Proposal to divide King County being revived

BELLEVUE, Wash. – Some non-Seattle King County residents, unhappy with land-use restrictions, are reviving the campaign to secede.

The grumbling threat recalls the failed effort to establish Cedar County in the 1990s, a move blocked by the state Supreme Court.

But members of both political parties are reported to be taking an interest in what is being called “Cascade County,” The King County Journal reported Sunday.

The litany of wrongs to non-Seattle boils down to one thing: private property rights. The perceived threats are tough new environmental regulations that restrict property use, reduced clout on the King County Council and rigid enforcement of county codes.

At the same time, most are aware that the regulations ease flooding and protect the environment, that codes make sure neighbors don’t infringe on neighbor’s rights, and that reducing the size of the council from 13 members to nine was supported in rural areas.

The staunchest property-rights advocates concede that not all rural residents oppose limits on land use or fair enforcement of county codes.

Some feel the solution may lie in electing more Republicans to the Democrat-controlled council – or in the “Balanced Rights Initiative,” a proposal modeled after Oregon’s Measure 37 that requires the state to compensate property owners for lost development rights.

Initiative supporters are raising about $750,000 to gather signatures for the measure later this year, says early backer Gary Tripp of Bainbridge Island. “We’re looking for fairness,” he told a recent meeting of the Citizens Alliance for Property Rights.

“This shouldn’t have to be a property rights issue.”

There hasn’t been a new county created in Washington since 1911, and there’s a reason for that, said County Executive Ron Sims.

“Most of the rural counties are really struggling,” he said. “They just don’t work.”

Governing carries responsibilities, often mandated by the state, he said.

Counties need a sheriff, a court system and prosecutors – and they must have plans to care for the mentally ill and the developmentally disabled. Such services are pricey and often are required for release of state and federal funds, he said.

“I would be willing to pay more in taxes to the county in order to control my own destiny,” said LeRoy Jorgensen of North Bend, owner of the Cascade Golf Course.

Larry Phillips, the Seattle Democrat who chairs the County Council, notes that rural services are supported by an urban subsidy.

Carving a new county out of King could eliminate those funds.

And he notes only three council members’ districts are entirely within city limits. The rest include rural and suburban areas.

“I like to separate reality from perception,” Phillips said.

There are options short of breaking away. In the 1990s, Republicans – champions of less government and private property rights – controlled the County Council, and they rebuffed Sims’ efforts to limit the size of rural churches and schools.

The county’s new GOP chairman, Michael Young, says creating a new county isn’t on his party’s agenda, but a Republican majority on the council is.

Republicans lost the County Council in 2001, when Julia Patterson, a SeaTac Democrat, replaced Chris Vance, then newly elected to lead the state GOP. She defeated a Republican stalwart, state Sen. Pam Roach.

But even with a Republican-controlled council, the county would be bound by a Critical Areas Ordinance, required by the state Growth Management Act and linked to state funds.