Talk:Fairwood, King County, Washington

Disputed tag -- annexation/incorporation information

To those reading this -- it appears the reason why there's a disputed tag on this page is because there's been a bit of a battle between incorporation and annexation proponents on the main page. I discovered this page and it originally had only information about incorporation. Some of that information was innacurate regarding annexation and the various legal requirements the Boundary Review Board must follow.

Being an annexation proponent, I placed factual information on the page regarding annexations that are presently ongoing in the Fairwood area. See the cited links for details. I largely left the incorporation information alone -- in fact, I actually added a citation in the incorporation area so that people could get information on that option from the incorporation proponents' website.

Unfortunately, an incorporation proponent continuously edited the page to remove any references to annexation. I then put it back in. This went back and forth for awhile until the "disputed" tag went up. Feel free to review the edit history for details.

I'm not sure what information regarding annexation is disputed, because if anybody goes to the cited links you'll see it's factual, but I figure it's important for people to get the back story about what's going on here.

Fairwood residents deserve to get information about their governance options. If people choose annexation, fine. If people choose incorporation, fine. But what's important is that people are informed. Removing information regarding their options and trying to keep people from getting information about annexation doesn't allow them to be informed. (Bbquax (talk) 16:36, 26 October 2008 (UTC))

Another note to those reading this: The information stated above by the annexation proponent is factually incorrect. The original text mentioned the original incorporation effort, and the new one restarted in 2007, but it also had a mention of the annexation effort - so the annexation WAS mentioned and was NEVER removed! Unfortunately, the annexation proponent felt that this article needed to be filled with additional, irrelevant details - such as how fast the annexation petitions were signed and not-quite-truthful information about who was really behind the Red Mill annexation effort. I agree wholeheartedly that it's critical for people to get the full story, but the addition of erroneous details doesn't help - including mention that the Station 17 has a net increase in staffing (not true).

Let's just stick to the simple facts: 1) there was an incorporation effort and a vote, and the result was very close; 2) there is a new incorporation effort underway; and 3) there is a new annexation effort underway. That's all that really needs to be stated in such an article. The original version did not have any divisive language that attempted to trump the other viewpoint - it simply stated what was happening. If we can strictly adhere to that tone, then we'll be in agreement. Wikipedia is NOT the forum for debating the merits of incorporation or annexation, yet the annexation proponent decided to use it as such. If you lack such confidence in your position that you wish to distort an obscure Wikipedia article, then I feel for you. Let's honor the intent of such an article and stick to the basics. To that end, I've offered a re-edit below.

Annexation/Incorporation section working draft

Here is the text as of 10/26/08:

In February 2005, the Fairwood Task Force filed a Notice of Intent to Incorporation with King County, Washington, to establish a new city under the name of Fairwood. This attempt to incorporate the City of Fairwood was very narrowly defeated in the election held on September 19, 2006. In that election, 48.22% of the votes were for incorporation; a swing of only 136 votes in the election would have changed the result.

The process to form a City of Fairwood was restarted by the Fairwood Municipal Initiative when it filed a Notice of Proposed Incorporation with King County, Washington on April 16, 2007. As of October 2008, the incorporation effort is now under the jurisdiction of the Boundary Review Board (BRB) of King County and a consulting firm hired by the BRB is conducting a economic feasibility study for the proposed City of Fairwood.

Efforts are also ongoing to annex the Fairwood area into the City of Renton (which as of late 2008 is experiencing an over $5 million budget shortfall ). Over 900 Fairwood residents recently signed a petition to get annexation of the area eventually placed on the ballot. Signature gathering took six weeks.

Additionally, annexation proponents encouraged business property owners in the Red Mill area of Fairwood to initiate a petition method annexation into Renton. Under RCW 35.02.155, while an annexation is technically held an abeyence if a competing incorporation proposal has been filed, the King County Boundary Review board may modify the boundaries of a proposed incorporation to allow an annexation to proceed.

King County Fire District 40, the area's fire service provider, signed a 20 year contract with the City of Renton to provide service effective March 1, 2008. At that time, all of Fire District 40's employees were transferred to the City of Renton, and daily staffing at Fire Station 17 on Petrovitsky Road was increased.

Here is where the section should be worked on until a compromise is reached and the it can be placed into the main article again. Preferable it should represent a balanced view of the major sides, and everything contentious should be referenced. --Kevmin (talk) 19:38, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Here is where the section should be worked on until a compromise is reached and the it can be placed into the main article again. Preferable it should represent a balanced view of the major sides, and everything contentious should be referenced. --Kevmin (talk) 19:38, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Kevmin -- that section's fine with me. I've got no issues with it. (Bbquax (talk) 20:20, 26 October 2008 (UTC))

I have issues with the section and have made minor modifications to reflect accuracy.

