I see commenters have been diving into the topic of I-747 unbidden, given understandable frustration with that recent decision. With Stefan taking a blog break, keep in mind most of the rest of the contributors have day jobs that keep us from chiming in as timely a manner on every issue as we might like.
With that, I think it's worth noting our current Governor as well as her party brethren in the Legislature are falling all over themselves to say they don't want to revert back to the status quo ante. It's probably safe to say this year's election punctuated the last several years of unrest from taxpayers, though it's not clear Olympia actually understands all of that negative feeling in full.
As such, calls for a special session to affirm the intent of voters seems more than fair if state government leaders are actually serious about making a statement to the citizenry. I don't actually think many local governments would be foolish enough to risk the backlash of taking advantage of the ruling to ram through sudden tax hikes, but it's possible.
More importantly, state government needs to start demonstrating they understand the frustration percolating among voters given the current mood. Not that I actually hold out much hope of that truly happening in the near future based on the spendthrift ways of the last couple budgets to emanate from the State Capitol.
Posted by Eric Earling at November 09, 2007 06:59 PM | Email ThisNote to Christine:
Dino is going to win anyway.
Posted by: swassociates on November 9, 2007 07:21 PMThat being said, I'm not sure you can really say the voters are in too much of an anti-tax mode. They approved an increased parks levy in the primary, and the medic one renewal is over 80%. 960 is only passing by 2% and that may fall as King County reports.
Roads and transit did fail, but the reasons are more complicated then just tax. Enviro concerns, turnout, and the projects themselves played an important role.
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2007 10:12 AM
Subject: Msg to Gov & Leg: here's the minimum
November 9, 2007
To: House & Senate elected officials & Governor Gregoire (cc'd to our thousands of supporters throughout the state & all media outlets (reporters, columnists, editorial writers, and others in newspapers, radio, and TV)
From: Tim Eyman, Jack Fagan, Mike Fagan, & Mike Dunmire
RE: Message to Governor & Legislature: here's the minimum
The liberal justices on the state supreme court did you no favors yesterday. This is a powder keg that will explode if you ignore the voters clear no-new-taxes message on Tuesday (passage of I-960 and rejections of Prop 1, 4204, and numerous other local tax measures). Even with the people's 1% limit, Washington state's property tax burden is still crushing everyone. All of you know this because nearly 50 bills were introduced in the last legislative session TO LIMIT PROPERTY TAXES EVEN MORE THAN REQUIRED UNDER I-747. In other words, even with the people's 1% levy limit in effect, you were discussing going further and reducing property taxes.
Here's why the people's 1% levy limit is a given:
In 1999, we sponsored I-695 which required voter approval for every tax and fee increase by state and local governments and $30 tabs. After the court rejected I-695, you adopted $30 tabs but you ignored the voters demand for I-695's voter-approval-for-tax-and-fee-increases provision. Pollster Stuart Elway has consistently said his polling showed I-695's voter approval provision had EVEN HIGHER support than $30 tabs.
Voters demanded it but didn't get it.
Prior to I-695 taking effect, local governments went on a tax and fee hike rampage, jacking up everything in sight from November through December 31, 1999. So in 2000, we sponsored I-722 and it:
* Nullified all those last minute tax and fee increases
* Imposed a 2% government levy limit and a 2% individual property tax
limit
* Repealed banking authority (RCW 84.55.092) which allows governments to unilaterally impose levy increases above 2% without a vote of the people
Voters overwhelmingly approved it with 55% support but once again, the courts said no, so voters didn't get any of these protections.
So, at this point, the voters demanded voter approval for tax and fee increases by state and local governments, repealed pre-695 revenue hikes, demanded a 2% levy limit and a 2% individual limit, and repealed banking authority -- AND THEY DIDN'T GET ANY OF THEM.
Voters were livid. The voters' clear demands were being disregarded, dismissed, and disrespected.
In response, many supporters in 2001 wanted us to go further and reduce property taxes, but we went with a compromise - no property tax reductions but a 1% levy limit which doesn't include the property tax revenue government gets from new construction, improvements, annexations, and real estate excise taxes and with an additional exception for anything above 1% approved by voters at an election. It got 58% support, the largest level of support for any initiative we've ever done. It was a crystal clear mandate.
