Does anyone know why King County was re-named after Martin Luther King Jr? (Seattle: houses, neighborhoods)

[mamainfl]

It sounds like the county commissioners just decided to do it one day, and pushed it through without a vote. Anyone know the back story? Did anyone have an issue with this?

[loriinwa]

The county council passed a motion in 1986 to make MLK the namesake for King County. Never heard anyone complain about it.

[GatsbyGatz]

Simple Wiki search:

The county was originally named after William Rufus King who was Vice-President when the Washington Territory was created. In 1986, a motion was introduced to change the namesake to Martin Luther King, Jr. No public votes or hearings were taken on the change.

On February 24, 1986, the King County Council passed Council Motion 6461 five votes to four setting forth the historical basis for the renaming of King County in honor of Martin Luther King, Jr. Because only the state can charter counties, this change was not made official until April 19, 2005, when the Governor signed Senate Bill 5332 into law.

The County Council submitted a vote to the public on February 27, 2006 to change the county's logo from a royal crown to an image of King. On March 12, 2007, the new logo was unveiled.

Martin Luther King Jr. visited King County for two days in November 1961.

__________________________________________________ ____________________

Ultimately, I think it was a matter of political weight. I don't think anyone knows that King County was originally named after William Rufus King or who he was (because Americans really don't care about vice presidents). Also, the U.S. doesn't have any kings, so obviously it wasn't named after a king. Therefore, by process of elimination, the only relevant name is MLK.

As to how MLK is in any way connected to the Pacific Northwest? No idea. On the contrary, if you look at deeds to properties throughout Seattle, many houses still have an easement which prohibits the property to ever be owned by African Americans. Obviously this easement is unenforceable, but it exemplifies the fact that the PNW has a history of segregation, as with the entire U.S. So I suppose remaking King County after MLK is a gesture of showing that the PNW transcends racial boundaries.

Another point worth mentioning is that in the 80's, it was a trend happening within almost every city in the US to rename a street MLK. You'll notice today that most cities have streets named MLK. So Seattle renamed a street MLK and went a step further to reframe the origin of the County's name.

[amaiunmei]

I'd start here:

Toledo Blade - Google News Archive Search

This is the guy the county was previously named for:

William R. King - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[seattlefun]

Originally Posted by GatsbyGatz

Simple Wiki search:

The county was originally named after William Rufus King who was Vice-President when the Washington Territory was created. In 1986, a motion was introduced to change the namesake to Martin Luther King, Jr. No public votes or hearings were taken on the change.

On February 24, 1986, the King County Council passed Council Motion 6461 five votes to four setting forth the historical basis for the renaming of King County in honor of Martin Luther King, Jr. Because only the state can charter counties, this change was not made official until April 19, 2005, when the Governor signed Senate Bill 5332 into law.

The County Council submitted a vote to the public on February 27, 2006 to change the county's logo from a royal crown to an image of King. On March 12, 2007, the new logo was unveiled.

Martin Luther King Jr. visited King County for two days in November 1961.

__________________________________________________ ____________________

Ultimately, I think it was a matter of political weight. I don't think anyone knows that King County was originally named after William Rufus King or who he was (because Americans really don't care about vice presidents). Also, the U.S. doesn't have any kings, so obviously it wasn't named after a king. Therefore, by process of elimination, the only relevant name is MLK.

As to how MLK is in any way connected to the Pacific Northwest? No idea. On the contrary, if you look at deeds to properties throughout Seattle, many houses still have an easement which prohibits the property to ever be owned by African Americans. Obviously this easement is unenforceable, but it exemplifies the fact that the PNW has a history of segregation, as with the entire U.S. So I suppose remaking King County after MLK is a gesture of showing that the PNW transcends racial boundaries.

Another point worth mentioning is that in the 80's, it was a trend happening within almost every city in the US to rename a street MLK. You'll notice today that most cities have streets named MLK. So Seattle renamed a street MLK and went a step further to reframe the origin of the County's name.

