Count this voter - who routinely says yes to local tax increases for transportation and schools - as seriously annoyed with talk of another Snohomish County sales tax increase under discussion.
The proposed hike could ironically be a budget saver, since effective drug and mental health treatment programs can significantly reduce overall costs to the criminal justice system, which consume over 70% of the county's discretionary budget.
But that same figure is reason enough to tell the county to go back to the drawing board and figure out a way to prioritize within the existing budget. The proposed program is a good one, and worthy of support. Just find a better way to fund it.
Given the overall state of local tax fatigue in many parts of the electorate, I don't care to see any tax increase even considered at the county level that doesn't have something to do with badly needed transportation improvements, for which there is a legitimate shortage of funds.
Posted by Eric Earling at February 27, 2008 07:59 AM | Email ThisThese lawmakers know that folks are NOT going to turn down these necessities, so they can divert the funds to other pet projects that voters would never approve.
Examples of this include fire protection and Medic One. Who would vote against Medic One services? So the service is not funded, and needs a special levy that is sure to pass. Result: tax increase.
I have reached the point where I will no longer voter for ANY levy, even the good ones, if the funding is for something that should be funded already. Ask me to approve the extras, not the basics.
Posted by: Seabecker on February 27, 2008 09:05 AMI have mixed emotions about funding all the social programs we have. First, drug addiction programs don't work, but mental health is another issue we have to deal with.
I don't know what it is, but it seems in my days, bipolars were just quirky, but now it seems, they are dangerous.
Posted by: swatter on February 27, 2008 09:08 AMEric, have you given any thought to becoming a Republican? It looks like an option you should explore.
You see, Republicans develop critical thinking skills. We don't "routinely say yes" to jacking up people's taxes for bloated projects meant to enrich political allies and state coffers.
You really ought to look into it.
Posted by: Hinton on February 27, 2008 09:31 AMHinton -
Did it ever occur to your spacious mind that the personal voting history I was referring to was a reflection of individually evaluating the ballot measures in question in my local jurisdiction? Does me thinking local requests from the Edmonds School District and Community Transit are reasonable somehow make me unRepublican?
Bluntly, it's brilliant thinking like yours which has contributed to the routinely wretched candidates we've been trotting out in the suburbs in recent election cycles.
Posted by: Eric Earling on February 27, 2008 06:40 PMSchool districts should be posting their check registers online in WA like they do in Texas. Try bringing that up at the next board meeting and see what kind of reception you get.
Posted by: School Marm on February 27, 2008 10:21 PMI respect your point, but in this case I have been actually taking a look at what the Edmonds School District has (and has not) been proposing when coming to the taxpayers. A) They've been selective about doing so in recent years thanks to relatively strong fiscal management on some big picture issues and B) all things considered I've generally been pleased with what they're proposing...even if I would make some changes if given the chance.
I totally respect the fact other districts might not be worthy of the same level of support.
Posted by: Eric Earling on February 27, 2008 10:41 PMYOU are the one who wrote "routinely says yes to local tax increases." Sorry... but that tends to preclude "a reflection of individually evaluating the ballot measures in question in my local jurisdiction."
To accept your premise is to accept that the ballot measures in question are "routinely" needed, priced, focused, executed, implemented, on time and on budget.
You know... like Sound Transit projects? Like that?
Look, Eric, I would rather have candidates that are "wretched" but Republican, then, well, candidates like you, who are, well, something else.
But thank you SO much for asking... and have a REALLY nice day.
Posted by: Hinton on February 27, 2008 11:55 PMBut, there is a web site out there dedicated to the corruption of some of its election officials. The blogger seems to post things at least once a week. I lost touch with it about six months ago, so I don't know if he has kept it up recently.
As for Sound Transit, it was a good idea (I guess) at its onset, but now it is showing why so many thought it was a bad, bad idea.
Posted by: swatter on February 28, 2008 06:28 AMI am interested because I am of the opinion that the federal government provides more than enough funding to schools to enable them to accomplish what their state depts of ed promise to do when accepting those federal funds. If you have an alternative viewpoint, I'd like to be able to understand it.
Posted by: School Marm on February 28, 2008 12:27 PM