So the 1% levy limit is the compromise -- 1% is a given. But because of the court's ruling, the people's 1% levy limit doesn't go far enough:
* You've got to either repeal banking authority (remember, voters repealed it in 2000 with I-722) or require voter approval at an election for anything above 1% including unused banking capacity. The gigantic stockpiled total that's now available to local governments is staggering, accumulating over the past six years. In 2002, the Port of Seattle jacked up their levy 37% using banking. You've got to make sure that 1% means 1% and if there's anything higher, it needs voter approval.
* You've got to close the loophole in I-747 that you created in 2007. King County Assessor Scott Noble was the whistleblower on this one and he advocates this loophole be closed. After he highlighted it and the Seattle Times slammed you for it, you said that wasn't your intent. But making "levy lid lifts" permanent even if governments promised during the campaign that they'd only be temporary is simply unacceptable.
http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=nobleed19&date=20070819&query=noble
* You've got to do this now. A special session is essential. King County Assessor Scott Noble has already been contacted by local governments who say "we want it all and we want to be first in line." January is too late. Rep. Ed Orcutt and Sen. Don Benton have already reported that state representatives and state senators must go to Olympia at the end of November for 'committee assembly' anyway. Do it then and get it out of the way.
You don't like us - but you do like your jobs. The court has given each of you the chance to prove that you got the no-new-taxes message from Tuesday's election. When it comes to the people's 1% limit, each of you will show whether you're a representative of the people or a representative of the government.
We're already hearing "Voters said 1%, courts said 6%, let's compromise at 2%." The taxpayers have already substantially compromised.
Governor Gregoire, Speaker Chopp, Majority Leader Brown, 2% is DOUBLE what voters want. State and local governments have learned to live with the people's 1% limit. Levy lid lifts above 1% by local governments have a 70% success rate with voters. So there's no going back.
You already know taxpayers are demanding PROPERTY TAX REDUCTIONS - so you better do the minimum right away and hope and pray that'll suffice going into the 2008 election. Just do the right thing, listen to the voters, and take this issue off the table in the 2008 election.
Regards, Tim Eyman, Jack Fagan, Mike Fagan, & Mike Dunmire
Gregoire to seek 1 percent WA property tax cap
By CURT WOODWARD
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER
OLYMPIA, Wash. -- Gov. Chris Gregoire pledged Friday to push the Legislature for a 1 percent yearly cap on property tax increases, to reinstate a voter-approved initiative that was just thrown out by the state Supreme Court.
Bowing to voters who rejected billions in new taxes at the polls Tuesday, Gregoire said she would work with Democratic legislative leaders to ensure the property tax cap gets passed.
"The voters approved Initiative 747, it has been in place for five years and I think we need to leave it in place," Gregoire said.
Gregoire, a Democrat, did not rule out a special session to make the change, a step called for earlier Friday by Dino Rossi, her Republican opponent for re-election in 2008.
Gregoire also reiterated her call to local officials not to raise taxes above the 1 percent cap, saying the Legislature must have time to act.
If that directive is ignored, Gregoire told The Associated Press she would consider calling a special session.
If no special session is called, lawmakers would begin working on the measure just after the new year. It figures to be at the top of the Democratic majority's agenda, and likely will be on a fast track for approval.
Gregoire's public support of the 1 percent cap follows Tuesday's election, in which Washingtonians displayed a penny-pinching mood.
Voters favored I-747 sponsor Tim Eyman's newest anti-tax initiative, endorsed a "rainy day" fund to head off future tax increases and rejected an $18 billion transportation package in the Puget Sound region.
Gregoire said cost-conscious voters in Washington mirrored their counterparts across the country, who defeated tax and spending measures from Oregon to New Jersey.
"I think the voters around the country on Tuesday said 'We're a little bit anxious about our pocketbooks, and we're a little bit anxious in general.' And I respect that," she said.
Washington voters approved I-747 in 2001 to prevent various levels of government from bumping up property taxes more than 1 percent per year. On Thursday, the Supreme Court ruled I-747 was unconstitutional, largely on technical grounds.
