Articles considering the tax proposals on the books for fall 2008 in the Puget Sound area, and comparing them with the current regional economic climate (as well as the state of the U.S. & world stock market) are piling up.
Meanwhile, Seattle has a long list of tax proposals for 2008 in addition to Sound Transit, and both the cities of Seattle and Bellevue are asking voters for more tax dollars for parks bonds.
How will these additional taxes affect your decision on ST2 (Prop 1)?
Here’s a sample of the articles:
1. The Seattle Times: Editorials/Opinion: “Approve Pike Place Market Upgrade; Reject Seattle Parks Levy“:
“All property-tax increases are a difficult sell in this alarming economic climate. Yet the proposal to do basic seismic and core infrastructure upgrades to the beloved market is the most well-thought-out and necessary. ”
“The most compelling argument against the plan is the council is attempting to make permanent an allegedly one-time tax. Proponents say they need levy funds to acquire new parkland and develop new open space. Yes, they do, but that is what they said eight years ago. Putting this back on the ballot without even a one-year hiatus proves supporters believe taxpayers should always be buying parkland. If voters say yes, this becomes, for all practical purposes, a permanent levy because park supporters will return in six years with a similar request and argument…
…But one or two promising proposals are not enough to get voters over the hump of ballot fatigue and overtaxation in trying economic times.
Seattle voters cannot afford to fix up every part of the city every year while middle-class and lower-income families are so pinched they may not be able to afford to remain in their homes.
Mayor Nickels opposes the park levy because he says this is the wrong time to ask voters for so many tax dollars. He favors the market levy and a major sales-tax hit in the Sound Transit package.
At least the mayor is picking and choosing. Voters should, too: no to parks, yes to the Pike Place Market.”
2. The Seattle Times: “Taxes Times Three: Can You Afford Them?”
“The Seattle City Council is the gang that can’t say no. It can’t say no to a new idea. It can’t say no to a property-tax increase. So this November, Seattle voters will face three money measures: two from City Hall, one from Sound Transit…
…Sound Transit also opted to place expansion of light rail and buses on the fall ballot — a sales-tax increase.
Housing slump be damned. Don’t worry about rising gas and food prices. Blow off concerns about tax increases from other jurisdictions or utility rate increases from City Hall. This council cannot worry about rising costs pinching residents.
Voters will hear how the parks levy is not technically an increase, it’s a renewal and, whoa, such a deal, if voters will just say yes.”
3. Crosscut article by Knute Berger: “Seattle’s Money Madness”
“If we’re going to have to cough up for higher basics like bus fares, water, and garbage, let’s figure out places to save. An easy start is to limit new spending. We have to live within our means and scale back ambitions so that those below the median income can still afford to live here. That means cutting back and tightening the belt, being selective about new initiatives, and demanding our electeds look out for the little guy, who doesn’t want to get priced off the bus or out of the supermarket.”
LETTERS:
To the HeraldNet: “Tax Burden Already Too Heavy Here”
“While passage of this measure will look great on a politician’s resume, somehow this has to be paid for. I suggest that it is time to get realistic and put money into expanded bus service, which seems to be the most cost-efficient method of mass transit.”
To the West Seattle Herald: “City Hall: Out of Control”
“City Hall wants two new levies, one new tax, one conservation program, three rate increases and Sound Transit wants yet another $18 billion to add to our already onerous tax burden at a time when the economy is doing poorly.”
“For the median Seattle family, this amounts to $46,000. Adding another $930 to this is a big hit, especially for the middle and low income families or seniors living on a fixed income who may be forced from their homes by any tax increase.”
http://www.westseattleherald.com/articles/2008/10/06/interact/letters_to_the_editor/letter06.txt