The Washington state Boundary Review Board for King County has formally recommended the incorporation of a City of Fairwood.
Now, it’s likely the issue of incorporation will go to voters this fall.
The 8-2 was taken at the board’s June 17 board meeting. The board had voted 8-3 on May 28 on a preliminary approval, following three days of public testimony in Fairwood.
The vote difference came when Evangeline Anderson, one of the board’s original no votes, switched to the yes column. Also, Michael Marchand, an original yes vote, didn’t attend the board’s June meeting.
The next step now is for the incorporation proponents, the Fairwood Municipal Initiative, to work with the King County Council to set a date for a vote on cityhood.
First, there’s a 30-day period starting on June 17 in which someone could appeal the Boundary Review Board’s formal decision. After that period and assuming there’s no appeal, the County Council would adopt an ordinance placing the question of the incorporation of the proposed City of Fairwood on the November ballot.
Joe Giberson, president of the Fairwood Municipal Initiative, said the board’s support is important in the upcoming election campaign. The board’s action, he said, “should settle the question of feasibility.”
The Boundary Review Board voted against incorporating Fairwood in 2006, the first time incorporation went to a vote. The incorporation study done then raised serious questions about whether a City of Fairwood could support itself financially.
Incorporation lost narrowly in a September 2006 election, 48.22 percent yes to 51.78 percent no, a difference of 270 votes. Then, nearly 60 percent of the 13,084 registered voters cast ballots.
This time around, according to Giberson, the discussion should center around “the likely features and benefits of the proposed City of Fairwood.”
The question, he said, is for the same tax dollars as residents currently pay, would they be better served by a City of Fairwood?
“The Fairwood Municipal Initiative will be advocating that the answer to that question is ‘yes’,” he said.
But Bryce Nelson, spokesman for Choose Renton, a group of Fairwood residents that favors annexation to Renton, said the answer to that question is “no.”
Nelson said the incorporation study done for the Boundary Review Board relies on 2007 statistics for revenue and expense projections. But, he said, the economics facing Fairwood “is a lot different” today, because of the recession.
“The study is based on a series of assumptions that really aren’t realistic, mainly that the revenue driver for the city is new-home construction,” he said.
A major source of revenue for any city are the sales tax and the real estate excise tax levied on new-home construction and on permit fees to build those homes. But Nelson points out that the incorporation study vastly overstates the number of new homes that would be built in Fairwood each year.
The authors of the incorporation study have said repeatedly that they based their revenue projects on an average year, in an attempt to avoid the wide variations in housing starts, for example, that occur during normal business cycles.
From Day 1, Nelson warns, “The city is not going to be able to pay for the services that citizens want.”
Fairwood won’t have city parks nor a city recreation department, he said, that “make a community a really good place to live.”
Nelson, an attorney, said he has no plans to appeal the Boundary Review Board’s decision, nor has he heard of anyone within Choose Renton who plans to do so.
“I don’t know that an appeal gets you anywhere,” he said.
Following is the formal findings of the Boundary Review Board.
