About 200 people attend meeting on Fairwood incorporation study
Published 3:14 pm Friday, January 30, 2009
Residents of Fairwood peppered consultants with questions about the draft of their Fairwood incorporation study Monday night but will have to wait until March 19 for the answers.
About 200 people attended the first public meeting on the financial feasibility study done by the Redmond-based consulting firm of Henderson, Young and Co.
The consultants will use the comments and questions from the meeting Monday to make changes as necessary to a second draft of the incorporation study. That second draft will go before the public March 19. From that meeting the consultants will prepare a final report for the Washington state Boundary Review Board for King County, which commissioned the study.
The Boundary Review Board will use the study in its deliberations whether to deny or approve the incorporation or to change the boundaries of a City of Fairwood. Regardless of the board’s decision, incorporation would still go to a vote of registered voters in Fairwood.
The meeting on March 19 also will be held at Northwood Middle School at 5:30 p.m. and will follow a similar format.
Randy Young, president of Henderson, Young, said the consulting team was “pleased with the wide array of questions” that ranged from how the consultants arrived at certain conclusions to some “obvious skepticism.” He expects the consultants will be able to address “80 to 90 percent” of the issues raised.
He called those in attendance polite and civil.
Some of the skepticism came from J. Paul Blake, who has pressed for Fairwood annexation to the City of Renton. Choose Renton is proposing an annexation of about 25,000 people in Fairwood to Renton.
Blake raised an issue about housing starts in Fairwood; property taxes are the key source of revenue for any city and the housing downturn could affect the city’s financial viability.
The consultants do take a look at the worst-case scenario in their report.
“This initial draft was very faulty,” Blake said, lacking details about housing starts.
Joe Giberson, a spokesman for the Fairwood Municipal Initiative, expected that residents would stump the consultants with some of their questions. Still, he said there were some “strange questions,” including whether the consultants counted the Fairwood Golf Course as undeveloped land. The report didn’t get into such detail.
“This is an entry point to the process,” Giberson said. “We are happy to have the opportunity to fine-tune the report.”
One question that was asked was the type of study the City of Renton is doing on the governance issues in Fairwood, including whether the city will compare annexation to incorporation.
The City of Renton is analyzing the potential financial impact on the possible annexation of Fairwood to Renton, according to Marty Wine, the city’s assistant chief administrative officer. The city is not doing an annexation vs. incorporation analysis.
The annexation analysis will be presented to the Renton City Council at a workshop later this month. There are two annexations pending involving Fairwood.
Consultant Young said the team next will analyze the questions and the information they provide as it prepares the next draft.
He said the consultants are “clearly interested” in hearing from residents who have alternative information or intuitively know that the data could be better.
“We are not the least bit defensive,” he said. He indicated “there was pretty much acceptance of the report as a whole.”
It’s unlikely that any new information will “change the overall conclusion of the report,” he said.
The consultants offer no conclusions about Fairwood’s financial viability, but their analysis offers a key piece of information. A City of Fairwood would generate enough revenue to cover its expenses in three key government funds.
Also within the 116-page report are a pessimistic view and an optimistic view of those numbers that reflect some of the study’s variables most likely to change.
Giberson said before the meeting that the group is “happy” with the report. The group offered its critique of the study as it was developed and some of its concerns were addressed, he said.
“We believe it reflects reality,” he said. The group has members who are experts in municipal finance, he said.
The consultants are taking seriously their charge from the Boundary Review Board to not offer any judgments or conclusions about the findings. Instead, they will let readers of the study and opponents and supporters of incorporation draw their own conclusions.
In 2006, when Fairwood incorporation was defeated 52 percent to 48 percent, the incorporation study was done by Berk and Associates. That study was commissioned by King County; it differed in its methodology and was more forthright in offering conclusions. It found a City of Fairwood “financially feasible.”
“If Fairwood residents are willing to pay the same total combined level of taxes they would pay as part of unincorporated King County, and are willing to preserve the taxing power to purchase public services over time, then a City of Fairwood would generate enough revenues to provide a slightly higher level of service than Fairwood residents currently receive,” the study said.
However, critics of incorporation then also pointed to sections of the Berk study that seemed to raise questions about whether Fairwood could pay its bills longterm. In fact, in 2005, the Boundary Review Board recommended against incorporation because of the proposed city’s potentially shaky finances.
In commissioning the study, the Boundary Review Board also asked the consultants to study whether the incorporation would meet certain criteria outlined by the state that the board must follow in its own deliberations.
The 2009 study by Henderson, Young found revenues in three key funds – general, stormwater and street – are greater than expenses.
Prior to Monday’s meeting, a spokesman for Choose Renton raised questions about the Henderson, Young study.
The spokesman, Bryce Nelson, questioned whether the study shows the “true costs of the city,” especially in regard to police services. He said the Henderson study shows the costs to provide police services in 2010 are the same as in 2005; however, he said that “doesn’t make any sense” because costs have gone up in those five years.
He also doesn’t think the revenue analysis takes into consideration the current economic recession. Given the downtown, he doesn’t think the estimate that Fairwood will add 190 new houses a year is realistic.
Young said in an earlier interview with the Renton Reporter the consultants were looking at averages, just so their analysis wouldn’t be swayed by the current economic downturn.
Still, Nelson preferred the Berk study because it offered an “actual practical cost.” The Henderson study, using the City of Maple Valley as a model, was more “theoretical.”
“Even if you assume the numbers are accuate – and I don’t think that – Renton can still provide a higher level of services at a lower level of taxes,” he said.
“Renton can still give you more for less,” he said.
REVISED MARCH FAIRWOOD INCORPORATION STUDY
March Revised Fairwood Report 090309
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT FAIRWOOD INCORPORATION STUDY
THE FIRST DRAFT OF THE INCORPORATION STUDY
Fairwood Report and Model 090129
HERE IS A LINK TO THE 2006 BERK FAIRWOOD INCORPORATION STUDY
