Online-only letters
“No” on EHJR 4204
Same old story
Editor, The Times:
There is a great reason to vote against EHJR 4204, which wants us to approve that a majority of voting voters can pass school district levies, instead of the current 60 percent of all registered voters. This means that if only 100 voters out of 5,000 voted, those 100 voters could pass or deny a school levy. Outrageous! Then taxation without representation takes place.
This nonrepresentation continues when people who own property in more than one county are allowed to vote in only one county but pay taxes in two or more counties. In the reverse, many people who do not own property at all - renters - can vote and not have to pay a penny of the increased property taxes. This is not right. Compound this with EHJR 4204 and property owners are really getting hosed once again.
The solution is: Get the lottery out of the general fund and back to funding schools as it was originally intended. Then schools would be funded better than they are now!
- Tom Schroers, Mount VernonAll things to all people
We have a pathetic history of voter turnout. Just look at the statistics of how many registered voters it actually took to elect our current officials we love to hate and who make many of the decisions we all care and complain about.
There is no way I’m going to give over my wallet on the 60 percent rule. That would be for me to say I want a smaller percentage of a minority of registered voters to “speak” for us all. No, I say!
Entities that want more tax dollars need to encourage more registered voters to vote, and I think this is critical. Have the vote take place during a general election, not scattered about the year at special elections or primaries, when turnout is even worse.
If I had my way, it would be 60 percent of the registered voters to effect a change, not just those who vote. If you want change, make your case and get people to the polls.
Vote “no” on EHJR 4204.
- Carl Wilson, SeattleKing County taxes
The big picture
So Gov. Christine Gregoire is mystified by King County Executive Ron Sims’ public opposition to the “RAT”[roads-and-transit] tax. Now we know why. This massive tax increase will generate public opposition to any further tax increases, putting and end to Sims’ nickel-and-dime tax game on King County residents [”PROP. 1: Free-for-all over roads, transit,” Times, page one, Oct. 21].
Step back and look at the bigger picture here for a minute. Millions wasted on the defunct monorail. A projected one-billion-dollar overrun on the Brightwater sewage-treatment plant - conveniently located in Snohomish County, so as not to lose votes for Sims). Feel-good projects given priority while Seattle needs 150 more police officers.
Wise up, folks. You can’t give these people any more money. Just give them the boot, and demand new leadership that will focus on responsible spending before asking for more.
- Robert Grove, BothellStart with yourself
So County Executive Ron Sims wants to tax us just a little more, huh? It seems like every time I hear about a new tax, it’s going to be added to my already enormous property-tax bill!
Most people who have lived in Seattle for any length of time are now paying more per month in property taxes than they did for their house payment not all that many years ago.
Because we’re attempting to buy the houses we occupy, does that mean that we’re fat cats? Maybe it’s time to charge those folks who ride Metro or use the state-owned ferry system what it really costs to transport them back and forth.
How about government at every level doing with a little less? Simple things, like instead of four or five guys watching one guy dig a hole, cut back to three!
- Steve Drake, SeattleMental-health plan
One dime at a time
The Mental Illness and Drug Dependency Action Plan sales tax proposed by County Executive Ron Sims in his budget address [”Sims wants three new taxes,” News, Oct. 16] culminates years of community-wide assessment of human-services needs.
The proposal has already received what can only be called a pre-endorsement by the county councilmembers, who have unanimously passed an action plan for the sales tax.
State law gave counties this authority for a .1 percent increase with the understanding that local leadership would exercise the due diligence to determine not only need but a responsible process. All these actions have occurred.
It is now time for the King County Council to pass this sales tax, at the cost of a dime per $100 spent, so that the crisis currently under way in our jails, emergency rooms and on the streets of our county due to homelessness can be addressed for the sake of these at-risk neighbors.
- Bill Kirlin-Hackett, director, The Interfaith Task Force on Homelessness, SeattlePossibilities are many
My hat goes off to County Executive Ron Sims for proposing funds to implement the long-awaited mental-health and substance-abuse plan.
The plan calls for a comprehensive approach to addressing the mental-health and substance-abuse needs in King County. It puts into play prevention, diversion and treatment.
The plan is the result of years of collaborative work. Implementing the plan will be a money-saver and a constructive approach to building stronger communities. Imagine no more need to treat mental illness in jail. Maybe we can prevent deaths of innocent citizens, including law enforcement personnel, at the hands of impaired drivers. The possibilities are many and hopeful.
Thanks, Executive Sims. I’m with you on this.
