concerned that your citizen elected representative voice, Lucy K., will be silenced by this squeeze play of four Councilmembers, now is the time to email your new mayor. Brian Bennett-the man who ran on the ticket that he believes in quality animal control and animal rights. Email Brian Bennettbrianb@burienwa.gov about this issue. Better still write to Joan M., Rose C., Jack B. or Jerry R. who are pushing to have the meeting night changed for no apparent or emergency reason. Oh Jerry R. mentioned at this retreat that the only legacy that he wished to leave Burien is the annexation of Area Y. Interestingly, he failed to put that on his campaign flyers this last fall. because he was afraid that posting that statement might cost him the election to Debi Wagner. Stay tuned to TV tonight to see what new tricks are unfolding with these four councilmembers. But speak out or email, if you want your vote and voice represented on this Council.

- Roger DeLorm

[Have something you'd like to share with our 50,000+ 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.]

Burien Police Chief Scott Kimerer

by Jack Mayne

Burien’s police chief say he was a bit perplexed at recent increases in crime in the unincorporated parts of the North Highline Unincorporated area, but believes his department can easily police the area if the Burien City Council and the voters of the area eventually do approve its annexation to the city.

The annexation matter is still under consideration by the state Boundary Review Board for King County. If it approves the proposed annexation, the Burien Council must ask voters in the so-called Area Y to vote in favor of becoming part of the city.

During recent Boundary Review hearings, Chief Scott Kimerer said there were some “relatively minor increases” in crime in the northern half of the North Highline and the White Center business and residential area.

During a recent period, overall statistics for “Part One” crimes – more serious offenses such as assaults and robbery – were 54 incidents per thousand residents in Burien, while the number for North Highline was 65 incidents per thousand people.

“Not a huge difference,” he said, but in the past both areas were about 62 violent crimes per thousand.

For “Part Two,” or lesser crimes, the recent comparison was 66 per thousand for Burien, versus 69 per thousand in North Highline – “so very similar,” said the chief.

One reason the county wants North Highline to become part of a city (Burien, Seattle or Tukwila) is that counties have fewer ways to tax residents and offer higher urban services. That means there are as many as half as many deputies patrolling the area than there used to be.

That could account for the increase in crime rate, Kimerer said in a recent interview.

“Like I said at the (annexation hearing), I was a little bit surprised because in studying crime up there for the almost nine years that I have been (Burien Police chief), the crime rates have always been very similar.”

“You could say at times there might be a concentration of crime in the White Center area, however you could also say there could be a concentration of crime in the downtown Burien core,” the chief said.

Kimerer said the annexation of the southern half of North Highline was mostly residential areas, very little business. But the majority of the area still unincorporated is where business is located.

The King County Sheriff’s office has “had a budget crisis” in the past couple of years.

“The sheriff’s office has taken some serious cuts in officers and staffing – the staffing is not what it was four years ago up in White Center,” Kimerer said.

People need to remember that Kimerer and all blue uniformed members of the Burien Police are actually deputies in the King County Sheriff’s Department, contracted and paid by Burien taxpayers. While he has been chief in Burien for just under a decade, he is also a major in the Sheriff’s department.

The Burien contract has permitted Kimerer to maintain the same number of officers.

King County had to cut the White Center storefront position, at 9609 16th Ave. SW for almost a year until funds were found to restore it. Still there are about two officers per shift on duty there, down from up to four before cuts.

“I think people don’t realize the value of that storefront position in crime reduction and community involvement to help drive down the crime rates,” Kimerer said. “All the cuts bunched together showed indicators that the crime rate went up.”

Kimerer said he would keep the storefront open if Burien annexes the area and would even keep the same deputy since the Sheriff’s department manages the individual from his department who would reopen the storefront. The deputy that works the office does not answer calls, but is available in the business community and can advise store operators on ways to cut down on crime and how to control nuisances by panhandlers or those under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

“It is community interaction, getting together with the businesses, talking about what their issues are, trying to find solutions, trying to build relationships up there amongst us and them and with each other to really drive down the people that are causing the problems.”

The chief also said he did not need as many officers to handle the unincorporated area that Seattle said in a study its department would need.