Before I-747 and a predecessor tax-cap initiative, the limit on annual property tax hikes was 6 percent.
Gregoire hadn't previously committed to a 1 percent cap, but said last year that a return to a 6 percent cap could tax people out of their homes.
House Democrats are committed to the 1 percent cap with Gregoire, and also would support a special session if local governments don't hold the line on property taxes in the meantime, said Majority Leader Lynn Kessler, D-Hoquiam.
"It seems that's appropriate given not just the election, but the whole economy," she said. "We've lived with it this long, so we can certainly reinstate it."
Senate Ways and Means Chairwoman Margarita Prentice, D-Renton, said Senate Democrats have been working on the issue already and are close to the governor's position.
Eyman said he was pleased by Gregoire's announcement, but found it ironic that Democratic leaders were suddenly pledging quick action.
"Olympia is never more representative than when facing the voters," he said. "They found religion. That's nice."
Eyman also credited Rossi with forcing Gregoire's hand, and Rossi quickly followed suit, calling Gregoire a flip-flopper.
"Despite her new position, this still cannot wait until January," Rossi spokeswoman Jill Strait said, pushing again for an immediate special session.
-- END --
Posted by: Tim Eyman, I-960 co-sponsor on November 9, 2007 07:55 PMThis once again is just all talk, no action, and it will take a taxpayer revolt in 2008 before this legislature will get out of our pockets.
I sm so angry at this State supreme court for this stupid decision, based not in any fact at all but their hate and greed for the public trough.
Donate to Dino, and show them a lesson!
This once again is just all talk, no action, and it will take a taxpayer revolt in 2008 before this legislature will get out of our pockets.
I sm so angry at this State supreme court for this stupid decision, based not in any fact at all but their hate and greed for the public trough.
Donate to Dino, and show them a lesson!
We're looking forward to 2008. Its amusing to watch your (insincere) leaders trying to distance
themselves from the State supremes decision. You and your socialist chums are gonna get your clocks cleaned next year.
Conservatives are proud to be conservatives. Liberals spend their lives trying to find ways to hide their liberalism in order to gain votes from the gullible. If they were honest about - oh - almost any of their beliefs (but we'll stick to taxes and wealth redistribution), they wouldn't win elections. Classy people.
Tim, please keep it up. Thank you for all your efforts.
Go, Dino!
Posted by: Attila on November 9, 2007 08:08 PMSo Tim Eyeman is all washed up, eh? I guess his latest initiative went down in flames, right?
No, wait! It passed, didn't DounceMan?
Any politician that jacks up property tax rates will be out on his (or her) ass quicker than you can say Jack Robinson. The voters are in no mood for free-spending politiicans.
Now, how do we recall those Supine Court jerks who think the voters are too stupid to understand the plain meaning of I-747? And sue the pants off the poiticians who brought the suit in the first place?
Posted by: Mike S on November 9, 2007 09:37 PMI-695 passed by a large margin.
I-722 passed with 56%+ of the vote.
I-747 passed with 58%+ of the vote.
I-960 is passing with 52% of the vote.
HJR-4204 is passing, though more narrowly.
Gas taxes have gone up 14.5 cents a gallon (by 2009)
Weight fees have been added.
The state budget has gone up by over 3 billion.
More than 6000 FTEs have been added to sate government.
Etc., etc., etc.
Majorities of voters over the years have expressed their desire to limit the increase of taxation and the legislature (abetted by the Supreme Court) has found ways to ignore these votes and do as they please.
The latest WSSC action has just awoken the people to the incredible arrogance of the politicians (and judges) that were elected to represent them.
Posted by: SouthernRoots on November 9, 2007 09:43 PMNow her Highness is trying to pretend that she favors 1% limits to property tax increases. Dino IS for it, she really isn't but is forced to pretend that she is. Oh, this will be fun in '08.
Posted by: Michele on November 9, 2007 10:13 PMMaybe if we put together another "simple" initiative to set a flat rate property tax increase limit. Sort of "Max rise - $30 in any one year." Olympia, Seattle and King County will catch on.
pyotr
Posted by: Saltherring on November 10, 2007 06:58 AM
Who is John Galt?
