Slog
News & ArtsMonday, February 8, 2010
Election Vote YES on the School Levies, People
Posted by Stranger Election Control Board on Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 1:05 PM
King County Elections reports that only 24 percent of you have mailed in your ballots on the two school levies. Tsk tsk. Find your ballot in that stack of mail, vote (see below), stamp it, mail it by tomorrow, and then drink a shot of whiskey for the kids.
Don't like our advice? Make up your own mind by reading the voters' guide statements—featuring cogent pro arguments and unconvincing con arguments—on Prop 1 and Prop 2. Don't like the voters' guide? Then read this Slog battle between Schools First (who say vote yes on both levies) and Mellisa Westbrook, an education activist and blogger at Save Seattle Schools, who says you should vote against the building and equipment levy.
And don't forget to vote.
3
I voted no on both not because I don't want schools to be funded, but because that funding should be in our general budget, not some special levy.
4
ARE YOU BOTH SERIOUS? THAT'S HOW SCHOOLS ARE FUNDED! Really, screw over the schools on levies because you don't like the levy system? If you truly feel that way, start a movement to get schools properly funded, don't cripple them to make a point! You're like people who refuse to tip in restaurants because "it should be included."
5
Voted no because Seattle loves to make homeowners pay for everything and that's a shit way to run a city. Also because I hate children.
8
People who vote "no" on school levies because they are poor, poor homeowners who can't spare a few bucks, or think the school funding system is broken and the best way to fix it is to fuck over the schools now, should never get laid, and should also get lots of speeding tickets and their taxes audited by the IRS. Oh, and herpes.
9
It just occurred to me what the levy-related comments threads on the Seattle Times' Teabagger-infested boards must look like. I'll try to stay away.
11
Seriously, people. Quit watering your gardens with Brawngo and figure out that this renews existing levies and only changes your taxes by two or three dollars a year. Don't inflict your own stupidity on future generations.
13
Most of the dropboxes have been closed (budget cuts!). The only ones still open are at the KC Administration Building downtown and at the Elections Center in Tukwila.
15
D'oh! That's 'Brawndo'.
But while I'm correcting myself, thanks for voting to lower our property values by voting to fill Seattle with stupid people. 'Cause that's what you're doing if you vote 'no'. Even from a purely financial / investment standpoint, voting 'no' on these measures is foolhardy.
But while I'm correcting myself, thanks for voting to lower our property values by voting to fill Seattle with stupid people. 'Cause that's what you're doing if you vote 'no'. Even from a purely financial / investment standpoint, voting 'no' on these measures is foolhardy.
16
Yes/No votes aren't nuanced. If you want to change the way schools are funded, you need to get involved and talk to your school board and your legislators, and since the likelihood of any of you actually doing that is nil, your votes will be co-opted by people you don't agree with on an issue that you only care about when you're asked to vote on it.
17
I think people who claim "it shouldn't be this way" or "the system isn't fair" reasons for voting "no" on levies and claim to not want to hurt schools (or who don't tip "because restaurants should just charge more and pay people more") are either full of shit, or really really bad at actualizing things they want to have happen in the universe.
18
@17 - seriously.
dudes, if you don't agree with the system work to change it or boycott it entirely. full participation in a process you claim to hate in order to victimize a third party means that you are either painfully ignorant or deeply awful human beings.
dudes, if you don't agree with the system work to change it or boycott it entirely. full participation in a process you claim to hate in order to victimize a third party means that you are either painfully ignorant or deeply awful human beings.
19
From my viewpoint, future generations are already being fucked over by the school system. A little extra fuckage now to move school funding into the general budget is worth it for the future-future generations, who greatly outnumber the generation (or fragment of a generation, because I believe that if these levies failed, the situation would be addressed pronto). Education is a fundamental service, and it should be in the budget from the get-go. If it's never to be voted down (as Q appears to fervently believe), then don't put it to a vote.
And I do tell my elected representatives that I think school funding should be changed.
And I do tell my elected representatives that I think school funding should be changed.
