33°Quick links: Boys ranch moves assets • GU basketball • WSU basketball • Kendall Yards plan • Swine flu
Good evening, Netizens…
David Horsey has taken on Tim Eyman, and frankly, I am uncertain if Eyman is quite the glinty-eyed ogre that David Horsey would make him out to be.
On the other hand, I am no fuzzy and warm fan of Tim Eyman, although I have a certain degree of sympathy for many of the Initiatives he has either successfully put or attempted to put on the ballot. I admit freely and openly a great deal of misgivings about one of his most-current efforts, I-1033.
However, in case you haven’t read the entire document, I recommend you read http://www.secstate.wa.gov/elections/initiatives/text/i1033.pdf the complete initiative. On second thought, at least speaking for myself, read it through twice. There is a lot of bureaucratic double-talk present, which is nearly always true of our beloved State Government, and by association, Tim Eyman.
If I were to summarize I-1033 in a simple sentence, I would probably say that, at the expense of various state government programs that are dependent upon property tax levies for their source(s) of funding, what this initiative does is put a spending cap or limitation on the amount of additional property taxes that can be added each year. It is true that, if I-1033 passes, there are a lot of state programs that will need to find additional source(s) of funding, and pretty quickly at that.
This does not prohibit any additional new property taxes. What it states plainly is that if additional property taxes are needed or wanted above the reasonable limits it sets forth, the voters can approve the additional funding as it becomes necessary. I may not have the precise terminology down pat, but at least from what I understand of I-1033, at least now I can see why schools and other tax-dependent organizations have been flooding the airwaves in opposition to I-1033.
Dave
999 W. Riverside, Spokane, WA 99201
P.O. Box 2160, Spokane, WA 99210
Main switchboard: (509) 459-5000 • (800) 338-8801
Newsroom: (509) 459-5400 • (800) 789-0029
Customer service: (800) 338-8801
© Copyright 2009, The Spokesman-Review
Rifleman__Dodd on October 21 at 11:15 p.m.
Our government's function is to spend money. They are so good at it that someone/somehow has to put government on a diet control.
Property tax is persnickety since it only taxes THOSE whom own property. Yet the rest of the people still get to vote on those whom spend that money. I call that Representation Without Taxation.
Its time that those whom procreate beyond a replacement for them selves share the burden for their proclivity to breed.
I'd like to see how many kids are home schooled nowdays and what their SAT scores are?
Surely there must be a case of a government agency actually returning UNSPENT money back into the pockets of the citizenry. i.e. a Tax refund?
I believe what Eyeman is actually doing is to force our system to abandon the unfair tax schemes that we have and normalize government income/spending.
Flag as inappropriate
spokelooneh on October 22 at 12:06 a.m.
“Property tax is persnickety since it only taxes THOSE whom own property. Yet the rest of the people still get to vote on those whom spend that money. I call that Representation Without Taxation.”
-Lance Corporal Dodd.
Apparently you don't understand the capitalist system. In it, landlords will pass along the increased property tax costs to renters.
Therefore, renters bear the same burden of property taxes as do property owners.
I have tried to make that concept, well understood by most everyone, as simple as possible for you to understand. Comprende?
Flag as inappropriate
arliacne on October 22 at 6:43 a.m.
spokelooneh is correct and so many apartment dwellers fail to comprehend the concept - there's no such thing as a free lunch (except in the case of midges).
Library districts, school districts, fire districts all improve the community in which we live, and all are dependent on levies and bonds. The cost of running these districts goes up just like costs go up for all of us. When we remove public funding we severely degrade the ability of these various districts to offer cultural and educational programs to all. Even if you don't use the library, your neighborhood children and elderly probably do. That directly impacts the quality of your life in so many ways.
I don't like paying property taxes, particularly in light of the sharp increases many of us saw in 2008, but I certainly don't begrudge the local districts the funds to operate at capacity. So, I pay my share, and so does my renter.
I do, however, expect those funds to be ditributed and spent wisely.
Flag as inappropriate
dick adams on October 22 at 7:21 a.m.
Seems to me somebody has got to stop the political pimps reckless spending habits. Go get them, Tim!
Flag as inappropriate
lewis on October 22 at 7:21 a.m.
Maybe we need to put the brakes on. If anything just to show we need some sort of regulation. Spokane has so many renters that don’t understand if the taxes go up their rent goes up because their rent will go up regardless. So why not get libraries and schools out of it? As far as they see it, it really only effects the landlord and what do they care?
I don’t mind paying my fair share but I don’t want to pay increased taxes for less services. When it snows I want to see a snow plow, when the roads have potholes I want them fixed.
And when the spd wants a donut machine in every car, i want some accountability They want they want what about what we want?
Flag as inappropriate
Rifleman__Dodd on October 22 at 10:32 a.m.
Actually not all “renters” pay a FULL share of property taxes since its spread out among ALL renters. ergo they dont pay it and only the landlord/owner gets the deduction.
Quit fooling yourselves. However that appears to be your modus operandi.
