Seattle.gov Home Page
Seattle.gov This Department
Link to Ethics and Elections Commission Home Page Link to Ethics and Elections Commission Home Page Link to Ethics and Elections Commission About Us Page Link to Ethics and Elections Commission Contact Us Page
Your advocate for fair, honest and open government
Error processing SSI file

Elections Home
Voting & Absentees
Voters' Guide
Campaigns
Disclosure Reports
Charts & Graphs
Contributor Lists
Contributor Search
Law & Filer Info
Past Elections
FAQ's

2006 Seattle Elections

General Elections Voters' Guide

Proposition 1 - Transportation Funding - Statement Against and Rebuttal


Statement Against Proposition No. 1


FIXING ROADS IS A CORE FUNCTION OF GOVERNMENT AND SHOULD BE PAID WITH EXISTING REVENUES

Voter-approved special levies should be for extras, not essential services.

Seattle government is taking a basic, essential service - road maintenance – something citizens expect to be funded from their existing tax burden - and telling voters they won’t get it unless they vote for a special levy. That is horrible public policy. It forces voters to pay twice for basic services.

A Seattle Times columnist said voters were being played for “chumps.”

If we vote yes, City Hall will see it as a “green light” to put other essential services on the ballot. It’s a Pandora’s box that shouldn’t be opened.

THEY’LL USE THESE FUNDS TO FILL THE FUNDING GAP FOR THE VIADUCT/TUNNEL

Nickels and the Council broke their promise to have a public vote on the viaduct/tunnel after cost estimates radically increased. They say they won’t use this levy for the viaduct/tunnel but why should we believe them? They’re billions short, not including financing and cost overruns (Boston’s Big Dig Tunnel cost $15 billion).

This levy will be a slush fund for the viaduct/tunnel.

LARGEST TAX INCREASE (LEVY-LID LIFT) IN SEATTLE HISTORY

Property taxes are skyrocketing even with voter-approved limits. This unprecedented proposal removes these voter-approved limits and compounds every year with increases over six times higher than current law allows, HURTING BOTH RENTERS AND HOMEOWNERS.

Even with voter-approved limits, Seattle’s crushing property tax burden is forcing working-class folks and fixed-income senior citizens to leave the city. This massive increase will drive away more.

SEATTLE SHOULD BE A CITY FOR EVERYONE, NOT JUST RICH PEOPLE

Seattle’s citizens already pay billions each year in regular taxes. On top of those, voters have approved special levies for schools, libraries, and parks. More tax increases are coming, including a $14 billion regional tax.

Tax-increase proponents say “it only costs $160 yearly for the average homeowner.” What they don’t say is the average Seattle family already pays $37,000 in taxes every year, a whopping 44% of family income. Seattle’s citizens are generous but don’t have bottomless wallets.

CITY HALL CAN’T PLEAD POVERTY

In 1996, the city spent $44 million for transportation; in 2006, they spent $177 million. That’s a 302% increase, almost 10 times higher than inflation. They’ve got the money; they just need to make fixing roads a priority.

DON’T BE BLACKMAILED INTO PAYING TWICE

Vote NO.

STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY: Jim Coombes, 39-year resident of Seattle, Al Rousseau, 78-year-old grandfather, lived in Seattle all my life, Albert Pong, 16-year resident of Seattle’s Rainier Valley


Rebuttal of Statement Against


Tim Eyman and the other opponents are lying to voters:

  1. Proposition 1 will NOT fund the Viaduct replacement. City Ordinance #122232 explicitly prohibits this.
  2. Proposition 1 is a nine year package that does NOT remove voterapproved 1% limits, and is NOT a never-ending tax. In fact, Prop. 1 is subject to strict citizen oversight and accountability, and cannot be renewed without a public vote.
  3. Proposition 1 is needed because Seattle lost millions in dedicated transportation maintenance dollars primarily because of Eyman-led initiatives that were forced on us even though Seattle voters overwhelmingly voted against them.

Proposition 1 WILL address a backlog of critical street and bridge maintenance, bike and pedestrian programs, and transit investments.

