Please vote NO on I-1033

[Gisteppo]

The solution is that they can and should be creating rainy day funds, and then living within their means.

They used to have these. Eyeman eroded them with I-695 and 747. Combined with decreased revenue from post 9/11 economics, they are gone.

Now, as for 1033, I have read the initiative inside and out. It has been suggested that the Governments cannot raise taxes. This is a lie. They must ASK us for permission, but they can raise taxes above growth and inflation.

This is an insidious little line he added. The process for requesting increases of funds puts the agencies within a continuous loop of elections. There is absolutely NO WAY for a govt agency to permanently raise a tax to pay for any outlined service in perpetuity. They can only as for B&O, M&O, bond, or levy, and all of those have caps between 1 and 10 years in duration. If you want to increase your police force by 10%, it will be by levy, and must be voted on every 6 years. If that levy fails at any point, the 10% staffing must then be dropped, reducing the level of service.

If a city grows from 150,000 to 175,000 people (16%), they generate need. Say they have 2000 requests for 911 police aid. It goes up to 2320 (16%), which requires an additional 16% of work force to respond. Using the I-1033 structure, they CANT GROW to meet need above the cost of living increase and population growth. It isn't a linear curve. The 1033 #s in this scenario would generate around 9-10% increase in revenue generation. This is an operational loss, and doesn't meet the needs for growth.

Also keep in mind that this is only for services based on RESIDENTS. Say you have a business on the edge of town. Most of your employees live close to work, and less than 25% live in town. The level of service can only rise to meet the need of those residents, not the total number of employees working 40 hrs a week and generating service calls.

____________________________________

We have spoken at length, and really this boils out to two root issues:

1) Don't hinder the state at the cost of the cities. This bill will consume cities and run them into bankruptcy while the culprit is the state.

2) If everyone hates how the state SPENDS the money, why do they attack how the GENERATE money? If spending is the problem, vote for initiatives based on curtailing spending.

Please vote NO on I-1033, its the wrong bill at the wrong time.

E

[Anglinarcher]

I would rather have continuous elections like we already have then allow the spend happy politicians to raise taxes at their whims. If they have to ask, they put themselves into a state of political jeopardy. They must justify or shut up. The initiative does allow for permanent tax increases - it is a misnomer that you cannot raise taxes for the long term post 1033.

Additionally, your are right, the increase in growth verses increase in cost is not linear. It curves down, not up. It is called economy of scale. Every business learns that lesson. Even Obama is claiming this for Government Health Care.

The fact is that most of the people opposing 1033 are either politicians or unions/guilds of government workers. I understand that no one wants to have THEIR pay cut or job lost. But the time has come for government, and unfortunately some of the workers associated with them, to suffer the consequences for the government's spend happy ways.

The Eyenman initiatives may have impacted the way governments acquired funds, but it did not cause the rainy day funds to be depleted - poor spending practices did that.

The solution is simple, I have to live within my means, you have to live within your means, and the Governments must learn to live within their means as well.

I agree that we have spent a great deal of time and effort writing about the subject. I do not agree entirely with your determination of two root issues.

1) My time spent away from this subject convinces me that the Cities and Counties are as guilty as the State. I spent my time studying the issue, and the initiative.

2) To kill a snake you cut it's head off. To control spending, you cut it's head off, or in other words, you slow the money.

Buy the time anyone reads this it will probably be to late now, but again, no matter what your views, VOTE. If you don't vote, then you have no right to complain, no matter what the out come.

Additionally, I suggest that it would be valuable to read Glen Becks latest book, Arguing with Idiots - How to stop small minds and big Government. I really never thought about reading a book like this before, but it is really quite good. Most of the back of the book is foot notes that take you to documentation of every point he makes.

I put it to you this way, if President Obama thinks Glen Beck is a threat, then don't you feel it is important to see what makes him a threat? PS, the White House has still not called into his TV show to correct any incorrect statements.

[Gisteppo]

The initiative does allow for permanent tax increases - it is a misnomer that you cannot raise taxes for the long term post 1033.

