The decision to become part of the city of Bonney Lake is headed to voters in the annexation areas south of the city limits.

On July 27, the city council passed a resolution to officially begin the process to place the annexation on the ballot early next year with an effective annexation date of Jan. 1, 2012.

The resolution passed by a 6-1 vote with councilmember Mark Hamilton opposed.

Known as sub-areas 1, 2 and 3, if they are annexed they would add more than 1,860 acres and more than 7,000 people to the south end of the city.

The resolution runs all three areas as a single annexation, to pass or fail as a group.

Deputy Mayor Dan Swatman, a proponent of annexing the areas, said the metaphor for this is a “T intersection” in which the city of Bonney Lake can only go in one of two directions.

“This is a change of direction for the city of Bonney Lake,” Swatman said of the potential annexation. “I believe this is in the best interests of the city of Bonney Lake.”

Swatman said he believes the residents of the greater Plateau will have a larger say in regional and state politics with the larger population an annexation would provide.

Swatman has also said the areas deserve the urban services – including increased police protection – the city can provide. He also said annexing the areas, especially sub-area 3, platted for the Junction 465 subdivision, will allow city control over the development of the region, instead of leaving it to the county.

Councilmember Donn Lewis also cited those areas as a primary reason to vote for the resolution to annex.

“Growth and development are going to occur with or without our input,” he said.

Councilmember Jim Rackley added the county was horrible about providing services to the people of the area and said he supported the annexation vote because Bonney Lake would be able to provide the services most Americans expect, such as police protection.

Councilmember Dan Decker also spoke in favor of the resolution, adding he believes the future of the city rests in this area.

Hamilton, who voted against, said after the meeting the time was not right to bring these areas into the city because it will further stretch city resources at a time when they are having to cut back due to the recession.

“My feeling is that there’s no guarantee we’ll have the budget available,” he said.

Along with the annexation resolution, the council passed a second resolution calling for staff to develop a staffing plan to cover the new sections, should they be annexed.

According to a study done by the city, the areas should generate about $3.5 million in additional revenue for the city while additional staffing would cost approximately $1.4 million, which includes additional police as well as other city employees.

The staffing resolution was passed unanimously.