“Seattle said they would have to put all of those officers in there and then turned around and said they could not afford it,” Kimerer said. “Well, I could make a claim of putting a whole bunch of officers in there that I can’t afford but it is about being realistic. We all have budget concerns.”

Seattle has a “fine department” but he didn’t think policing the area would take as many officers as they had claimed – 44 added police officers – while Kimerer figured he would need only 15 additional officers.

The added officers for Burien to cover the proposed new annexed area would mean he had that many additional officers to use anywhere in Burien, as needed.

“It would become a much more robust department,” Kimerer said.

According to a notice sent out Wednesday morning, Feb. 1:

Amendments to Burien Zoning Code to revise definitions relating to impervious surface and schools; change review process for quasi-judicial land use decisions from Type 3 to Type 2; change review process for certain park and recreation facilities from Type 2 to Type 1; eliminate Type 1 review for auto repair in the CC zone; add minimum floor area requirement for mixed use in the CI zone; eliminate outdated and redundant references; establishing a process and requirements for legalization of non-conforming accessory dwelling units; eliminating requirement to maintain a database of significant trees; changing “wetland” to “stream” in a stream regulation; clarifying the location of stream buffers on property; establishing standards for increasing impervious surface coverage on sites where impervious surface coverage is already non-conforming; revising road capacity levels of service; establishing standards for community gardens; and, allowing options to preparing a parking study to determine parking requirements.

The specific proposed 2012 Zoning Code Amendments and project file is available for viewing at Burien City Hall during regular business hours.

Any person may submit written or oral comments or testimony at the public hearing, or may submit written comments prior to the hearing. Written comments may be submitted in person, via mail, e-mail or by facsimile. All documents submitted or requested as part of this application, including the City staff report are available for review at City Hall during regular business hours.

Scott Greenberg, AICP
Community Development Director
City of Burien
400 SW 152nd St, Suite 300
Burien, WA 98166

Phone: (206) 248-5519
E-Mail: scottg@burienwa.gov

McDermott, whose District 8 includes Burien and North Highline, will lead the county council’s 2013 budget deliberations.

“Tough choices and a true commitment to reforming county government have placed the County on sound financial footing,” McDermott said. “Sound fiscal management will continue to be my priority as budget chair.”

The Budget Committee maintains oversight of the current year’s budget, and is the lead decision-making body during the adoption of the 2013 budget.

“Unfortunately, the county’s coffers will be facing many challenges this year as cuts from the state are absorbed. In all likelihood, we will be forced to make many more tough choices,” McDermott said.

McDermott joined the King County Council in 2010 after serving nearly a decade in the state Legislature. He was a Senior Budget Analyst with the Seattle School District and worked for former Pierce County Prosecuting Attorney John Ladenburg.

Our poorly Photoshopped portrait of the current Burien City Council.

The Burien City Council will be holding its annual Council Retreat “for the purpose of discussing Council goals and priorities” this Saturday, Jan. 28, 2012, from 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. at the Environmental Science Center at Seahurst Park (13476 24th Place SW, Burien).

The meeting is open to public observation.

However, despite the fact that it’ll be held in the heart of Seahurst Park, we’re doubtful there will be any Moonlight Beach Walk at this event.

Here’s the agenda:

Burien City Council Annual Retreat
January 28, 2012

8:30 Welcome/Introductions (15 minutes)
• Review objectives for the day
• Ground rules

8:45 SWOT Update (20 minutes) [In small mixed groups]
• Strengths
• Weaknesses
• Opportunities
• Threats
Full group debrief (15 minutes)

9:20 Kids and Cops- Mike
Presentation and discussion

9:50 Leadership Team and Council Small Groups (90 minutes with 10 minute break)
[The topics identified in #6 and invite additional ideas]
• Introduction, instructions and top issues for discussion (10 minutes)
• Recommendations and next steps
• Two rounds (35 minutes each)

12:00 Full group debrief and summary (15 minutes)
• Identify Action Items

12:15 LUNCH

12:45 Review of 2012 Workplan (30 minutes)
• What questions do you have?
• What else needs airtime with Staff?

