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.