In February 2005, the Fairwood Task Force filed a Notice of Intent to Incorporation with King County, Washington, to establish a new City of Fairwood. This attempt to incorporate the City of Fairwood was very narrowly defeated in the election held on September 19, 2006. In that election, 48.22% of the votes were for incorporation; a swing of only 136 votes in the election would have changed the result.

The process to form a City of Fairwood was restarted by the Fairwood Municipal Initiative when it filed a Notice of Proposed Incorporation with King County, Washington on April 16, 2007. As of October 2008, the incorporation effort is now under the jurisdiction of the Boundary Review Board (BRB) of King County and a consulting firm hired by the BRB is conducting a economic feasibility study for the proposed City of Fairwood.

Efforts are also ongoing to annex the Fairwood area into the City of Renton (which as of late 2008 is experiencing an over $5 million budget shortfall ). Additionally, annexation proponents encouraged business property owners in the Red Mill area of Fairwood to initiate a petition method annexation into Renton. Under RCW 35.02.155, while an annexation is technically held an abeyence if a competing incorporation proposal has been filed, the King County Boundary Review Board may modify the boundaries of a proposed incorporation to allow an annexation to proceed. However, the Boundary Review Board declined to modify the proposed incorporation boundaries in favor of the Red Mill annexation, thus this annexation effort is on hold until the incorporation process is decided by a public vote, likely in mid-to-late 2009.

King County Fire District 40, the area's primary fire service provider (the other is Fire District 37 which covers a small portion in the south), signed a 20 year contract with the City of Renton to provide service effective March 1, 2008. At that time, all of Fire District 40's employees were transferred to the City of Renton but still work on behalf of FD 40.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.104.173.16 (talk) 20:28, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Couple of comments-

(1) it is considered very improper to modify text on a talk page that you yourself did not post(excepting spelling corrections), which is why I reinstated the text as I removed it from the page, this way people can compare the two without assuming the second text is what came out of the article rather then a proposed rework.

(2) The preview button is the editors best friend. I use it extensively before fully posting an edit or comment to make sure the text I add is what I really want and as a way to avoid a series of 4-5 minor edits after an initial post. For example I have previewed this post 5 times now tweaking my text to clarify and adjust what I initially wrote. (Up to eight now and finally posting

(3) It is not polite to NOT sign your posts when you post them. To sign all you have to do is type 4 tildes(~) in a row at the end of a comment. SineBot is not able to catch every unsigned post so please don't rely on it for your signing

Now a couple of questions:

(1) What is the relevance of staffing at KCFD 40 to the annexation/incorporation efforts? Right now it is just a random fact that could be stated almost anywhere in the current page.

(2) While it is notable that Renton is experiencing a budget short fall a quick search shows the all of King county, and as should be obvious the vast majority of the nation, so can this be contrasted with how incorporating would produce a different situation? At the present it seems to me (not having any knowledge of the A/I attempts) that this is something a newly incorporated city would have the same problem with. --Kevmin (talk) 00:09, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Note to Kevmin: In regards to your advice, thank you! In regards to your questions: 1. You're right, the staffing levels have zero relevance to the two efforts and in fact I would recommend removing the reference to Fire District 40 altogether. The pro-annexation person was hoping to illustrate that since the local FD40 has contracted with Renton, then annexation is a logical next step. So I'd recommend removing. 2. The note about Renton's budget shortfall was considered relevant in that people who are open-mindedly needing to consider the two options should know the condition of the potential city into which they'd annex. As for incorporation, there's no evidence to currently suggest that such a shortfall would be a given (as much as pro-annexation folks would like people to believe); so it's an unknown. But, if you think the Renton reference is irrelevant, then remove it - the fact is well known anyway to people who are affected by this decision.76.104.173.16 (talk) 00:53, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

As this is a general encyclopedia available worldwide leave in the Reference to the deficit. But it should be amended with info and reference on how the newly incorporated area would be financially to provide a balanced view. --Kevmin (talk) 03:07, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I've put this at the bottom to try and make it a little clearer, because this page is getting hard to read. Here's how I'd do it:

In February 2005, the Fairwood Task Force filed a Notice of Intent to Incorporation with King County, Washington, to establish a new City of Fairwood. This attempt to incorporate the City of Fairwood was very narrowly defeated in the election held on September 19, 2006. In that election, 48.22% of the votes were for incorporation; a swing of only 136 votes in the election would have changed the result.

The process to form a City of Fairwood was restarted by the Fairwood Municipal Initiative when it filed a Notice of Proposed Incorporation with King County, Washington on April 16, 2007. As of October 2008, the incorporation effort is now under the jurisdiction of the Boundary Review Board (BRB) of King County and a consulting firm hired by the BRB is conducting a economic feasibility study for the proposed City of Fairwood.

Efforts are also ongoing to annex the Fairwood area into the City of Renton Additionally, the Red Mill area of the Fairwood PAA is presently undertaking a separate petition method annexation. Under RCW 35.02.155, while an annexation is technically held an abeyence if a competing incorporation proposal has been filed, the King County Boundary Review Board may modify the boundaries of a proposed incorporation to allow an annexation to proceed.