1:15 City Department Managers depart after they have completed retreat evaluation

1:30 Councilmember Session
• Work Session (90 minutes)
• Review of remainder of Councilmember Interview Summary
• How we do work together as a Council: Working agreements
• Moving the work forward
• What else?

BREAK

• Council Committee Appointments

3:45 Wrap-up and evaluation

4:00 Adjourn

At the beginning of the council’s first meeting since Jan. 9 – which was the same day the 2012 Legislature convened – Councilman Jack Block Jr. asked that the matter be added to the evening’s agenda.

In the meantime, Gov. Chris Gregoire voiced her support for legalizing gay marriage in the state, and earlier Monday it appeared the Senate had enough votes to pass the act – virtually assuring its passage by the Legislature.

“We have an important role as a city council to protect the equality of all our citizens,” Block said to begin their discussion. Recalling passage of the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, he added, “It’s the right thing to do.”

Block asked them “to continue the proud tradition of the city council to advocate for all our citizens.”

Among those actions, the council approved in 2005 benefits for same-sex partners of city employees. That legislation was sponsored by Block, along with then-Councilman Stephen Lamphear, who is openly gay.

Councilman Gerald Robison said it was important for the council to go on the record as supporting the Marriage Equality Act.

Block moved to adopt his motion to make it so, and Councilwoman Joan McGilton seconded it, adding, “I voice my support for it.”

Council members Bob Edgar and Lucy Krakowiak were absent.

City staff will draft a letter stating the council’s official support of the measure, which will be sent to the governor and the Legislature.

Michael Stein-Ross, Burien Councilmembers Lucy Krakowiak and Bob Edgar, and his 6th grade class.

by Michael Stein-Ross

Following the November elections, a number of my sixth grade students at St. Francis of Assisi School wrote to two Burien City Councilmembers – Bob Edgar and Lucy Krakowiak – congratulating them on their wins in the election.

They also related their concerns about how Burien deals with the homeless and poor in the City of Burien.

So this last Friday, Jan. 13, 2012, Mr. Edgar and Ms. Krakowiak visited with Mr. Stein-Ross’s sixth grade students to discuss these topics. Students wanted to know why Burien does not have more homeless shelters, why some of Burien’s vacant storefronts were not being used to shelter people when the weather got really bad and why there were not more community garden spaces to grow food for the poor. Another issue for the students was the availability of medical service to the homeless and poor in Burien.

The class session with the Councilmembers involved a discussion on awareness of who was really homeless, what were some of the reasons for why people become homeless and how each individual student could help the homeless. The St. Francis of Assisi students currently collect food for our local food banks, run a clothing drive and do community service at a number of our local charity sites. Any items that readers of this article want to donate to support these homeless community drives or causes can be dropped off at the school.

Some other community service projects that my students have been involved in include: building a rain garden at the school and stenciling the storm water drains around the school. You may have seen the white marking around drains in Burien’s streets. These markings are to remind people not to put things like soaps, fertilizers, chemicals and oils down them.

The students of St. Francis of Assisi plan to continue to work for the homeless in Burien.

Isn’t that what the concept of citizenship is really about?

The meeting will take place where the prior forums were – Cascade Middle School – located at 11212 10th Avenue SW near the Evergreen High campus.

Here’s the rest of the announcement:

Please note, however, that the Board has completed the public hearing in this matter so no further public testimony can be received.

For more information please contact Lenora Blauman, Executive Secretary, at 206-296-6800.

Thank you for your interest in this matter.

WOW who writes this stuff for the City of Burien website. Currently on the website under annexation of north Highline this statement is made in the last paragraph, “…Financially feasible, and even provide additional resources to the City above the costs of annexation, since Burien would receive up to $5 million a year for ten years …”.

Amazing how wrong our City staff can be! Let me quote Washington state law RCW 82.14.415(6), “All revenues collected under this section SHALL be used SOLELY to provide, maintain, and operate municipal services FOR THE ANNEXATION AREA.”

How does the above quoted state law allow Burien (or any other City) to “provide additional resources to the City ABOVE the costs of annexation”? If the City writer cared to learn more he/she might try reading RCW 82.14.415(7) which further details what the annexing City MUST do with these Sales Tax Credits and what to do if the Credits actually exceed the costs of providing services in the area.