I know in the last year I've shut down my business precisely because of the taxation - and the strong-armed way it is dealt with - from this state. I'm done, I've fought for 10 years over THEIR mistakes.
So away went a small business. Yes, all my employees have found other jobs, but half are now in other states. 25 direct payroll positions - and probably twice that many indirect - are now gone. Another small manufacturer and engineering firm in the state is gone. Good positions - the lowest pay we had in the company was $13.90 per hour, and the average wage was $23.80 per hour, full time.
This is happening more often than you can imagine. At the small industrial park I was at for a decade, I know in the last 2 years at least 5 other businesses who have done the same, for the same reasons. Shut down, packed it up, and moved to another location. Those units remain vacant, adding more strain to the industrious man who created the park. No new business is moving in.
The relocation is happening, and someone else will benefit. Hundreds of solid blue-and-white collar jobs gone, and being replaced by state workers (6000 new in the last 2 years) and retail clerks. A lot of those employees went back to their home state, their tax base gone forever. The state adds to its own rolls, it's own never-profitable rolls. It consumes more and more, with no return.
I'm going on strike. Oh, I'm still working, but I'm now based overseas. I've put my house on the market and I've got a couple of offers and I'm simply withdrawing from the state. I intend that I will celebrate the new year outside the People's State of Washington. I am moving to where success is rewarded, where one's value is judged not by what their victim status is, but by what they can produce, what value they can can add to society. Where what you earn is yours to keep, not the state's private piggybank.
In this state, success is not rewarded, it's punished, severely. A state that takes money away from every dollar you earn, whether you make profit or not - a policy that essentially directly punishes productivity; you would pay lower taxes if you had ZERO revenue or sales, than if you had even one dollar. Regardless of whether you make a profit or not.
Any asset you have is not yours, it's the states as their ability to immediately and unequivocally seize it (personal or corporate, they do not care it can be seized directly by forced liquidation or indirectly through liens making your asset unusable in terms of leverage). You are required to spend tens of thousands of dollars fighting the state to prove their own errors - freely admitted errors at that!
A state which has bottomless resources, apparently, because they tax at will and add staff at a whim. A state which will spend hundreds of thousands of dollars defending a mistake which would have improperly given them tens of thousands. It's a losing proposition, and they know it, and freely admit their mistake, but still expect the productive of society to pay for it.
Spends hundreds of thousands to gain tens of thousands. Run in the red. Try that as a business, and you are either bankrupt, or the state determines you are not a business but a "hobby" and punishes you even further. Where the agents of the state are incredulous that a producer would put THEIR OWN MONEY on the line to make a business a success, open up their own wallet to cover expenses. Because they want access to our wallet for their own uses - the wallet is not mine, it's the states and I may be lucky enough to get to keep a little bit, if so deigned by the state.
The producers of society are going on strike, and attitudes like yours are most of the reason. I was willing to fight as long as the masses were, and at least some reason existed in the state. But when the WSSC can undo the will of the people, and then the elected legislators choose to ignore the will, and then the masses refuse to change who they elect, well out I go.
The state of WA is going to enter a world of hurt in 3-5 years. It's going to wake up and find its tax base gone. Everyone pulled out, and the slow bleed will suddenly be realized. Boeing and Microsoft already add many more jobs out-of-state than they do in WA, for good reason. They're growing away from here. This state is shrinking, it is only from the games being played in Olympia that this fact is hidden, and when it comes to light the repercussions will not be ignored.
Who is John Galt?
Duffman- YOU give it a break. Are you on drugs or just retarded? It's less than a week since Tim just kicked the crap out of the legislature. The guy has never been MORE relevant.
With regard to 2008...the voters have said twice now they don't like what they see in Olympia. The mortgage crisis is the perfect storm to really send Queen Christine's budget and spending spree flaming into the dumpster.
Posted by: Andy on November 10, 2007 08:34 AMThe property tax checks for those of us in Thurston went up by as much as 30% this year.
