Comments

1
Vote no. Every single property tax hike affects the homeowner with about a 5% increase. If Mayor Murray's property tax for parks is also going to be on the ballot. If both measures are approved, the average homeowner in Seattle would pay about half a year's mortgage payments in additional taxes in addition to the mortgage.
Lefty Seattle apartment dwellers don't usually consider these factors but wonder why their greedy landlord increases their rent.
2
Vote yes the tax hike is reasonable It's like going to a bar 3 times.
3
I have a sudden crush on TeddyBen.

โ€”Shit, did I say that out loud?!
4
I think it is ironic that a Stranger staff writer was billed $155 from the City of Seattle earlier this month for not wearing a helmet while bicycling. Guess he thought $38 was too high a price to pay for transit!
5
Anyone have a link to the text of the initiative? I'm wondering how exactly it will work.
6
FUCK NO! Raise BUS FARE!
7
Surely, people can pay more now that the minimum wage will soon be $15 an hour!
8
Just charge fucktard texting drivers or people with one hand holding their phone to the ear and the other hand driver an extra $100. They'll find it's cheaper to take the bus where they can text to their hearts' contents.
9
@5 I fail to see any connection between wearing a helmet and paying more taxes to support Metro. Furthermore, it's not ironic that a slogger would be fined for not wearing a helmet. Ansel has posted to Slog his "interesting" (re ill-advised) opinions on wearing helmets before.
http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive…
That said, was it Ansel who got the ticket? If so, YES! Better that than a TBI.
10
Gonna vote yes so hard that my pen might roll through the paper.
11
@6 THEY ALREADY DID
12
@6, 7

Erok, go back to suburbia and stay there.

Fucking suburbanites are always wanting something for nothing from the city that makes their comfortable suburban lifestyle possible.

You come to the city to line your pockets then whine, moan and complain when you are asked to give back to the city that made you.

Go back to your mall and gated communities, ungrateful assholes, and see how well you can do earning a living where you actually live.
13
Out of the 60 or so bus routes, yeah I can see the 15 non-Seattle routes being eliminated. But what about the commuter buses that took people from Kent or Lakewood to DT Seattle M-F? Will those get saved as well?

This is basically what prop1 should have been. Everyone pays, but Seattle pays a little bit more because they benefit more. When you ask everyone to pay equally, but Seattle gets the lions share of the routes, then no shit it failed.

14
Boy McGinn has fattened up. I guess he have up cycling when there was no more political capital in it for him.
15
Sounds legit. $5-$6/month to save my bus routes is plenty worth it, and yes I will be on of the ones paying it. More than makes up for the lost time I would have with the elimination of my express route.
16
@15: you're crazy if you think property taxes aren't factored into rent prices. *All of us* will be the ones paying for it.
17
Does anyone know how this Seattle only funding will work with Metro's forced funding splits? Last I checked, 60% of this money would have to be given to the suburbs for their busses.
18
@13

So, you only want to pay for what you use.

HA! Do you now, suburbia?

Okay, let's see how it might work.

What if we took that self-serving, short-sighted suburban point of view and applied it in a way that forced suburbanites to pay for their use of the city.

The state of WA could grant Seattle the right to place a use tax on all vehicles that enter Seattle that are not registered to actual Seattle residents or businesses.

Seattle could be granted the right to charge tolls (shared with the state, of course) on all roads leading from the suburbs to the city.

In fact, let's just treat suburbanites like what they are - local tourists, and tax them accordingly. If you don't live here and won't pay taxes to fund the city that fills your pockets to make your suburban lifestyle possible then fucking pay a tax for anything and everything you use here. Don't worry; we can do it cost effectively by creating a special designation on all WA drivers licences OR state identifications issued to actual residents of Seattle that they can show to exempt them from paying your suburban & tourist taxes.

Suburbanites are so clueless, shortsighted and selfish...to your own foolish demise.
19
@18 I would vote for that
20
I can't wait until this fails because people are too fucking lazy to turn in a ballot.

You all talk a good game, but most of the time can't deliver the goods.
21
Call the Initiative "Seattle Transit Now" with signs saying "Seattle Now, Suburbs Never"

Make it personal
22
What white males want, white males get.
23
I don't sign initiatives, but I would sign this one.
24
@20: and did you miss the part where the most recent vote was, in fact, passing in Seattle? If the vote had been Seattle only we would have won already. It is not us that is the problem here (either on the county or state level).
25
Ben "the transit thug" Schiendelman?

No thanks.
26

Great idea...but really, Seattle should raise its property taxes a whole lot more.

Maybe $1000 per year.

That would solve a whole lot of problems.
27
@13 - No, Prop 1 was what it should have been, a regional tax for a regional transit system. All those city buses keep thousands of cars off the road each day, which definitely benefits the commuting masses coming from suburban and rural King County to work in Seattle.