Please show me where this is the case, I haven't found it in any part of Eyeman's legislation, and it is standing state law how long each type of levy can last. The limits posed by all three of these initiatives are so simplistic that they create unchangeable taxation. You may be familiar with the use of the Levy Lid Lift, which is one way to go to the voter, but it is once again a short term solution to a long term problem.

It is called economy of scale. Every business learns that lesson.

This is an incorrect assumption in that economies of scale are effective in products, but not manpower. Taxes pay for people, they don't pay for things. 86% of the SFD budget is personnel costs. This cost is linear, based on per-employee costs. More employees cost more money. Better service is delivered by more responders.

The fact is that most of the people opposing 1033 are either politicians or unions/guilds of government workers.

Excellent point! It is opposed by those who know, understand, and work within government, who know how the tax dollar is spent, how it is generated, and are bound by laws which regulate them. It isn't opposed by those who have a weak or vague understanding of tax law.

The Eyenman initiatives may have impacted the way governments acquired funds, but it did not cause the rainy day funds to be depleted - poor spending practices did that.

100% false. Rainy day funds in MUNICIPALITIES were depleted on two things: Rising cost of insurance and rising cost of goods and services that cities acquire for service delivery. Since the first initiative went into effect, insurance has increased 50%. Fifty percent! Cost of employee contracts for wages grow based on cost of living, and are easy to meet with existing taxation. 1033 will hinder that, on top of the worsening budget gaps already in existence.

The solution is simple, I have to live within my means, you have to live within your means, and the Governments must learn to live within their means as well.

Correct, absolutely correct. So they need to learn to live within the means of a declining sales tax dollar, rising costs of fuel and insurance, and overall budgetary stresses from unforeseen catastrophic events. They are struggling to do that today, and you are proposing to cut them even deeper, while the bleeding hasn't stopped.

1) My time spent away from this subject convinces me that the Cities and Counties are as guilty as the State. I spent my time studying the issue, and the initiative.

You haven't spent time on cities that are hurting. I have this year's budget data for Spokane, showing massive cuts yet again, depleting services, reducing the number of public servants to provide protection, sustainability, and growth inside the city. Police alone are losing anywhere between 10 and 28 positions. If you want those numbers, let me know. They are preliminarily released from the Mayor's office.

2) To kill a snake you cut it's head off. To control spending, you cut it's head off, or in other words, you slow the money.

Im utterly baffled by that analogy.

I put it to you this way, if President Obama thinks Glen Beck is a threat, then don't you feel it is important to see what makes him a threat? PS, the White House has still not called into his TV show to correct any incorrect statements.

This would be considered political pandering, not a validation of his statements. Punditry is just that. If one man has an opinion, let him put it forth. I personally have listened and read what he has to say, and think him to be outside the main stream of thought, bordering on destructive to the populous.

Buy the time anyone reads this it will probably be to late now, but again, no matter what your views, VOTE. If you don't vote, then you have no right to complain, no matter what the out come.

I couldn't agree more, you hit that nail right on the head.

Vote NO on 1033

E

[Anglinarcher]

I suppose that at the conclusion of this day, it is also the conclusion of this initiative.

I find the above comments by Gisteppo self serving and quite frankly uninformed. He is a smart guy, but I believe he is listing to the Government and Union TV adds and not reading it himself. I talked to two Lawyer friends of mine and they agree with me, 1033 will not prevent long term tax increases, if approved by the Voters.

If the claim that the "economy of scale argument was false" is true, then NYC should have 5,000,000/100,000 more cops then Spokane does. That means that they should have 50 times more cops they we do, if they are 50 times the size of City. In fact, they do not but have less cops per capita then Spokane does. I know that economics are a controversial topic, but facts are facts.

Again, 1033 is being opposed by self serving people who what to maintain their jobs, not people who have our best interest at heart. We completely disagree on this one.

Rising cost are tied to inflation. If indeed insurance increased 50%, then either the Governments need to self insure or they need to bargain for better rates. If they cannot, then go before the voters and ask for more - justify. Again, so what if the cost of goods and services rise, that is inflation and is again tied to 1033 and is grounds for normal tax increases. Need more then that, ask the voters - justify.