20
People have been voting down levies forever and those years, schools have to make cuts. Right now, districts already have had to increase class size and lay people off. Trying to make a point by voting "no" will NOT result in the legislature suddenly doing away with the levy system and funding schools completely. Especially this year. You're fooling yourself if you think so.
21
Just wait. If the levy fails, crime will go up because more kids will be out of school*, and all the teach-them-a-lesson property owners will really be whining loudly. Also, the quality of the public schools has a direct correlation to property values, hence a drop there too. I love Karma. Shame it would have to come at the expense of kids though.
*Without the levy, schools will be forced to cut special programs, many of them geared towards the struggling or disinclined students who would otherwise drop out and hangout on the streets or have sex and end up on welfare with multiple kids. Increased class sizes lead to more kids feeling uninvolved/unmotivated in school, teachers can't make much personal contact with students when there are 40+ in a classroom, thus truancy increases and crime increases.
You'll pay for it one way or another - preventative measures (i.e. school) or social/punitive measures (i.e. welfare and jail). But go ahead - teach the school system a lesson by not passing the levy. I'd venture to guess a good portion of the teachers - especially they newer ones - can't afford to live in Seattle anyway, so maybe they can find a job in a district closer to where they live; someplace that values education a little more and sees those few extra dollars in the tax bill as an investment in the future.
*Without the levy, schools will be forced to cut special programs, many of them geared towards the struggling or disinclined students who would otherwise drop out and hangout on the streets or have sex and end up on welfare with multiple kids. Increased class sizes lead to more kids feeling uninvolved/unmotivated in school, teachers can't make much personal contact with students when there are 40+ in a classroom, thus truancy increases and crime increases.
You'll pay for it one way or another - preventative measures (i.e. school) or social/punitive measures (i.e. welfare and jail). But go ahead - teach the school system a lesson by not passing the levy. I'd venture to guess a good portion of the teachers - especially they newer ones - can't afford to live in Seattle anyway, so maybe they can find a job in a district closer to where they live; someplace that values education a little more and sees those few extra dollars in the tax bill as an investment in the future.
22
Is there ANYONE here who is going to vote "no" because they just plain don't want schools to have any money? Almost everyone is claiming they want to help the schools by preventing them from having enough money. I think I'll vote against health care reform because if enough people get sick and die, they'll have to go to universal health care. Not gonna work.
23
Levy no-voters are a "with friends like these..." bunch, it seems like. Plus, y'all seem kind of uneducated on how school funding works or how to change something you don't like in government. Maybe we need to hold a special levy to fund additional civics/government classes with a special emphasis on the actual workings of Washington State government. Or "Baby/Bathwater 101: Avoidance of Inadvertent Combined Disposal."
24
Gee Q, you seem uneducated as to how this whole "voting" thing works. If you don't want people to have a choice, don't give it to them. If you don't like the choice they're making, try to persuade them otherwise. Your argument seems to be "This is how schools are funded!" and "THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!"
I don't think this is the best way to fund schools, and I'd rather fuck some kids over now to unfuck a bunch in the future. Charge me double whatever the levy is now, I don't give a shit--just put it into the regular budget.
I don't think this is the best way to fund schools, and I'd rather fuck some kids over now to unfuck a bunch in the future. Charge me double whatever the levy is now, I don't give a shit--just put it into the regular budget.
25
@23 With No Child Left Behind and its yearly testing requirements in math and English in 3rd-8th grade & 10th grade (with occasional science tests), there will be more and more uninformed people in the general populace when it comes to civics, because if it isn't tested these days, it has no value and why spend time on it. Part of that accountability mantra that the GOP loves...
For those who want to educate themselves on school funding, try this site (minus the spaces):
www. fundingwaschools. org
or Google WA State school levies
For those who want to educate themselves on school funding, try this site (minus the spaces):
www. fundingwaschools. org
or Google WA State school levies
26
It would be so much easier if likely candidates to appear on 'People of WalMart' just weren't allowed to vote. But that would be undemocratic and wrong.
27
It's "g", not "q". I should change it to an actual name, I guess.