Okay now to give the City staffer a math lesson. It is NOT POSSIBLE for the City of Burien to receive anything near $5 million. Not even possible to receive near $1 million. Why? Because the above state law specifically details the formula upon which any City receives this Tax credit. The credit is based upon the state’s Sales Tax collected in the annexing City not as reported in the BERK Report based upon the City Sales tax.

Manager Mike Martin has already stated that Burien, “has received a total of $584,000 to date to help the city provide services in the NORTH Burien annexed area” referring to the Area X north highline. That amount is nowhere near $5 million as referred to in the website. Even if Burien annexes Area Y and again based upon sales tax formula the City MIGHT be able to get an additional $200,000 since the sales tax would then include those collected in Burien to INCLUDE Area Y (White Center business area). Burien does not have a snowballs chance to collected “up to $5 million” EVER. Note the City of Auburn received its first annexation check in 2008 for $1.25 million. Auburn has a enormous retail and commercial sales tax base compared to Burien. How could anyone speak of getting “up to $5 million” when it not even a remote possibility? Unless it is written to purposefully deceive, such a statement is grossly incompetent.

Who writes this stuff for the City? How could these significant errors get past the City Manager and the Council?

- Chuck Rangel
Burien

[Have something you'd like to share with our 50,000+ 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.]

by Jack Mayne

The second night of testimony to the Boundary Review Board was as much pro-Burien annexation as the first night was anti-annexation, giving a good-sized audience another evening of opinions while again suffering on hard middle school cafeteria seats while straining to hear because of a poor sound system.

The meeting took over three hours again, so the board decided to adjourn to Monday, Jan. 23 at 7 p.m. The meeting place is still unknown.

That meeting will not be for comment by those for or against the northern part of the North Highline Unincorporated Area being annexed by Burien, only for the 10 members of the board (one has recused himself because he lives in the area) to argue between themselves over whether Burien should be allowed to go forward with the second annexation in a bit over two years.

The Monday night group heard the majority of people testify they were opposed to the annexation. Many were Burien residents and most said the city had not made the financial case that the addition of the 3.2 square mile area that is home to about 17,300 people.

Tuesday night most of those testifying lived in or close to Area Y, or the northern half of the former unincorporated area. A rough count showed 20 testifying were for annexation to Burien, and four were opposed.

Time and time again area residents told the board that, in the words of Mercedes Dantona, that White Center “is much better served in Burien; it would add color and interest to Burien.”

Andre Lopez agreed and said he was prompted to come to the second night of hearings because he was told “people of color were not represented at the first meeting and that people of color need social services.”

“If we don’t get annexed by Burien, we will be annexed to Seattle,” he said, adding that he would not like that because government would be far away from area residents.

Some were upset by people Monday night referring to residents of the White Center area as somehow beneath them.

“I kept hearing people who never would set foot in my neighborhood say horrible things about our people,” said Rebecca Lopez, who lives in the proposed annex area.

Person after person talked about how they felt like Burien residents already, how they shop there and pay sales taxes there. Others referred to Seattle government as far away and remote because of distance and because the Seattle City Council met in the daytime when they could not attend meetings, while Burien met at night when they can attend.

“I am afraid if we don’t annex to Burien, we will lose something important,” said Martha Koester, another resident from the area that would be annexed.

Most of the 20 pro-Burien people who testified mentioned not wanting to be a part of Seattle, even a woman who lives north of Roxbury in West Seattle but runs a White Center restaurant. Elizabeth Gordon said Burien would be better and noted that in the past few years, “beautiful things are happening in White Center, people know each other and they are working together” to make a good business area even better.”

A couple of people were definitely in favor of Seattle annexing the area with a woman suggesting needed health care for her family would not be available in Burien.

Burien makes final pitch
City Manager Mike Martin summed up the process of annexation as being “a divisive and emotional issue,” but said the “thoughtful process by the city of Burien was exactly the same as used for the first annexation.”

“During the first annexation, you heard exactly the same arguments against it,” Martin said “and we outperformed those expectations. This was a difficult issue (but) the Council has come to the realization that we can do this.”