So, the Government failed to prepare and now they are bleeding. So is the public, the WE THE PEOPLE. Should we bleed more then the Governments that claimed to be so wise and protective of our needs? Sorry, tough love.

I still believe that the only reason the high profile offices are being cut is to frighten the voters into agreeing to more taxes. And for the record, the news reported that only two police jobs will be lost, the rest have left through attrition already.

I am not surprised that you are baffled by the analogy. Perhaps I should have been more literal and less metaphorical. You don't stop a drug addiction providing more drugs. You have to slow the drugs to wean them off, or force them off cold turkey, but you don't just keep giving them more and more drugs.

Most liberals don't like Glen Beck, but they can't actually find anything wrong with what he says, they JUST DON"T LIKE WHAT HE SAYS. You are right, he, and you, and I, have a right to our opinion. The problem is that his Opinion has a lot of facts behind it.

Now, we do conclude this with a partial agreement. Indeed, we both say to go vote. Nevertheless, we conclude this with a realization that we will end this argument on opposite sides. I see no more reason to discuss this considering that it is 4:30 PM and any final comments will be of little use. Nevertheless,

Vote Yes for 1033.

[Gisteppo]

Though reeking of condescension, Ill answer that post.

Again, 1033 is being opposed by self serving people who what to maintain their jobs, not people who have our best interest at heart. We completely disagree on this one.

I am in no way going to be affected by 1033. I know what level of service we provide, and I know what the effects will be. I know the facts from the inside, and the fact of the matter is the city will, in all likelihood, see fire station 9 close if no other tax avenues are found, within 5 years.

If indeed insurance increased 50%, then either the Governments need to self insure or they need to bargain for better rates.

The city can't self insure without MASSIVE reserves. We can't generate those reserves given the fiscal status of the city and the lack of tax revenue. We can't grow a money tree any better than you can. Money must come from somewhere.

I still believe that the only reason the high profile offices are being cut is to frighten the voters into agreeing to more taxes. And for the record, the news reported that only two police jobs will be lost, the rest have left through attrition already.

This is a really frustrating argument because you completely miss the point. The officers losing their jobs are NOT the number of service providing positions lost. You are losing between 10 and 28 POSITIONS. Those mean they will reduce the number of personnel available to respond to your service request by between 10 and 28. Just because people are retiring and not being laid off doesn't mean they aren't losing providers.

You have to slow the drugs to wean them off, or force them off cold turkey, but you don't just keep giving them more and more drugs.

You also don't cure an addict by taking their job away, their only source of money. You stop the addict by removing the addiction. Cut spending, not income.

E

[Gisteppo]

Also:

As of Tuesday, the department will be forced to cut 22 positions, though that number could change as the City of Spokane is in ongoing negotiations with the Police Guild.

http://www.khq.com/Global/story.asp?S=11437647

E

[Anglinarcher]

Clearly we did not and will not see this from the same point of view. We each believe we have truth on our side, and we will never agree.

Nevertheless, I wish to congratulate the opposition on their victory. I expected it, especially considering the overwhelming number of opposition commercials on TV, but that is the way the game of politics is played.

Perhaps, if we are lucky, the debate will have spurred the Government agencies into reviewing their spending practices, and their way of supporting their ever growing need to spend more and more. If we are unlucky, they will consider the outcome as a "mandate" to raise our taxes in an uncontrollable rate.

Only time will tell, but, as I indicated, congratulations, well played.

[Gisteppo]

I suggest that anyone who feels slighted over 1033 not passing should put in a call to their representative and senator, both at the state and federal level, and let them know that you feel spending habits need to change.

This is an opportunity to find the right initiative that controls how money is spent, put it to the people, and successfully pass it.

Don't put another dollar in Eyeman's pocket next year, come up with your own solution and get the word out!


E

[Mike Carey]

God bless America and Nov 4th, now we can pick up all those darn lawn signs.

[Gonefishing]

And on Nov. 7th the signs that were well jammed into the dirt still sit waiting for mother nature winds to yank em out or the person that put it there to pick em up.