Flag as inappropriate
Spok on October 22 at 2:25 p.m.
1033 will lead to a degradation of services and schools that have already suffered major cuts. That, in turn, leads to a loss of value in our homes.Buyers pay a premium for neighborhoods in good school districts.
1033 has illusory immediate savings at huge future costs, as both California and Colorado have found out with their own similar propositions or initatives.
Flag as inappropriate
arliacne on October 22 at 3:57 p.m.
When our schools and libraries have their funds cut because of loss of levies and bonds (i.e. property taxes don't increase along with the costs associated with providing community service) we as a community lose by seeing schools and libraries shuttered, class sizes increased affecting the ability to teach, libraries making do with books three, four years out of date and no new replacements, loss of fire protection and on and on. That makes the residential areas less attractive to home buyers coming in to the area which in turn lowers the property value of the homes in the region which in turn leads to schools and libraries having their funds cut because of loss of …… well, any intelligent person can see the slippery slope here.
Don't kid yourselves, when schools and libraries fail so does the community.
And by the way I pass on the entire cost of the property tax on to the renter. The tax deduction for that is fairly minimal.
Flag as inappropriate
Rifleman__Dodd on October 22 at 9:43 p.m.
Property tax is just a reverse Poll Tax in disquise.
1033 will hold our government responsible and control OUT of control spending.
I suggest trying the diet and perhaps our government will end some of its BLOAT and pork. Nothing else has worked and unless any of you other brainiacs got a better idea, how about getting behind this plow and help push the FAT off the land.
Flag as inappropriate
lewis on October 22 at 10:16 p.m.
I was a renter for years I could have cared less about the property taxes because my rent went up every year anyway it was right in the lease it could go up 20% every year. So I voted for every darn increase they wanted on the property owners. I felt I was stabbing it to the landlord, and not known to me at the time I was also stabbing the single-family homeowner, which is what I am now.
Yes thank you for the insult rifleman just shows your own ignorance. You da man!
Flag as inappropriate
Steve Zemke on October 22 at 11:24 p.m.
Unfortunately these comments point out the difficulty of trying to write complex legislation and budget by initiative. Tax and budget issues are not simple and most people do not understand our tax and revenue system
I-1033 is a wealth transfer scheme. On the state level, revenue to the current budget comes from several sources.
Eyman proposes to freeze government services at this year's level and transfer any revenue received over that limit to reduce property taxes. The problem is that the state's general fund revenue comes in the following proportion;
retail sales taxes 54%
Business & occupation tax 19.5%
property taxes 10.4%
real estate excise tax (on sales of homes) 4.1%
other 13.4%
Taxes come in from multiple sources but Eyman does not propose people get rebates on what they pay. Rebates only go to property owners. Some 35% of households are renters. Sales taxes everyone pays.
This scheme shifts the tax burden to low and middle income taxpayers to only benefit people who own property, including commercial property. The rebate is not proportional to the taxes above that anyone paid, only to the amount of property one owns.
I-1033 has people without property paying taxes for property owners. Renters lose twice by not getting any rebate or seeing their tax dollars go to fund services they need or could use.
I-1033 has many unforeseen consequences. It's obvious from the discussion above that it not easy to figure out, since no on noted that the description of what I-1033 does above was not correct, that most people don't know what it will do. Even reading the initiative does not make it clear.
People would be wise to vote No on such a complex measure that in my opinion is not going to help them. A property tax homestead exemption on ones principal home makes a lot more sense. Eyman opposes that. Eyman's scheme just transfers more money to people with lots of property.
For example Kemper Freeman who owns Bellevue Square gave Eyman $25,000 to get I-1033 on the ballot. He stands to see a $1.7 million reduction in his property taxes each year. You and I would be paying for that.
Vote No on I-1033. It creates more problems than it solves and trasfer tax burden onto those that most need help.
for more info see:
http://www.leg.wa.gov/Senate/Committe…
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html…
Flag as inappropriate
Rifleman__Dodd on October 23 at 8:31 a.m.
Zemke: “Unfortunately these comments point out the difficulty of trying to write complex legislation and budget by initiative. Tax and budget issues are not simple and most people do not understand our tax and revenue system”.
Self prophecy. No need to read beyond his first paragraph.
Flag as inappropriate
richard on October 25 at 8:25 p.m.
Zemke seems to be confused on “welath transfer.” He seems to believe that government “owns” the revenue before it is taxed. Limiting the growth of government is not about wealth transfer; taxation is about wealth transfer. Listen to and observe Barack Obama.
If the public is unable through its elected officials to keep tabs on the size of government; who will do that job? The anti-initiative movement has already determined that growth in government is “good” and that those who pay the taxes for that growth have ulterior motives.
I think if one is to examine the foundation of this nation, they would realize that the notions today fronted by the liberal/Democrats is upside down and anti-democratic. The weath of this nation is not there to fund government excesses and growth.
Vote yes on I-1033!
Flag as inappropriate