Posted by: Andy on November 10, 2007 08:48 AMWhat a vacuum-headed, slack-jawed, mouth-breathing chihuahua of a man you are. Go suck your thumb.
Posted by: ERNurse on November 10, 2007 09:00 AMI really like Edmonds Dan's comment @ 25. I have been looking for ways to "shrug" for years now. I take lower-paying jobs, and live a more frugal life. I have an MBA, but I am taking a job as a teacher. I am not poor, but I drive a '98 VW Jetta. The tabs are cheaper! Voluntary simplicity is fiscally conservative!
I think it is time for the brave among us to practice non-violent civil disobedience. I don't have what it takes to really do this right, and I have a family to think of, but I admire people who work for cash and don't pay taxes. If you buy used stuff on Craig's list, you avoid paying state sales taxes! Barter, trade, and make due without. Buy your hard goods in Oregon. Move to counties with lower sales taxes and lower real estate values. By the way, this is the way to make more money on appreciation! Buy in the path of development, not in King County where it is already developed.
Gregoire had better implement her 1% cap. But I'll bet her version contains enough loop-holes to drive a city council through. She had better be afraid of Rossi and Eyman. The people and I are ticked off about high taxes and government waste.
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on November 10, 2007 09:17 AMAlso, can anybody answer this question? I'm confused. If 747 has been deemed unconstitutional (because we're all too stupid to know what it meant) how does it gain constitionality when it's done by the legislature?
Again, just curious.
Posted by: Rae on November 10, 2007 11:22 AMThe 1% limit doesn't apply to an individual's property tax, but instead to the taxing entities overall collection (plus new construction).
Saltherring's right - the public is stupid.
I look forward to the constitututional amendment to limit individual property taxes - living in a location, for a long time, seeing value growth faster than most places - I look forward to the rest of you paying some of my tax bill.
Rae, tell the truth - your property taxes have not been going up 13-25% "for years".
Have your property taxes really doubled in the last five years?
Posted by: BA on November 10, 2007 11:45 AMProperty taxes now take over 20% of my total income.
Our Camano Island representative refuses to act on this, and now Gregoire is promising to get the democrats and their hack courts off the stick on this one.
http://www.governor.wa.gov/news/news-view.asp?pressRelease=689&newsType=1
But based on her ability to get this legislature on board for any tax payer considerations ($30 car tabs etc, and failure to get real estate tax reform last session) give me no warm and fuzzies about her recent online statements.
I'm tired of talk, and I'm ready to vote again in 2008!
Posted by: GS on November 10, 2007 11:55 AMWe must cut property taxes across the board by 50% immediately, and limit future growth rates to the 1% in I-747.
The Dems in the State Supreme Court simply make up law when it supports their party's goals. This got started because a Seattle liberal activist judge said the wording was "confusing". They got two pro-tem judges at the Supreme level to hear this, both very activist liberal.
THE FIX WAS IN ON THIS FROM THE BEGINNING.
We can vote out these Leninists in the next election. The Seattle press will crucify anyone who stands up to tax rape, so be prepared to be demonized!
If your assessed value increased in two years to $800k, a 267% increase, how did your tax bill only go up $600 - 21%?
The Island County Assessor's office shows a general trend downward in tax rates -which is typical when the value basis is rapidly rising.
Not a bad return on investment - unless you think the assessment value is wrong - in which case I'd have thought you would have contested it.
Posted by: BA on November 10, 2007 12:08 PMPosted by: GS on November 10, 2007 07:20 PM
I stand corrected. The tax amount has fluctuated over the years, but the evaluation goes up and up and up, 13-25% each and every year. The assessor does nothing but MAYBE drive up and down our road.
Ever try contesting your assessment? Well, I have and it's not the slam-dunk people who say "just contest it" purport it to be. And of course, you get that new assessment right after you've paid your first half taxes of $4300 in our case, you have 30 days to contest, and believe me, you're in shell shock.
Posted by: Rae on November 11, 2007 08:41 AMIf they won't do that, then vote them out, despite their rhetorical language of concern and actual lact of doing anything to solve the problem.
Mine went up over 10% even with the 1% limit in place.