My point is that voting down levies because you think it will make the state government do away with levies is not going to work. Can you explain how it will work? I've been aware of school levies since I was in grade school and in all those years I've seen them voted down and passed. I've never seen the state jump in after levies were voted down and change the system. When is this supposed to happen? All you're doing is screwing over schools at a time when they are coping with drastically reduced budgets as it is. Voting "no" is not going to change the system. And to use my analogy again (because I think it's apt), stiffing a server on a tip doesn't change the business model of restaurants, it just screws over a server.
My point is that voting down levies because you think it will make the state government do away with levies is not going to work. Can you explain how it will work? I've been aware of school levies since I was in grade school and in all those years I've seen them voted down and passed. I've never seen the state jump in after levies were voted down and change the system. When is this supposed to happen? All you're doing is screwing over schools at a time when they are coping with drastically reduced budgets as it is. Voting "no" is not going to change the system. And to use my analogy again (because I think it's apt), stiffing a server on a tip doesn't change the business model of restaurants, it just screws over a server.
28
@26
I'd prefer it if those who appeared on "People of Walmart" weren't allowed to breed, as that would eventually eliminate the worry about them voting. Alas, that too is apparently undemocratic and wrong.
I'd prefer it if those who appeared on "People of Walmart" weren't allowed to breed, as that would eventually eliminate the worry about them voting. Alas, that too is apparently undemocratic and wrong.
29
And, yes, @24, this is how the schools are funded. I agree that a different system would be more fair. But I think your method of changing the system is 1) not going to work, and 2) damaging to current students and schools. Therefore, if you don't want class sizes to go through the roof, programs to be cut, etc., you work with what is real NOW and you vote to pass the levy, while at the same time getting active in changing the system.
30
@24- It's hard to talk about school funding without "thinking of the children." And the kids need fully funded schools. Now AND in the future. Since there's a way to get what you want without fucking over any children, why the hell do you choose to fuck over some children?
31
If funding from levies dries up, and the need is essential, it'll be found elsewhere. People need to face up to how essential education is and fund it from the beginning, not leave it to the voter's whims. It's dishonest to say "Here, make a decision--OH SHIT!!! NOT THAT ONE!!!"
And let me make this clear: the hurting of the schools and THE CHILDRENZ! is intentional on my part. As it is, the state holds them hostage and dares me to vote down the levy. I disapprove of that tactic and I am willing to call their bluff (to save THE FUTURE CHILDRENZ!!!). I strongly encourage all concerned citizens to take this power away from me BY NOT PUTTING IT TO A FUCKING VOTE.
That old saw about lawyers never asking a witness a question they don't already know the answer to applies here--never put something to a vote that you can't stand to have go the other way.
And let me make this clear: the hurting of the schools and THE CHILDRENZ! is intentional on my part. As it is, the state holds them hostage and dares me to vote down the levy. I disapprove of that tactic and I am willing to call their bluff (to save THE FUTURE CHILDRENZ!!!). I strongly encourage all concerned citizens to take this power away from me BY NOT PUTTING IT TO A FUCKING VOTE.
That old saw about lawyers never asking a witness a question they don't already know the answer to applies here--never put something to a vote that you can't stand to have go the other way.
33
Will-what are you saying--use the roads budget to fund education? If so, no, that sounds like a bad idea.
How about use the "education budget" to fund "education". If people are all gung ho to "put our children first", put the numbers up front.
How about use the "education budget" to fund "education". If people are all gung ho to "put our children first", put the numbers up front.
34
@31- "If funding from levies dries up, and the need is essential, it'll be found elsewhere. People need to face up to how essential education is and fund it from the beginning, not leave it to the voter's whims. It's dishonest to say "Here, make a decision--OH SHIT!!! NOT THAT ONE!!!""
All funding (in a democracy) is ultimately at the voters' whim. Whether its on a straight up or down levy vote or just part of the whole package of voting for representatives. If you don't like the current system, tell your representative about it. Voting down a levy will just fuck up the schools for a few years. You'll be surprised how little is "essential."
Breaking Thing A because you think Thing B needs fixed is a very bad way to do things.
