Slog
News & ArtsMonday, February 11, 2013
Olympia Lawmakers from Rural Counties Should Quit Their Whining About the Viaduct Tunnel Before We Demand Our Money Back
Posted by Goldy on Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 3:39 PM
If there's one thing that really pisses me off about Washington State politics, it's the way rural Republicans bitch about spending state money in Seattle: "If [Seattle] wants the tolls so low that it only generates $165 million," state Senator Curtis King (R-Yakima) complained about recent Alaskan Way Viaduct tunnel tolling projections, "then they can help us replace the additional monies that we're losing."
Uh-huh. And you know what monies I'd like Yakima to help the state replace? Let's start with the $2.6 million a year Yakima receives under the sales tax credit for rural counties. This is a credit in which 32 "rural" counties keep 0.9 cents of the 6.5 cent state sales tax collected within the county. Combined, the credit cost the state almost $25 million in 2011 (more than enough to close the funding gap on the tunnel).
That's right, the state sales take rate in rural counties is actually only 5.4 percent. The 0.9 percent goes straight into county coffers. Sweet.
But rural counties like Yakima don't just send less money to Olympia, they also get more of it back. As I've previously reported, a Yakima lawmaker like King is the last person to complain about the regional allocation of state monies, coming as he does from one of the biggest welfare counties in the state. According to 2008 data from the Office of Financial Management, Yakima County receives back $2.24 in state funds for every dollar it sends to Olympia, a wealth-redistribution-windfall third only to Lincoln and Ferry counties.
By comparison, King County, with roughly 29 percent of the state population, produces 42 percent of state tax revenues, yet receives back less than 26 percent of state benefits. That's a return of only 62 cents on the dollar for our state's Democratic stronghold.
Throughout the state and throughout state history, the bulk of our state roads have been paved courtesy of state and federal dollars—which means that taxpayers here in King County have picked up the lion's share of the cost because, you know, this is where most of the fucking money is. So when Senator King complains about a "Seattle-centric" tolling commission somehow screwing the rest of state, well, I've got zero sympathy.
Note to Yakima: We carry you. And we generally do it without complaint, because we're all one state and it's the right thing to do. BUT WE CARRY YOU. And all we ask in return is that you don't throw a fucking hissy fit every time the state spends a little cash in Seattle.
3
They won't pay a fair rate on "Best Use".
The situation is like rent control...a lot of long timers sitting on really valuable property, hogging it up, but not contributing appropriately to infrastructure.
Meanwhile, there is this whole phalanx of paid mouthpieces who rant on and on about rural towns people and "spawl" just because we don't need a half mile tunnel that costs $6 billion of our Federal tax dollars.
Ya Hingey!!
4
Lower capacity.
More GHG.
And twice as expensive for half the cars, trucks, or tax-exempt "non-profit" electric limos driven to the cushy stadium boxes and private jets from SLU and Queen Anne.
With no downtown exits.
Something has to give. And this .. is what will be thrown out.
9
10
11
Just do a comments database search for all comments by him containing the words Seattle, sprawl, or *urban. It will write itself.
Yakima is poor.
King County SHOULD pay more. Much More.
Why are you such unpatriotic stingy fucks?
14
Not a lawyer so this is just not-a-legal-opinion back-of-an-envelope type stuff, but maybe something like @12's idea about "county equity". Title it something like the "No Redistribution of Wealth in Washington Act" and make it a simple punchy piece that talks about "monies collected in one county may only be spent in same unless used by a special purpose district or as part of federal obligation". I'm sure a lawyer could make that legit to protect things like Sound Transit and cross-county water districts.
15
And we've got solid majorities in every county against income taxes, and for a two-thirds legislative requirement for tax increases. So, Goldy, given all of this, you know the end game: give to the schools, take from the safety net. That's the way it'll go.
Maybe it would've been better if the brilliant minds in Seattle would've watched their pennies a little more diligently. You know, like spending $800 million to repair the viaduct instead of $4 billion on that tunnel. Or like not giving Hansen and his bondholders $350 million for a basketball arena that most people will never see because the ticket prices will be too high. Or not committing multiple billions for light rail and streetcars that won't do a goddamned thing to ease congestion.
The list goes on, but the brilliant minds in Seattle think the money source is endless. The news for them is bad: The voters have erected a series of flaming crosses between you, Goldy, and their wallets. Hell, even Jay Inslee knows it. He got elected on a promise to oppose tax increases.
So now the brilliant minds of Seattle are going to have the opportunity to face the music in the next few years. The Whinefest has barely begun!
19
Are Municipal Bonds Headed for a ‘Train Wreck?’
The problem facing municipal bond investors is a double whammy. First, an investor who buys a municipal bond at a premium over face value (which is common in this price-inflated environment) only gets back face value at maturity, and the difference reduces the total return of the investment.
Second, municipal bonds are callable by the issuer (unlike U.S. Treasury securities and many corporate bonds). When a bond is called, it is redeemed prior to the maturity date and the stream of interest payments is cut short. That reduces the yield that would be expected if the bonds were held to maturity. In muni bond lingo, the measure of this double whammy is called the “yield to worst.”
http://www.pageperry.com/blog/are_munici…
You know what abortively will not help improve our schools? Withholding funding.
"...only gets back face value at maturity, and the difference reduces the total return of the investment." The reason the price declines over time is because they're being paid an above-market interest rate over the time they hold it. The amount of extra interest they get is exactly proportional to the amount the face value of the bond declines, so at the end of their investment they will have received the same total return as someone who bought a bond for exactly its face value received.
25
Go away Mister G, you have already proved yourself to be one of the dumbest people here, and banned for good reason.
Actually, the comment @17 was right on point.
Considering the stormfront types that still get to post here, I'm surprised to hear that Mister G was banned. I guess the truth hurts.
Seattle voters supported the tunnel (largely because they weren't given the option of retrofitting or replacing the AWV and the remaining alternative of pushing all of the traffic onto downtown streets was MUCH worse, but still....)
29
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Portland Voters Are Stoopid by Goldy
-
All You Motherfuckers Complaining That aPodments Are Too Small at 200 Square Feet by Dominic Holden
-
SL Letter of the Day: Did You Think I Was Going To Tell You Not To Come Out? (PLUS: Help Free Kate!) by Dan Savage
-
Rightwing Anti-Gay French Activist Commits Suicide at Notre Dame Cathedral by Dan Savage
-
Why They Break Windows by Unpaid Intern
-
Spoiled Rotten: Star Trek Into Darkness by Paul Constant
-
Usually When I'm Sent a Photoshopped Image of a Gun Pointed At Me... by Dan Savage
-
There Are No Atheists In Foxholes by Dan Savage
-
Tornado Truthers by Dan Savage
-
Listen Up, Gays: They're Coming to Recruit You by Cienna Madrid
Stranger Personals
The Stranger
RSSSeattle Art & Performance Quarterly
A complete guide to Seattle's current art, film, dance, and theater season.
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (30) RSS