- Marty Jacobs, SeattleRoads and transit
A whole different problem
Advocates of the latest “stick-’em-up” tax-and-spend program ought to be on a “Wanted” poster for failed leadership for railroading the taxpayers once again.
These are the same supporters of last year’s tax grab for repairing the “failing” Highway 520 bridge that has yet to see any grand plan. The aim of the mostly-Democratic leaders is to fleece the populace telling the taxpayers what they don’t want to hear so they will be willingly opening their pocketbooks for the latest government holdup.
Not once does this same group of shysters consider the additional burdens on the hardworking taxpayers for such little return, especially considering that the vast majority of funds for Proposition 1 goes not to the roads, but to the already-hemorrhaging, heavily-subsidized and underused transit system. It’s not a revenue problem; it’s an allocation problem.
The fact that it will burden generations of taxpayers not yet born allows them to gain an advantage before they can have any say in this highway robbery.
Their insatiable appetite for power and our money should make everyone hold them accountable to see them for who they are with their removal at the ballot box while we still have money left in our own pockets.
Vote a resounding “no” on Proposition 1.
- Dan Kessler, Mountlake TerraceLet’s get going
Regarding “Transit package’s Eastside benefits debated” [News, Oct. 16]: The idea that the Eastside shouldn’t be connected to the regional light-rail system is unthinkable - and irresponsible.
This November we have the chance to vote on the roads-and-transit plan to extend light rail to the Eastside and invest in more than $5.5 billion in roads and transit projects.
We are in a competition with other major cities to attract and retain businesses and the best and brightest employees from all around the world. The stakes are high: Just about every city in the western United States has something we don’t.
These cities have commute choices for their residents - they can drive their own cars or they can enjoy a reliable, fast, and safe light-rail system to get to work and other destinations. It’s time for the Eastside to offer those same kinds of options.
I’ve lived in New York, New Jersey, Tokyo and Chicago where rail transit is an integral part of life for everyone, used and loved by all for both personal and business commutes. Rail is easier, cheaper and faster to use. We can see from examples from all around the world, it works! People want to travel by light rail.
Bellevue and the Eastside are at a crucial milestone. We can either embrace the growth and our future as a regional, urban center, or we can rest on our laurels and isolate ourselves. Let’s make the right decision and get going. We’ve spent years talking and disagreeing on how to address congestion. In the meantime, the problem gets worse, and costs hundreds of millions more each year we wait.
Proposition 1 is not everything, but it gets us going. Voting “no” hinders our growth and limits our future. I will be voting “yes” on the roads-transit measure this November.
- Karen Little, BellevueIraq vets’ benefits
Nothing to write home about
Regarding “Iraq veterans deserve more than post-combat negligence” [Local News, Oct. 14]: Though the problems associated with post-traumatic-stress disorder are getting more attention, the idea of scarce resources and government agencies unwilling to offer help is far-fetched. The Department of Veterans Affairs does exactly what it’s supposed to in offering help to those who want it, but no one can force a soldier into treatment.
Medication, support groups with fellow vets and individual counseling are all available to veterans. Staying with the programs is key to becoming fully rehabilitated and able to re-enter the civilian world.
As the sister of a Marine who served two terms overseas, I have witnessed that this process is not an easy one but does have valuable benefits. The Seattle Veterans Affairs serving Washington and other neighboring states has the funding, manpower and resources to help those who need and want it.
Mental wellness is vital to troops returning home, but there are more than enough places for them to seek out the help they so badly need.
- Leslie Stansbury (Bellevue native), Fort Collins, Colo.Presidential election
Bone of contention
Another Clintonian waffle comes to a breakfast near you!
So Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton says she will “reverse the power grab” George Bush has during his presidency [Campaign Digest, News, Oct. 24].
I think I feel another Clintonian “It really depends on what the real meaning of ‘is’ is” moment coming on. The so-called power grab by Bush is a myth. To date, no court has ruled the president’s use of presidential powers either illegal or outside the scope of what the Constitution says.
Does anyone really think that if Clinton is elected, she would actually give up presidential powers that so far are legal? First, if she did, she would be abdicating her presidential responsibilities; and second, when hasn’t a Clinton tried to control everything he or she has touched? Surely she would find a way to waffle on such a vague pledge.
Don’t fall for it, America. If Clinton is elected, look for less freedom of choice, speech and defense of our individual liberties under the guise of the “Robin Hood” model: take from the rich and give to the Democratic voters… er, poor. Sorry about that.
- Art Francis, Issaquah