All funding (in a democracy) is ultimately at the voters' whim. Whether its on a straight up or down levy vote or just part of the whole package of voting for representatives. If you don't like the current system, tell your representative about it. Voting down a levy will just fuck up the schools for a few years. You'll be surprised how little is "essential."
Breaking Thing A because you think Thing B needs fixed is a very bad way to do things.
35
tiktok, you seem sincere so I'm not going to say you're trolling on here...but really, you're just so so wrong about how to help the schools. All your "no" vote is going to do is drive class size up and fuck over badly-needed programs. There is NO WAY the funding system is going to change by failing levies instead of by an initiative or legislature-drafted bill. No way. None. Zero. So, have at it, fuck over the schools and tell yourself you're helping them. You are doing THE OPPOSITE. Can't be much clearer.
36
@20, this district hasn't voted down a levy in about 15 years, then there was a 3 year blip and then every one since 1976. Get your facts straight.
@29, great that you want to get all active but where are you when there ISN'T a levy? Working for better Board members? Volunteering in schools? I doubt it. So many people say, work for better schools but vote for the levy. But are you really doing both? I've worked for over 15 years for public education in Seattle and the stories I could tell. But the bottom line is yes, vote for Prop 2 the Operations levy or otherwise the district is screwed.
But I don't think people are getting that by voting in Prop 1, the BTA levy, you enable/perpetuate the continuing decline of our facilities. We will NEVER get out of this $500M backlog maintenance hole - not by any levies anyway - if we don't grab the district by the collar and say straighten up, Jack. I know these people and the entrenched bureaucracy is unbelievable.
To say, "do it for the kids" is the most naive and simplistic thinking there is. Doing the wrong thing for the right reason, well, you are still doing the wrong thing. Using a fire hose to put out a forest fire is not much, kids. Don't fool yourselves into thinking that all the BTA levy money is going to shore up lots and lots of schools. It's not. (And yes, everything I say about the money is factual and I can document all of it.)
@29, great that you want to get all active but where are you when there ISN'T a levy? Working for better Board members? Volunteering in schools? I doubt it. So many people say, work for better schools but vote for the levy. But are you really doing both? I've worked for over 15 years for public education in Seattle and the stories I could tell. But the bottom line is yes, vote for Prop 2 the Operations levy or otherwise the district is screwed.
But I don't think people are getting that by voting in Prop 1, the BTA levy, you enable/perpetuate the continuing decline of our facilities. We will NEVER get out of this $500M backlog maintenance hole - not by any levies anyway - if we don't grab the district by the collar and say straighten up, Jack. I know these people and the entrenched bureaucracy is unbelievable.
To say, "do it for the kids" is the most naive and simplistic thinking there is. Doing the wrong thing for the right reason, well, you are still doing the wrong thing. Using a fire hose to put out a forest fire is not much, kids. Don't fool yourselves into thinking that all the BTA levy money is going to shore up lots and lots of schools. It's not. (And yes, everything I say about the money is factual and I can document all of it.)
37
@36, where did I say I'd seen SEATTLE levies fail? Please understand that people have gone to school in Washington in other districts and are still allowed online. And if it's in the past 15 years, why do you assume I've been in the public school system in the last 15 years? No one over 33 on Slog? And why would you assume I'm not active in schools? Besides, I was telling someone else that voting down all levies isn't a way to help the schools - do you disagree?
38
G, yes, I am sincere. I understand this will screw over the school districts. Go ahead and do something to insure this won't happen--take it off the ballot.
Based on previous votes, I fully expect both levies to pass, and the schools will continue to be, as I see it, crucially underfunded. But everyone who votes for the levy will feel that "they're doing their part" because they were offered a choice between (apparently) slitting their children's throats, or (as I see it) beating them with a cane for the next few years.
What I want to see is a student to teacher ratio of no more than 12 to 1, and the cost for that rolled into the property taxes. What's that require? Doubling the current budget? Tripling it? Fine. That's the education system I want to fund, and that's how I want it to be funded.
Based on previous votes, I fully expect both levies to pass, and the schools will continue to be, as I see it, crucially underfunded. But everyone who votes for the levy will feel that "they're doing their part" because they were offered a choice between (apparently) slitting their children's throats, or (as I see it) beating them with a cane for the next few years.