Gregoire has made a statement about fixing this yet again a second time, but in a few days will deny she ever made such a statement about fixing anything that doesn't take millions and billions out of the publics pocket.
Posted by: GS on November 11, 2007 11:03 AM"A voter reading the text of the initiative could believe that he or she was voting to reduce the property tax limit by 1 percent instead of by 5 percent, a substantially different impact on the public coffers, as well as the perceived benefit to the individual voter's purse," the majority, led by Justice Bobbe Bridge, wrote...
TRANSLATION: "Voters are too stupid to be trusted to vote on this. Thankfully, WE in the Washington Supreme Court are here to assure that voters aren't unfairly relieved of their right to be taxed out of their homes"...
Put another way, the law is only "Constitutional" if THEY think YOU the VOTER are SMART! Sooooo.....I guess we know what these elitist judges think of all us "regular folk". What do all you waitresses, engineers, teachers, construction workers, computer programmers, day care workers, taxi drivers....think about that? These judges think you're STUPID!...too stupid to vote for lower taxes, that is. When you voted them into office, you were PLENTY SMART. So smart you could actually wade through years of each judge candidate's legal case history so you could determine, based on their previous decisions, whether they were qualified for the added responsibility of being on the HIGHEST COURT IN THE STATE! What's that...? You didn't do that when you voted for judges? Hmmmm, I guess THAT vote was "unconstitutional" too because you didn't educate yourself about the issues in those cases! How could you possibly pick the right judge? Well, if voters understanding of the issue is the standard, we can throw out nearly every vote there has ever been in the history of the state. How bout we start with light rail, and the five and nine cent per gallon tax increases for road improvements? Didn't you think that was for congestion relief? Well, it wasn't. Opps! Sorry! You didn't understand it wasn't for congestion? You were obviously misled by the proposition. I guess the Supreme Court will be falling all over themselves to overturn those.
Uh....one question Judge Bridge; why is it that we STUPID voters consistently vote to reduce taxes on nearly every tax lowering Initiative that makes it on the ballot?
This is what Tim Eyman had to say: "Every local government, from right now, has the ability to jack up property taxes by 30 percent without the vote of the people".
Attorney General Rob McKenna said his office was still analyzing what the potential tax impact could be. I hear many local governments are already asking for it...ALL 30% OF IT! I guess the good judges who overturned the voters will weren't really all that worried about "the perceived benefit to the individual voter's purse".
Another thing the justices didn't consider; most county governments suddenly cranked up PROPERTY ASSESSMENT VALUES in an effort to offset some of the lost revenue from I-747. So now we're sitting on overvalued property and will be hit with the 30% increase based on those values!
Well, I'm smart enough to know what a 30% increase in my property taxes will do to my "voter's purse". It's going to EMPTY it!
I was smart enough to buy a damn nice house; which means I'm smart enough to earn enough money to buy a nice house. I'm even smart enough to do my TAXES...or maybe not. That's reeaaallllyyy hard, but the government is more than happy to require me do them...STUPID as they claim I am.
These totalitarian know-it-all's should all be RECALLED. They have pulled this garbage before and will continue to do so until THE PEOPLE OF WASHINGTON TAKE BACK OUR GOVERNMENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
We need to start with these Supreme Court elitists, and finish it off with Queen Gregoire.
In the mean time, hold onto your wallet because they're coming after 5 YEARS worth of tax increases...for all of YOUR money they think the GOVERNMENT is entitled to!
COMMUNISTS!
The voters speak, the elected officials don't want to hear us. We need to VOTE THEM OUT.
Posted by: intransit on November 13, 2007 09:30 AMThe voters speak, the elected officials don't want to hear us. We need to VOTE THEM OUT.
Posted by: intransit on November 13, 2007 09:31 AMWhat is especially disturbing about the WSSC ruling overturning I-747 by a 5-4 vote is that the "majority" included two justices pro tem.
How can such a ruling be considered legitimate, when it depends on a couple of unelected, unaccountable temps?
Where, and by what process, are they digging up these stiffs?
Posted by: ewaggin on November 13, 2007 12:11 PMRead em and Vote!
Posted by: GS on November 15, 2007 08:56 PM