The Seattle Times has endorsed the Families and Education Levy:
Seattle voters should extend the Families and Education Levy for another seven years despite City Council add-ons that ratcheted up the cost. This package is too important to turn down.Its importance should be judged in the context of the accomplishments of the last $138 million of Levy spending, which the Times neglects to note, are scandalously meagre. The Times is also a bit too credulous of some of the Levy's other campaign promises:
the city adds strong accountability unseen in the first two leviesAs we've explained here before, the initiative doesn't actually add any accountability, strong or otherwise. The Times was at least less enthusiastic about the package than the P-I was and they do acknowledge some of the faults
This levy is marketed as a renewal, but in reality it is a 69-percent increase from the previous $69 million levy ... We thought the nurses ought to be paid by the School District and the crossing guards by the city general fund.The conclusion is regrettable:
Our answer is yes. Seattle cannot afford the alternative.The affordable alternative would be to say no now and craft a fairly priced, accountable proposal later. What we really cannot afford is to keep approving and paying for these things even when they have little chance of actually fulfilling their promises.
The Times editorial page agreed to publish our op-ed sometime in the next few days. (It's different from today's P-I op-ed). I still wish the Times news department would do some reporting on where the last $138 million of Levy funds went and what (little) this spending actually accomplished.Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at September 02, 2004 09:58 AM | Email This