What I want to see is a student to teacher ratio of no more than 12 to 1, and the cost for that rolled into the property taxes. What's that require? Doubling the current budget? Tripling it? Fine. That's the education system I want to fund, and that's how I want it to be funded.
39
Okay, tiktok, I'll take it off the ballot. Oh, wait, I can't. Can you? Can you please tell me how that's going to happen, and how rejecting levies will start the process? How increasing class sizes now will make class sizes smaller in your ideal future? Yes, we need to change the system, but how can voting down levies do that? I think you're making all kinds of assumptions that just aren't based in reality.
40
I voted no on prop 1 (building and equipment), yes on prop 2 (day to day operations).
Everything @39 (g) is arguing for (class sizes, etc) is in prop 2. Prop 1 does almost nothing to deal with long overdue maintenance of existing facilities. They should fix what's broken before building new stuff that they have no plan to maintain.
Everything @39 (g) is arguing for (class sizes, etc) is in prop 2. Prop 1 does almost nothing to deal with long overdue maintenance of existing facilities. They should fix what's broken before building new stuff that they have no plan to maintain.
41
You take it off the ballot by...not funding it via voter-approved levies. If you think this is the best way to fund education, okay--keep on putting it to a vote and trust that the people keep agreeing with you.
I think that the community needs to commit to a significant, guaranteed increase in education funding. The current system doesn't generate enough money, and is subject to anti-government voters. I want to increase taxes and education funding. You're right though--that's not very realistic. People don't want significantly increase education funding. If they did, the current propositions would be much larger, and the reason they're not is because it greatly increases a voter rejection. Putting in the general budget puts a few layers between the budget and the voters who have repeatedly shown a reluctance to spend big.
I think that the community needs to commit to a significant, guaranteed increase in education funding. The current system doesn't generate enough money, and is subject to anti-government voters. I want to increase taxes and education funding. You're right though--that's not very realistic. People don't want significantly increase education funding. If they did, the current propositions would be much larger, and the reason they're not is because it greatly increases a voter rejection. Putting in the general budget puts a few layers between the budget and the voters who have repeatedly shown a reluctance to spend big.
42
I'm not in Seattle proper, but I voted no on my local school levies because I don't think milking property owners is the right way to get funding, just like I don't think it's right to use car tab taxes to pay for things like the monorail.
The money is out there. Our governments just can't seem to find it. They have a couple of go-to sources (property taxes, car tabs, restaurant and hotel taxes) and don't put any actual thought into real alternatives.
Also, we just went through a huge boom in property taxes (2010 values are down, but 2009 values were higher than ever in the middle of the deepest recession since the Great Depression). What did the schools do with all of the extra money they made off of their "$X/1000 of value assessed" levies? Even if these levies pass property values are being assessed way lower for 2010 which means less for the levies. If we pass these now, we're telling the gov't that they can keep going back to that well and we'll see more special levies to make up for the amount lost due to declining property values.
The money is out there. Our governments just can't seem to find it. They have a couple of go-to sources (property taxes, car tabs, restaurant and hotel taxes) and don't put any actual thought into real alternatives.
Also, we just went through a huge boom in property taxes (2010 values are down, but 2009 values were higher than ever in the middle of the deepest recession since the Great Depression). What did the schools do with all of the extra money they made off of their "$X/1000 of value assessed" levies? Even if these levies pass property values are being assessed way lower for 2010 which means less for the levies. If we pass these now, we're telling the gov't that they can keep going back to that well and we'll see more special levies to make up for the amount lost due to declining property values.
43
Eh--everyone needs to be taxed for education. We all benefit from good schools, either directly for our own kids, by making the area a more attractive place to live, and by raising an informed citizenry and educated workforce. Everyone has to live someone where, so either they property tax directly, or their landlord passes it on to them via rent increases.
If you're not going to tax everyone for education, then the most logical route would be to tax parents per kid.
If you're not going to tax everyone for education, then the most logical route would be to tax parents per kid.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
NYC Man Ticketed for Not Riding in the Bike Lane by Jonathan Golob
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (43) RSS