@20 - November during a mid-term election year will be better for turnout than special ballot in April around tax time, I would think.
28
Seems as if King County Metro director Desmond Tutu does;t even support this. Let this one fester for 7 months, when people realize the Metro cuts are little more than efficiencies they should have done years ago, then let's see how it does at the polls. I predict a meltdown like McGinn's Prop 1 which you all swore, swore would pass in oh-so-progressive Seattle.
29
I voted yes for prop one, but I will vote this down. Property tax cant be the only well for resources.
30
@20

1 city and roughly 5-7 counties decide the outcome of every statewide election in WA.

You were saying something stupid about that city, do go on.
31
"November during a mid-term election year will be better for turnout than special ballot in April around tax time"

Why? Da yoots are notorious no-shows at mid-terms. People people of property are the ones you can count on to vote and with three property tax measures on the ballot, at least one will sink.

But then again you swore Prop 1 would pass in King County. No way it would fail! You also swore McGinn's Prop 1 would pass, no way that would fail too!
32
It's not "a middle finger to the state legislature." This is exactly what the Republicans in the state leg want: the political isolation of Seattle, and limiting of public transit to a few cities in order to prevent the development of effective metropolitan area and regional transit systems.
33
It passed 2:1 in Seattle as car tabs

Same voters

Make it so!
34
@32 but that means we will not vote for their highways.

Are they that stupid?
35
@18: It goes both ways. Or do you not realize that a lot of Seattle residents work at Microsoft, Boeing, Costco, Nintendo, Expedia, T-Mobile, REI, Weyerhaueser, Alaska Airlines, Puget Sound Energy, PACCAR, etc.
36
@29: But it is. Olympia won't let us tax anything else. We get sales tax or property tax or a flat fee on car tabs. If you vote "no" on everything that is paid for by property tax, you're not "sending a message" to Olympia; they don't give a shit. You're just depriving Seattle of the infrastructure that it needs.
37
@21: If you make it personal, it's unanimous: Both city and suburban voters think you're an idiot.
38
As soon as Seattle voters learn this tax will go to fund suburban buses as well, it will fail. Just like McGinn's Prop 1 you all SWORE would pass.

Remember: mid-term elections are also when the moochers forget to vote.
39

Seattle will be the dairy farm where we milk rich cows to fund the entire state.

Note to Washington natives...better buy a 4 Sale sign...now.
40
@16 -- You are crazy if you think economics is that simple. We really don't have a free market when it comes to housing. For example, I can't convert my house into a duplex. Every landlord knows this, so they compete with other landlords for tenants. Over the last few years, demand has outstripped supply. Although it seems like we have cranes everywhere, supply hasn't met with demand because the city limits it (via the aforementioned zoning laws). Because of the increase in demand, and the low supply, landlords have raised prices. This has nothing to with the cost of doing business, just the price they can get (without a high risk of losing their tenant). All this will do is make their investment less of a good deal (and only marginally). So, for a lot landlords, this will make their life a bit tougher. I have nothing against landlords, but I don't have a lot of sympathy because I think they are doing just fine right now.

I'm sure that some people will pay extra rent because of this. There are folks out there with nice landlords that are barely making it, and don't want to raise rents on long standing tenants. There are also landlords that will use this as an excuse to raise rents. But they could have done it all today, and it will result in the same thing. For just about everyone in the city, they have a choice between paying a lot to live where they want to live, or paying a lot less to live in the suburbs. This won't change that.
41
@16

I love it...you dipshits are finally waking up to the fact that all your schemes result in less for you...and most likely you'll all get the boot from Seattle because you just can't fucking afford to live there at all!

Make way for rich people buying up those "big" houses that you wanted to transform into apodments, and turning them into superplexes for themselves and their concubines (that would be your job...you can come to work on LINK, service your masters, and then leave with a few hundred cash in hand to spend on the RV park to which you've been relegated).

And just when you've caught up with the credit card payment...yeah...the Obamacare fine is delivered to you from the IRS...
42
@41, go away, troll.

In other news: this is a great proposal. Let's do it!
43
@ 18, 21

Wow way to generalize by that logic since 9/11 was committed by a few Muslims all Muslims must be terrorists.

