Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Politics Port Commissioner Gael Tarleton: We Didn't Raise Taxes
Posted by Erica C. Barnett on Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 6:46 PM
Last night's meeting of the 43rd District Democrats was the usual mix: Young up-and-comers (including a sharply groomed 43rd District Rep. Jamie Pedersen) and gray-haired old-timers sat in stiff-backed folding chairs munched on bowls of chips and tiny bags of Famous Amos chocolate chip cookies and Planter's peanuts, and read "Eat the State" during slow moments. Two differences: Booze—a liquid smorgasbord that included Corbett Canyon Merlot, Mike's Hard Lemonade, Kokonee beer, and a raspberry-champagne concoction I failed to commit to memory—and a surprise appearance by Seattle Port Commissioner Gael Tarleton, who defended the Port's much-criticized decision to increase the amount of money it collects in property taxes next year, and blasted Port critics for calling it a tax increase.
"We are not raising King County’s taxes by 11 percent," the black-pantsuited Tarleton told 43rd District members. "That is so wrong that it’s almost impossible to figure out how it happened." The distinction Tarleton was making— the Port actually lowered its property tax rate, although the total amount it will collect increased 11 percent because of rising property values—might be true, but it could seem like a semantic distinction to property owners facing higher property tax bills than ever before. The peanut gallery in the back row—made up of several onetime political candidates, various gadflies, and a consultant or two—snickered audibly as Tarleton insisted, somewhat defensively, "We are one of the few government agencies that are not losing money." The fact that the Port of Seattle can tap property taxes—unlike every other port on the West Coast—undoubtedly has something to do with that.
Share via
What? Huh? Since when are government agencies supposed to turn a profit?
Usually, the inability to profit off of an essential good or service is the reason why government is the one providing it.
And Erica: You know I adore you, and I hate to nitpick, but what's up with "the black-pantsuited Tarleton"? Pantsuits have been common woman's apparel since the 1970's. Many of them are black. Why make a special note of it?
If she had shown up in a hoop skirt, or dressed as a poodle, I could see commenting on it. But a pantsuit? It just seems odd to me.
http://www.nashvilleistalking.com/node/8…
You're welcome. All that's missing is him being a youth pastor.
also there's nobody else at our meetings under 30. :( i feel alone
First, if you ive in King County, the Port levy accounts for maybe 2% of your property tax bill ... so if they jack that up by 11%, your taxes increase by about 0.22%.
Except that a big chunk of the projected 11% revenue increase results from new construction added to the tax base. Unless you are riding one of those 20-odd highrise cranes on the skyline, this component doesn't cost you.
The Port did lower the levy rate, so the Port share of your taxes will rise only if the value of your property rose more than about 3% (roughly the amount the Port levy mill rate decreased).
And other tapped-out units of government really are tapping the Port's "profit" to fund projects like the eastside "rails to trails" corridor. Bike on that, willya?
I donate most of the alcohol, so I should know ...
I think she meant the cake and cookie options when she referred to raspberry framboise, but we did all go out to get bubble tea afterwards!
Down the road is a different strategy: I want to let the people vote on whether the Port should use its taxing authority for big community investments. Some examples where Port ballot initiatives might be in the cards include having the Port help fund the Viaduct replacement, or voting to support the Puget Sound Partnership.
When the Port isn't losing money, it's able to plow dollars back into environmental, transportation, and port security improvements for King County. It also doesn't have to resort to layoffs...when the public and private sectors are besieged with deficits as they are now, all our citizens and families suffer.
A public agency is supposed to invest in the public good. A perfect example is the Eastside Rail Corridor - the Port used its taxing authority to agree to buy the corridor with King County tax dollars. King County taxpayers will be paying about $10 million a year in debt service for about 20 years (once the bonds to purchase the corridor can actually be sold). In return? King County brings a private rail corridor back into public ownership, which otherwise was going to be sold off in chunks to the highest private bidders.
Thanks, RonK, for helping give accurate information about the Port's taxing authority. Another myth that's out there is that no ports outside of Washington State have taxing authority. Not true. There are 39 other ports in the nation that have taxing authority.
Government agencies need taxing authority. That's how governments build public assets that no one else will build - seaport terminals, roads, light rail, bridges, airports, schools, public utilities, and the list goes on. The real issue is not the authority. The issue is whether the people have a say in having the money spent on things they care about.
2009 is going to be a very tough year for our families and communities. My focus is on Jobs First - sustaining our businesses and communities through the recession and laying the foundation for clean trade and green, family-wage jobs for the future.
Most Commented on Slog
-
Life and Death in a Recliner in South Carolina by Dan Savage
-
Pit Bulls! by Dan Savage
-
Becoming a Man by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Hot & Drunk by Dan Savage
-
All The Best Men Are Taken by Dan Savage
-
I Hate You, Garrison Keillor by Jen Graves
-
$2,600,000,000 by Dan Savage
-
Unreal Americans by Dan Savage
-
Precious: Brutal New Classic or African-American Bruno? by David Schmader
-
Breaking: Police Officers Have Shut Off Several Blocks of Leary Way Between Ballard and Fremont by Christopher Frizzelle
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (17) RSS