Currently, the Seattle City Council is weighing whether or not to incorporate White Center, and several other currently unincorporated southern neighborhoods, into the city. This isn't a new discussion—it's been raised and tabled for over a decade. But the debate is finally going to reach a head on March 28, when the city council votes, ultimately, on whether White Center residents should have the option of becoming Seattleites*. (The alternative is to let Burien scoop up the chunk of currently unincorporated land and its residents.)

So should the 20,000 people of White Center become Seattle residents?

Seattle City Council President Richard Conlin says yes—White Center residents deserve better fire and police services, among other things. Mayor Mike McGinn says no—Seattle can't afford the costs of annexation at this time.

While I admire Conlin's fine taste in neighborhoods, Seattle should pass on White Center and allow it to become part of Burien.

No one is debating the merits of White Center, or other neighborhoods in the annex zone. They can't be debated because White Center is undeniably kick ass: It's diverse, the markets are great, the people are friendly (EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM), and some of them—the ones lobbying City Hall—really want to become Seattle residents.

But here's the problem: Seattle doesn't have the money to incorporate White Center and its surrounding neighborhoods. And, frankly, those residents would have more political power in Burien, where they'd makeup 50 percent of the Burien's population, as opposed to five percent of Seattle's population. There, residents would be a lobbying power to be reckoned with. Seattle can't offer them that. All we can offer them is bottom-barrel access to services we're already cutting left and right.

You might be wondering why the hell this is being debated at all (or again. and again. and again). I'll get into the wonky details—and the estimated millions that White Center would annually cost Seattle—after the jump.

*The long and short of it is, if the council voted for annexation to move forward, unincorporated residents would then vote in November on whether or not to allow Seattle to incorporate them.

Here's the quick back story: The state Growth Management mandates that cities deliver urban services—like fire, police, etc. So unincorporated neighborhoods like White Center are forced to either latch onto a city or become their own. The problem is, most unincorporated neighborhoods are too poor to be autonomous. So last year, the cities of Seattle and Burien reached a gentlemen's agreement to divvy up a large, unincorporated area known as the Highline into northern and southern halves. Burien promptly incorporated the southern half and Seattle once again dithered on whether or not to incorporate the northern half (which includes White Center). The gentlemen's agreement basically stated that if Seattle didn't act before 2012, Burien would then have a crack at the northern half.

So for the past few months, Seattle city officials have been analyzing the costs associated with taking on this new population—basically balancing the revenues that White Center would bring in versus the one-time and ongoing costs of incorporation. And the numbers don't look good.

According to the city's budget office, in the best case scenario—meaning White Center would provide the highest revenue and cost Seattle the least amount possible—annexation would cost Seattle $1.8 million annually to maintain. In the worst case scenario, which assumes less revenue assumed and higher costs, the area would cost the city $16.8 million annually (after a one-time annexation cost of $91.3 million to pave crumbling streets, get the area's fire and police response services up to snuff, etc.).

Holy shit! you're thinking. That's a lot of money!

Indeed. It's more than Seattle has right now—or will have in the near future—to spend on new residents.