@ 38

The Red Counties mooch far more than the blue ones and the red states mooch far more than the blue ones. The GOP are such hypocrites.
44
Concerns about Washington's brutally regressive tax structure are NOT an "obnoxiously irrelevant argument." That would be arguing that busses aren't worth funding because your mom looks like an aardvark. I voted for Prop 1 and I'll vote for this, too, but don't pretend like regressive taxes aren't utter bullshit, thanks.
45
And one more fee making it harder for home ownership for the middle class. We need an income tax...Because having car tabs/property taxes is bullshit. 15Now should become IncomeTaxNow once the 15 buck passes.
46
Thanks everyone for your support. This is the most progressive revenue option that anyone has - much better than a car tab *plus* sales tax. If you want to help, or just have questions, feel free to email me - bensch@gmail.com
47
@46, a property tax is infinitely more regressive than a car tab tax. One needs shelter to live, whereas a car is a luxury. We need to lower property taxes and bubble inflated property values if we want to have any hope of Seattle becoming anything other than an enclave for the 1%.
48
@46 Why do you and Larry Phillips call it a "CAR TAB"? I missed your bit in the Voter's Guide that said scooters and motorcycles would be exempt. A lot of us did, looking at how the vote went.
49
@46
Excited to jump on board Ben!
50
Richer people pay more, nothing for roads, and the suburbs are marginalized. What's not to like about this. As a homeowner, sign me up. If I knew this was the next option, I would have voted no on Prop. 1.
51
@50, that's why we couldn't talk about it until Prop 1 lost - it was a risk to think there was a backup plan. Please go to www.friendsoftransit.us/volunteer and sign up!
52
@32, exactly. I don't know why on earth otherwise fairly intelligent writers/readers think that the Republicans in Olympia give a shit about what we do in Seattle.

This could indeed pass, but I really don't like what's said above: that property tax will be raised but owners will pass it on to renters. That's a good thing? It's standard, but it's certainly not a plus factor. But perhaps they're hoping to prevent no votes from the owners, and they think that renters are more likely to be bus riders (although the latter's not necessarily the case).

53
@50 exactly! Thx for the link, @51!
54
@52 landlords don't charge based on costs, they charge based on what the market will bear. Most of this $6 dollars per unit per month will not be passed on.
55
@54, You really think so? Landlords will use this as an excuse to raise rents. "Sorry, Property taxes went up this year, so I need a 4-15% increase" and there's no tenant protection laws to stop them. And what house is appraised at 300k these days in Seattle? Most 2 bedrooms are at least 400k, meaning this will be more then 60 bucks a year. People complain that rents are too high, but then keep jacking up the property taxes to pay for things income tax should pay for. The middle class gets squeezed while the rich gets richer.

Here's an idea, tax all big business in Seattle to pay for this. Increase B&O tax on MacDonalds/etc.
56
This is good. Raising bus fare is essentially a poor tax. Yes there are plenty of commuters who can easily afford a raise in fare, but a substantial proportion of bus users are low income or students. The idea of public transit it not merely to provide us with alternatives to heavy traffic, but to provide a public service.
Yes, an income tax would be ideal, but this is our option right now because the city of Seattle doesn't have control over income taxes. That is state and federally regulated. We can band together as Seattlites and have a city we enjoy without relying on state politics. Does anyone really want to deal with worse traffic than we already have?
57
55. Landlords are going to do that anyway, property tax hike or not. It's a booming market and they're going to leech increases wherever they can, whether via rent hikes or leasing at higher rates to new tenants.
58
Transit is necessary in cities. My proposal is to add a small amount to everyone's utility bills, and use the money to fund transit and give everyone in Seattle a bus pass.
59
@55 This will basicly do that (tax busineses). Most class A commercial tennants pay property taxes in triple nets over and above base lease rates. The direct pass through will happen more directly on commercial rents than residential. Also the assesed values, in terms of dollars per square foot, are much higher for class A commercial and retail than residential and off beat commercial.
60
58 that's a little regressive. The idea sounds nice but it should be inproperty taxes. Median and lower households will pay less in a property tax than a utility surcharge.
61
*do you not realize that a lot of Seattle residents work at Microsoft, Boeing, Costco, Nintendo, Expedia, T-Mobile, REI, Weyerhaueser, Alaska Airlines, Puget Sound Energy, PACCAR, etc.*

Hey, I'm one of them! And like all the others, my bus from downtown to Redmond (Everett, etc) is a Sound Transit bus, not Metro, so this particular funding debate is 100% irrelevant to my bus to work. Try looking something up before arguing about it next time.
62
As a homeowner, I'll be voting yes (I voted yes on Prop 1 too)...but yeah, I also really dislike voting for regressive taxes.

If 15Now became IncomeTaxNow instead I know a lot of small business owners who would JOIN the movement in a heartbeat. We're tired of voting for regressive taxes, Washington. When are you going to get your shit together? The 1% of the fucking 1% live here!
63
@13 A lot of those buses are paid for by sound transit from a different pot of money, whether or not the coaches are operated by metro drivers from metro depots.
64
Regarding the notion that renters will feel this: it's absurd for two reasons.

1) Landlords don't need an excuse to raise rent. Because demand is greater than supply, they can charge what the market will bear, which doesn't have any direct relationship to their expenses. Expenses relate to rent when rents aren't determined by artificial scarcity, and the horse left that barn in Seattle a while ago.

2) Even if the costs of this were passed along, it would barely be noticable; for most rentals it would come out to a few dollars a month.
65
Why not just raise bus fares within the Seattle city limits. That way, those who use the service, regardless of whether suburbanites or city dwellers, would help fund the service they actually use

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.