October 7, 2009 in City

Nonprofits oppose I-1033

Agencies dealing with children’s issues, housing fear big cuts if initiative passes

• Print
• Email
• Share

Nonprofit agencies that work on housing and children’s issues are putting out a call for volunteers to work against a Washington initiative to limit government spending.

Recent polls show Initiative 1033 with a comfortable lead, and that has groups concerned about a loss of grant funding for programs, said Mary Ann Murphy, executive director of Partners with Families and Children: Spokane.

“I did get alarmed that perhaps people didn’t know all the implications of how this will play out,” she said.

Social service agencies are planning a phone bank to alert voters to their concerns.

The sponsor of the initiative asked whether the agencies should be campaigning for or against any ballot measure but said he doubted their effort would have much impact.

“If we thought it was going to be really effective, we’d be more upset,” Tim Eyman said.

The initiative proposes limits on the amount of revenue the state, cities and counties can spend from their general funds. It also would require property tax reductions if they collected more than an amount tied to inflation and population growth. The state’s Office of Financial Management projects that state, city and county revenues would grow much more slowly under I-1033 than they would under current law.

Based on estimates of inflation and population growth between now and 2015, the state’s fiscal office projects the state would have almost $6 billion less to spend over the next five years, while cities would have $2 billion less and counties $694 million less. But the Office of Financial Management also notes that all three will see more money over that period. For example, the state general fund, which covers education, health and social services and most other state programs, would grow between $400 million and $500 million a year through 2015, rather than an estimated $800 million to $1 billion a year.

Michael Kelly, of the Washington Low Income Housing Alliance, which put out the call for volunteers, said restrictions on general-fund spending could lead to reductions in programs that tackle homelessness, hunger and housing shortages.

Murphy said the state may have already cut mandated services such as schools and corrections as much as possible, so health and social services may bear a larger share of any cuts from I-1033.

“I don’t feel shy or reticent about thinking those are good things the state does. I feel good about services for health and children,” she said.

Eyman argues, however, that the best way to fight homelessness or expand low-income housing is to make homes more affordable, and one way to do that is to lower property taxes, which I-1033 would do if revenue grows faster than the limit it sets up. “How do we help the poor? Stop taxing them into poverty might be a good start.”

Rachel Myers, executive director of the housing coalition, agreed the state needs to examine its high property taxes, as well as its high sales tax rate, but not in an initiative campaign. “I don’t think this is the way to address the disproportionate impact of taxes on the poor.”

A September poll commissioned by the pro-initiative campaign showed the proposal had backing from a majority of voters.

Three comments on this story so far. Add yours!

• 

  TimEyman on October 07 at 7:22 a.m.

  RE: Poll by Rasmussen Reports on I-1033: 61% yes, 31% no, 8% undecided (remember, those undecided’s gotta go somewhere)

  It’s clear that voters are rejecting the multi-million-dollar, Washington-DC-funded “con” campaign by opponents of I-1033 — the initiative leads by 30 points with just a few weeks left to go. The poll by Rasmussen Reports, taken on September 22nd, shows support at 61% yes, 31% no, 8% undecided. Here’s what 500 likely voters were asked:

  A statewide initiative will be on the ballot this November. We’d like to ask if you support it or not:
  
  The initiative concerns state, county and city revenue. Here is the ballot title: This measure would limit growth of certain state, county and city revenue to annual inflation and population growth, not including voter-approved revenue increases. Revenue collected above the limit would reduce property tax levies. Do you definitely favor, probably favor, probably oppose, or definitely oppose this initiative?

  21% Definitely favor
  40% Probably favor
  17% Probably oppose
  14% Definitely oppose
  8% Not sure

  NOTE: Margin of Sampling Error, +/ 4.5 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

  Just to show how accurate Rasmussen is with their polling, their results on Initiative 960 two years ago perfectly predicted the measure’s election outcome (51%-49%). Here’s the results of their September 26, 2007 poll among 500 likely voters: 51% yes, 39% no, 9% not sure (18% definitely favor, 33% probably favor, 22% probably oppose, 17% definitely oppose). Despite opponents spending $1.3 million over the subsequent weeks saying I-960 was ‘just like Colorado’s TABOR’, the numbers didn’t move an inch. With I-1033 starting 10 points higher (61% versus 51%), we’re feeling really good about I-1033’s prospects with voters in November.

  It’s clear that voters are savvy enough to see through opponents’ threats, lies, and scare tactics on I-1033.

  We have faith in the common sense of the average taxpayer to see through opponents’ threats, lies and scare tactics.

• 

  Rifleman__Dodd on October 07 at 8:07 a.m.

  When non-profits begin to attempt to influence a “citizen/voter” law making process, is when I put my checkbook back into my pocket.

  If the NGO’s really want to make a difference, then they can help stop the Government squandering of our tax dollars, which is what this initiative is attempting to stop.

  Its incredibly funny for them to think that a phone bank will make any difference. The phone bank calling lists are only landlines not cell phones. Who owns just a land line anymore? The poor and the elderly. Both groups whom support keeping the government from dipping into their pockets. This will just increase support for the Initiative.

• 

  SteveZemke on October 12 at 10:32 a.m.

  Government is not out of control unless you count countless filings of anti-tax, ant- government initiatives by Tim Eyman paid for by Michael Dunmire that hire out of state signature gatherers to try to promote extreme right wing agendas like transferring wealth from lower income taxpayers to wealthy property owners as I-1033 proposes to do.

  Renters and fixed income seniors and working families that don’t own property lose under I-1033’s unfair tax transfer system, collecting sales taxes and other fees from low and middle income taxpayers to be used to pay property taxes for corporations and real estate developers and shopping mall owners like Kemper Freeman Jr of Bellevue Square who gave $25,000 to Eyman.

  The tax rebate system proposed by Eyman in I-1033 is not based on the amount of sales taxes or other fees one pays but on the amount of property one owns. If you own no property you get ne rebate.

  Last year some 54% of state revenue came from sales taxes. Businesses get about one third of the property tax rebates yet they have a sales tax exemption for goods they resell. The end consumer is the one who pays the sales tax.

  What a great tax refund system Eyman is proposing.- take taxes paid by everyone and use them only to benefit property owners. Some 35% of households in Washington State are not owner occupied according to the US Census Bureau.

  Times are bad enough for low and middle income families already with the recession without making our tax system even more regressive. Vote NO on I-1033.