King County Fire District 40, the area's primary fire service provider (the other is Fire District 37 which covers a small portion in the south), signed a 20 year contract with the City of Renton to provide service effective March 1, 2008. At that time, all of Fire District 40's employees were transferred to the City of Renton.

I changed four things: the budget shortfall sentence (which was discussed above), altered the Red Mill sentence a bit to be more factually neutral, took out the sentence about the Boundary Review Board declining to modify the boundaries, because there's been no public hearing by the BRB on that issue yet, so that's not correct, and took out the very end of the FD 40 sentence, because the former FD 40 employees have been scattered throughout the city's fire stations. I think that this should be acceptable to everybody. Thoughts?(Bbquax (talk) 05:31, 27 October 2008 (UTC))

Response: Regarding Red Mill, I guess it might be news to the pro-annexation folks that the BRB isn't inclined to modify the boundaries of the incorporation effort, public hearing or not. But since this remains a publicly undetermined issue, I removed the complete mention of the abeyence because it's irrelevant at this point. If/when the BRB makes a statement or conducts a hearing on this issue, I'm all for adding a mention back in, whatever the outcome. For now, it's sufficient to mention that the Red Mill annexation effort was initiated. And about FD40, I again think this is irrelevant in the Politics section of this article because it really has no bearing on the incorporation and annexation efforts - so I removed it (i.e., a lot of smaller/newer cities contract to local municipalities and/or KC for Fire/EMS coverage). I think the version below is sufficient and sticks to the basics: 1) there was an incorporation effort, 2) there is now an incorporation effort, and 3) there is now two annexation efforts (although both initiated by the same people - but I kindly left that part out).76.104.173.16 (talk) 14:40, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

The text below is fine by me. One thing you might want to add is a link to the BRB website so if people want to check it out, they can, but I'm not sure that's absolutely necessary. Just more helpful than anything.

With respect to the FD issue, perhaps a better approach would be to add a section in the wiki outlining what all of the various service providers (i.e. water, sewer, schools, fire, law enforcement, etc.) are with links to their websites. (Bbquax (talk) 16:25, 27 October 2008 (UTC))

Response: Great, we're in agreement then! I agree completely about adding a BRB link, which is essential, so I've added that reference to the text below. As for the services, I think it would be fine to add a general bulleted list elsewhere in the article that indicates all the various service providers/districts.76.104.173.16 (talk) 16:43, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Here's the version I propose:

In February 2005, the Fairwood Task Force filed a Notice of Intent to Incorporation with King County, Washington, to establish a new City of Fairwood. This attempt to incorporate the City of Fairwood was very narrowly defeated in the election held on September 19, 2006. In that election, 48.22% of the votes were for incorporation; a swing of only 136 votes in the election would have changed the result.

The process to form a City of Fairwood was restarted by the Fairwood Municipal Initiative when it filed a Notice of Proposed Incorporation with King County, Washington on April 16, 2007. As of October 2008, the incorporation effort is now under the jurisdiction of the King County Boundary Review Board (BRB) and a consulting firm hired by the BRB is conducting a economic feasibility study for the proposed City of Fairwood.

Efforts are also ongoing to annex the Fairwood area into the City of Renton Additionally, the Red Mill area of the Fairwood PAA is presently undertaking a separate petition method annexation.

I have added the agreed upon text back into the article. Congratulations on coming to a compromise. In regard to the Fire district, It is generally handled by wiki articles about populated areas to have a paragraph or to under a section heading like "Services" which does like Bbquax suggests and covers fire, water, waste, schools etc...--Kevmin (talk) 16:45, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Quick note: I think we just missed each other in our comments, and the ref link to the BRB was left out, so I added it into the article.76.104.173.16 (talk) 16:56, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

References

Comments

I made these edits, some MoS, but mainly to remove large chunks of copyright text added by one contributor. Check the edit summaries in the history. Apologies if there has been any collateral damage Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:22, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fairwood, King County, Washington. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130911234518/http://factfinder2.census.gov to http://factfinder2.census.gov

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:20, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Fairwood, King County, Washington. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://factfinder2.census.gov/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160205215107/http://saarch.com/projects/king-county-library-system-fairwood-library.php to http://www.saarch.com/projects/king-county-library-system-fairwood-library.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080820080331/http://fairwoodmi.org/ to http://www.fairwoodmi.org/
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://rentonwa.gov/uploadedFiles/Government/AJLS/Annexation/annexations_june2008_11x17.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130127043612/http://rentonpark.rentonschools.us/ to http://rentonpark.rentonschools.us/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:47, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Neighborhoods

What value does a long list of developer-named groups of houses/apartments/condos provide to the article? It seems a bit directory-like. I suggest we remove the Neighborhoods section. Schazjmd (talk) 19:00, 18 April 2021 (UTC)