Who says you don't learn something new everyday? This is great info! thank you

[amaiunmei]

Originally Posted by GatsbyGatz

Simple Wiki search:

The county was originally named after William Rufus King who was Vice-President when the Washington Territory was created. In 1986, a motion was introduced to change the namesake to Martin Luther King, Jr. No public votes or hearings were taken on the change.

On February 24, 1986, the King County Council passed Council Motion 6461 five votes to four setting forth the historical basis for the renaming of King County in honor of Martin Luther King, Jr. Because only the state can charter counties, this change was not made official until April 19, 2005, when the Governor signed Senate Bill 5332 into law.

The County Council submitted a vote to the public on February 27, 2006 to change the county's logo from a royal crown to an image of King. On March 12, 2007, the new logo was unveiled.

Martin Luther King Jr. visited King County for two days in November 1961.

__________________________________________________ ____________________

Ultimately, I think it was a matter of political weight. I don't think anyone knows that King County was originally named after William Rufus King or who he was (because Americans really don't care about vice presidents). Also, the U.S. doesn't have any kings, so obviously it wasn't named after a king. Therefore, by process of elimination, the only relevant name is MLK.

As to how MLK is in any way connected to the Pacific Northwest? No idea. On the contrary, if you look at deeds to properties throughout Seattle, many houses still have an easement which prohibits the property to ever be owned by African Americans. Obviously this easement is unenforceable, but it exemplifies the fact that the PNW has a history of segregation, as with the entire U.S. So I suppose remaking King County after MLK is a gesture of showing that the PNW transcends racial boundaries.

Another point worth mentioning is that in the 80's, it was a trend happening within almost every city in the US to rename a street MLK. You'll notice today that most cities have streets named MLK. So Seattle renamed a street MLK and went a step further to reframe the origin of the County's name.

I think you're on to something about the renaming happening in the 80's, in the context of those times.

Another thing to note is that Washington's ties to WR King were tenuous, at best. The name was a hand-me-down from a year previous to Washington's inception, when the Oregon territory chose the name. WA just kind of inherited the name and didn't address the legacy until centuries later. I think a lot of the issue had to do with an active choice to reclaim the history and make it distinct from Oregon's history (which had problematic elements).

[GatsbyGatz]

Originally Posted by amaiunmei

I think you're on to something about the renaming happening in the 80's, in the context of those times.

Another thing to note is that Washington's ties to WR King were tenuous, at best. The name was a hand-me-down from a year previous to Washington's inception, when the Oregon territory chose the name. WA just kind of inherited the name and didn't address the legacy until centuries later. I think a lot of the issue had to do with an active choice to reclaim the history and make it distinct from Oregon's history (which had problematic elements).

It almost seems prudent for the county to have been renamed after either a member of the original Denny Party or a prominent member of the preexisting tribe. Although I guess keeping the same name but modifying it's origin story is logistically easier.

[Gardyloo]

When the change was made much was said about how W. R. King was a prominent slaveholder.

[NCDavid]

Yes, King County was renamed during a period when many localities around the country were renaming local streets, parks and other things to honor Martin Luther King. But that is only part of the story. William Rufus King was a slave owner from Alabama who worked hard in the U.S. Senate to try to prevent the freeing of slaves. That made it even easier for King County officials to justify the renaming of the county in honor of MLK.
Ironically, WR King was instrumental of the naming of Selma, Alabama.
Not pertinent to this discussion but of historical interest, WR King was likely gay and was widely rumored during his lifetime to have had a relationship with James Buchanan, the only bachelor president in US. history.

[RotseCherut]

Originally Posted by mamainfl

It sounds like the county commissioners just decided to do it one day, and pushed it through without a vote. Anyone know the back story? Did anyone have an issue with this?

Because it is a liberal county. It is like how Portland renamed 39th Ave to Cesar Chavez Ave, yet the street has the lowest number of hispanics in the entire metro area. They just want to feel like they are being open-minded and progressive.

Ironically, most of the black people have moved away from the neighborhoods surrounding Martin Luther King Jr Blvd in Portland and I notice this happening in Seattle as well now.