The last time the family was driving through Peasley Canyon, I made a point to introduce them to the newfound Nowhere Road.

As we drove north under the SR18 overpass, I announced: “On the left edge of this road is the City of Federal Way. On the right edge is or will soon be the City of Auburn. And the road itself, right here, is nowhere.”

The failure of the East Federal Way annexation vote in August, and the success of the Auburn West Hill annexation vote, resulted in this peculiarity of political geography, the child of the maddening state of King County politics. As those familiar with the EFW proposal know, the proposed annexation area consisted of a north and south portion of USKC, connected by an umbilical cord of Peasley Canyon stretching from S 321st St to Highway 18, roughly 8/10ths of a mile. This allowed for one contiguous territory which could be annexed with a single proposal instead of two. (There were good financial-feasibility reasons for doing it this way.)

Federal Way’s North Lake area is to the west of Peasley Canyon. Auburn’s West Hill, which will be officially annexed within a year or so, is to the east of it. But since the EFW proposal failed, this stretch of road is a ribbon of USKC winding between two incorporated cities. And as a result, Federal Way still does not actually border its neighbor to the east.

I wonder if the county has any way of measuring demographics of those who vote by mail vs. those who vote at a polling place.

For the first few days since Election Day, the SR4204 (school levy simple majority) measure was failing. Likewise, in Federal Way, Hope Elder was ahead of Dini Duclos.

A week later, SR4204 is winning. So is Dini Duclos, in a nail-biter of a contest.

Could there be a connection? Could at-your-leisure mail-in voters lean in a certain direction moreso than those who, like me, vote in person and put their fresh ballot directly into the locked metal machine?

Nicknames spotted for East Federal Way (the area that failed annexation in August):

• Unincorporated (South) King County (UKC)
• No Way
• UnKing (these two from Chris Carrel)
• East Hicksville (from FWBlog)

Feel free to add your own spotted or suggested nicknames for EFW in the comments.

Since a number of other local blogs are doing it, I’ll blab here, for the remotely curious, how I intend to vote tomorrow (yes, the increasingly unfashionable old-fashioned way)… and a bit about why.

Prop 1: YES

What it comes down to, really, for me, is this: Light rail from Federal Way to Seattle, plus Tacoma and Bellevue. Having spent most of my life in a city whose transport lived on its subway, the lack of non-bus mass transit in this supposedly modern, supposedly world-class metro area is a glaring omission. The more we put it off, the more glaring it will be, and the more expensive it will become.

Light rail proponents who are against Prop 1, like the Sierra club or the Stranger, argue that the roads portion of the bill is a poison pill. The Stranger criticizes it as “getting urban voters to support a suburban agenda.” What they miss is that the exact opposite is also true: getting suburban voters to support an urban agenda, namely light rail. The roads-and-transit combination is a painful compromise, but one that provides a benefit to those who won’t be benefiting directly from the light rail, such as the sub-suburban areas in the southeast and northeast corners of developed King County. They get better roads, we get light rail. Everyone’s happy, if we’d only allow ourselves and each other to be.

I-960: NO

If the name Tim Eyman wasn’t enough to turn me off to an initiative, the first few sentences does. The proposal says that any tax increase of any sort must receive a 2/3 supermajority in either the legislature or public election. Sounds like an effective check and balance on taxes, until you realize that almost nothing ever passes in this state or county or nearly anywhere else these days with that sort of majority. Eyman and cohorts know this, of course.

Compare also the irony that we have this initiative on the ballot at the same time as one that seeks to eliminate supermajorities for the approval of school bonds.

R-67: YES

We pay for health and other insurance so that we can have peace of mind that, when serious problems happen, we have a safety net that will either take care of it or cushion the blow. We don’t pay for it just for discount meds and routine visits, but for disabling injuries and illnesses too.

Bottom line is, if we can’t count on the insurance companies to make a good faith effort to satisfy their ostensible purpose, then we need to hold them to it with the rule of law; just like if we can’t count on our fellow individual not to drive through opposing traffic or steal candy bars, we likewise hold them to it with the rule of law.

