(Ed. note: the first letter was published on Jan. 16, after the Boundary Review Board meetings on Burien's proposed annexation of unincorporated North Highline.
A rebuttal to this letter from Mike McCumber, written by William Forest, was posted on Jan. 23 and can be found below.)

On Jan. 9th I attended a Boundary Review Board meeting at Cascade Middle School to listen to people make their cases either for or against a Burien annexation of what is known as “Unincorporated King County Area Y.”

Only one thing was really clear when I left this meeting: I am really concerned about how this annexation is being approached.

To be clear right off the bat, I have not decided if I am for or against annexation of North Highline yet and I had hoped that these meetings would help me decide. What I experienced at this meeting was a lot of noise and what I am starting to believe is willful ignorance towards the facts.

Person after person got up at the meeting and talked about how the city of Burien was trying to pull a fast one on everyone or how the BERK report was a scam or incomplete or how we don’t want “those people” or “all that crime” in Burien.

What stood out to me was how many of these people had no factual evidence to support their claims and most had no background in what they talking about. I was amazed at how many people spoke with such authority on matters such as finances, city planning, urban development, crime, and the morality of Burien City Council members when most, if not all of the speakers, had no platform or experience from which to speak from with such expertise.

A number of speakers were allowed to speak for longer than 3 minutes because they claimed to represent groups of citizens concerned about annexation. In these extended speeches I heard a number of outright factual errors about finances, education, and crime.

The city of Burien and the King County Sheriff’s Department have provided plenty of information about these topics on their website but for some reason these speakers “facts” and figures were no where close to what the city of Burien and the King County Sheriff’s Department have provided.

That tells me that these speakers are either patriotic Americans who are standing up against our deceptive local government or people who don’t care about facts, only care about what they want to be true, and don’t care how much they have to stretch the truth to get what they want. I think the latter is probably the most likely.

Editor's note: A section of this letter referring specifically to the testimony of a private citizen has been removed.

I was also extremely concerned about Burien City Council member Lucy Krakowiak’s actions at the meeting last night. When it came to speaking about Burien libraries being closed, she chose to not speak her opinion about the issue, as it may be a conflict of interest because she is both a City Council member and a member of the King County Library Board.

Last night Krakowiak showed no hesitation to speak her opinion about annexation. I perceived her actions at the meeting last night to be very hypocritical and again made me wonder if she understands her elected role.

I still do not know if I will support or oppose the annexation of the unincorporated area, but I do know that the decision should be made out of reasonableness and factual evidence.

Mike McCumber
Burien

REBUTTAL TO MIKE McCUMBER’S LETTER
Writer says ‘undecided’ man not really neutral

Mike. You are NOT fooling anyone. Pretending you are undecided and looking for facts is a joke considering your letter slams (unjustly) everyone that spoke against annexation.

If you had actually been at the first (Boundary Review Board) BRB meeting, you would have noticed that all those people speaking against annexation and questioning the Berk report turned in DOCUMENTATION to the board supporting their position.

The BRB was there to review comments on the sections of the state law that apply to annexation in RCW sections: 35.63 35a.63 36.115 39.34or 36.70. These statutes are all the board is empowered to address. On the first night the vast majority of those that spoke against annexation also supplied DOCUMENTATION to the BRB, which obviously you didn’t notice. If you had been there, (unless you are totally unobservant) you would have.

As far as the second meeting goes I watched it on video and from what I could see most of the ranting from the White Center group was a waste of the board’s time since everyone from the gang of pro- annexation proponents did not address the salient points of the RCW statute, they just came to vent and make irrelevant points which, when all was said and done, were a waste of the BRB’s time and everyone else who had to listen to them go on and on and repeat the same old song over and over again.

From what I could see on video, none of them turned in documentation to support their rants either. It was just an exercise in freedom of speech for (all the good it did them).

These are the FACTS, Mike. Apparently your pro-annexation agenda does not allow facts to come into it because apparently whatever does not support your agenda is in your mind not a fact.

The really salient point i.e.: the economics of the situation, were not even mentioned in your letter. 
Obviously your mind was made up before the meeting even took place, even though you pretend it was not. Anyone reading your letter with an open mind cannot come to any other conclusion.

Mike, slandering Ms. Edgar by changing what she said is really dirty pool.

She simply stated the logic or formula that KING COUNTY used and will have to use to determine the fate of the two libraries. Anyone who wants to confirm that can view the tape and see what was ACTUALLY said.


Mike, it is very apparent that your letter was biased against the residents who spoke against annexation. I also did a people search and it seems likely you are not a Burien resident as the closest Mike McCumber I could find to Burien lives in the unincorporated area.

William Forest
Burien