Proposition 1 is an affordable, accountable solution to Seattle’s growing transportation problem.

Join transit and pedestrian advocates, neighborhood and business leaders, unions and conservationists in support of Proposition 1, and Keep Seattle Moving.

STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY: Michael McGinn – Sierra Club, Jessyn Schor – Transportation Choices Coalition, Chuck Ayers – Cascade Bicycle Club






General Election Voters' Guide

Introduction

Voter Registration, Polling Places & Absentee Ballots

Seattle Form of Government

Links to Non-Seattle Voters' Pamphlets

Council Position 9

Sally Clark

Stan Lippman

Seattle Municipal Court Judge Position 1

Edsonya Charles

Seattle Municipal Court Judge Position 2

C. Kimi Kondo

Seattle Municipal Court Judge Position 3

Ron A. Mamiya

Seattle Municipal Court Judge Position 4

Judith Montgomery Hightower

Seattle Municipal Court Judge Position 5

George W. Holifield

Seattle Municipal Court Judge Position 6

Michael Salvador Hurtado

Seattle Municipal Court Judge Position 7

Fred Bonner

Seattle Municipal Court Judge Position 10

Jean Rietschel

Referendum 1 -
Adult Entertainment Regulation

Statement for and Rebuttal

Statement Against and Rebuttal

Title & Explanation

Complete Text

Initiative 91 -
Leases to Sports Teams

Statement for and Rebuttal

Statement Against and Rebuttal

Title & Explanation

Complete Text

Proposition 1 -
Transportation Funding

Statement for and Rebuttal

Statement Against and Rebuttal

Title & Explanation

Complete Text

Chrtr Am 6 -
Meeting Location in Emergency

Statement for and Rebuttal

Statement Against
and Rebuttal
(None Submitted)

Title & Explanation

Complete Text

Chrtr Am 7 -
Council Quorum Requirements

Statement for and Rebuttal

Statement Against
and Rebuttal
(None Submitted)

Title & Explanation

Complete Text

Chrtr Am 8 -
Council Reconfirmation of 3 Dept Heads

Statement for and Rebuttal

Statement Against
and Rebuttal
(None Submitted)

Title & Explanation

Complete Text

Chrtr Am 9 -
Auditor Appointer and Length of Term

Statement for and Rebuttal

Statement Against
and Rebuttal

Title & Explanation

Complete Text

Chrtr Am 10 -
Planning Commission Appointments

Statement for and Rebuttal

Statement Against
and Rebuttal
(None Submitted)

Title & Explanation

Complete Text

ChrtrAm 11 -
When Approved Ballot Issues take Effect

Statement For
and Rebuttal
(None Submitted)

Statement Against
and Rebuttal
(None Submitted)

Title & Explanation

Complete Text

Chrtr Am 12 -
Selected Cnclmmbrs Vote on Chrtr Amendmnt

Statement For
and Rebuttal
(None Submitted)

Statement Against
and Rebuttal
(None Submitted)

Title & Explanation

Complete Text

Chrtr Am 13 -
Ballot Measure Notification

Statement For
and Rebuttal
(None Submitted)

Statement Against
and Rebuttal
(None Submitted)

Title & Explanation

Complete Text

Chrtr Am 14 -
Clerk Compilation of Ordinances

Statement For
and Rebuttal
(None Submitted)

Statement Against
and Rebuttal
(None Submitted)

Title & Explanation

Complete Text

Chrtr Am 15 -
Change Comptroller to Clerk

Statement For
and Rebuttal
(None Submitted)

Statement Against
and Rebuttal
(None Submitted)

Title & Explanation

Complete Text

ChrtrAm 16 -
Obsolete References to Art. XIX Sec. 10

Statement For
and Rebuttal
(None Submitted)

Statement Against
and Rebuttal
(None Submitted)

Title & Explanation

Complete Text

Ethics and Elections Home | About Us | Contact Us | Commission | Ethics | Elections | Lobbying | Whistleblower