The scare tactics by the insurance companies and business interests say you should vote no, because if you vote yes, insurance rates will go up. (Frankly, that sounds more like a threat than a prediction.) Well, I don’t know where you’ve been, but insurance rates are going up anyway, and have been for some time. We’re paying more for insurance already — are we sure that our insurance company will pay out when we need it the most, or try to weasel out of it with circumstantial evidence or misrepresentation? If we are going to pay for insurance, then we need to make sure we get our money’s worth.

While insurance companies and business interests oppose the law, firefighters and nurses support it. Who’s more likely to have your interests at heart?

JR4204: YES

After seeing last year’s FWPS bond fall just short of the current 60% supermajority, I have to say that the supermajority doesn’t serve either kids or their communities. I’ve heard that one of the reasons that we have this supermajority in the first place is that people feel guilty voting against school funds. Well, good; they probably should feel that way, because our country’s public education is important. Presumably, people likewise feel guilty voting against police or fire funding, but we don’t have a 60% supermajority for those votes. It doesn’t make sense, and our schools need funds.

Dovey vs. Freeman: FREEMAN

Basic math here: Freeman is in favor of an elected mayor. Dovey is against the EFW annexation (thanks FWG). For me, that puts Freeman up one and Dovey down one. (Both opposed Symphony, sadly, so no points for anyone there.) The local papers may argue that Freeman is a newcomer and Dovey has lots of experience. Personally, prior to this election, the name Jack Dovey evoked thoughts of … nothing at all. Given that I can’t think of anything he’s done (apparently he was pro-Celebration Park; more on that hot button issue later), and his positions vs. Freeman’s, I have to add that FW’s political circles could use some new blood.

Duclos vs. Elder: DUCLOS

This is, to me, perhaps the most meaningful election in the city this year. While the Tribune supports Elder, citing her preexisting council experience and years of involvement, the Mirror (surprisingly) supports Duclos.

Why is this the most meaningful election? Federal Way is currently embroiled in a simmering struggle between a homey small-town desire and a growth-oriented urban vision. To me, Elder represents the former, and Duclos mostly represents the latter (although my primary pick, Eric Stavney, who came in a close third, probably represented it better). I for one am for the latter: Symphony, a walkable downtown, light rail, growth, diverse community identity and pride; rather than a nice, quiet, reverent, sleepy little suburb with some nice parks and tightly condensed shopping complexes.

The News-Tribune touts Elder’s “gutsy” move to support Celebration Park years ago. While I won’t debate the value of Celebration Park, this frames the contest: Hope Elder supported the (then-unpopular) construction of a park that gave middle-class kids an unnecessary surplus of places to play soccer and baseball. Meanwhile, Dini Duclos ran a nonprofit company that provides services to lower-class people, young single-parent families and seniors to help them gain self-sufficiency. Hope Elder dreams of an imaginary white-bread Federal Way, Dini Duclos opens her eyes and sees a real modern city with real modern issues both present and probably approaching. Moving forward, it’s clear to me which one Federal Way will need.

Larson vs. Walker: WALKER
Castellar vs. Bronson-Doherty: BRONSON-DOHERTY

Not to pour salt into Larson’s wounds, which he displayed proudly despite not really feeling much pain from them, but last year’s national embarrassment, the Inconvenient Truth debacle, made the city of Federal Way look like a laughingstock, and rightfully so (even without Frosty Hardison’s appearance on the Daily Show). Larson claims to listen to the parents of Federal Way, but when a single notoriously vocal local family (and an unmentioned number of unnamed others) voiced their obscure concern, Larson and a majority of the School Board (including Castellar) were happy to oblige with a rare show of book (or movie) burning. Later, when a deluge of opposing mail (not counting that from outside the district) came in, Larson was not apologetic, only lamentatious. And while the ban on the movie was ostensibly overturned, I’ve not heard a word as to whether or not teacher Kay Walls was ever able to show it.

The school board is run by ideologues; sadly, the stay-at-home parents that have the time to get involved deeply with school and district issues likely share their ideology. But that by no means means that the rest of the parents and other residents of the city (which has consistently voted 54-56% for Kerry, Gregoire, and yes, Gore) share them, and our city’s schools and its children’s education shouldn’t be based on them. The more we can upset that apple cart, the better the community and its kids will be.