I-776 would institute an across-the-board $30 car tab fee--no loopholes like the additional current $15 county fee. The real loophole at issue, however, is Sound Transit's .03-percent motor vehicle excise tax (MVET), which makes up an estimated $700 million of Sound Transit's funding through 2009. (Monorail is also supposed to be funded by the MVET, but a yes vote on 776 would not jeopardize the monorail, because 776 refers to state code that is distinct from the Olympia legislation enabling the monorail agency to issue its tax.)
The anti-Sound Transit message will surely resonate with the federal government, which is currently debating an additional $500 million in critical Sound Transit funding. Short of a straight revote on Sound Transit, 776 is the best way to let lawmakers know that the public is no longer behind Sound Transit.
The Glee Club is well aware that 776 is the bidding of anti-tax crusader Tim Eyman (776 is a follow-up to Eyman's I-695, his 1999 campaign to rein in car tab fees). We dislike Eyman and his tax-cutting agenda as much as the next social worker, but we're clearheaded enough to separate the message from the messenger and admit he's right about this particular tax. In short, voters should say no to a tax for a project that does not resemble what voters were promised in 1996. Lose your patience. Send the right message.
Initiative Measure 790Vote NOInitiative 790 would give police and firefighters majority representation on their pension board. Currently they are not represented on the board. While it seems like they should have a voice on the board, we don't like their suggestion. It's a bad idea to give an unelected group majority control over taxpayers' money--especially when the only safeguard is a veto that legislators aren't likely to take against politically popular firefighters and police officers.
Referendum Measure 53Vote YESReferendum 53 would put a heavier unemployment tax burden on traditionally seasonal employers (e.g., construction) whose workers currently reap a disproportionate chunk of overall unemployment benefits. R-53 redistributes the fairness of the tax system, without affecting benefits.
Referendum Bill 51Vote NoThis is a huge plan that proposes a nine-cents-per-gallon increase in the state gasoline tax that would raise an estimated $7.8 billion earmarked to begin work on a veritable grab bag of transportation "improvements," which will eventually cost taxpayers well over $30 billion. Such improvements include bulking up I-405 to 10 lanes in one stretch, putting $450 million toward the multibillion-dollar repair of the Alaskan Way Viaduct, and pumping some money into a slew of smaller public transport initiatives, most outside of Seattle. Indeed, this proposal--shoved before the voters by a spineless and weak-willed legislature unwilling to take a stand on increasing taxes to begin fixing, after years of neglect, the state's pent-up transportation needs--contains a bit of everything under the sun. That is, if everything under the sun is paved over with tar and asphalt. A politically expedient attempt at a one-measure-fits-all solution to our complex transportation needs, one that attempts to pave our way out of the problem, the Glee Club urges voters to vote no on R-51.
It's not that we don't have big transportation needs; anyone who's been stuck on a gridlocked I-5 during the middle of the day knows we do. But this initiative, opposed by environmental groups and most of the population of Eastern Washington, as well as a surprising number of Seattleites, will quite possibly make things worse rather than better. The Glee Club, as everyone by now ought to know, firmly believes that the way out of our problem is not more roads--which means more cars, more congestion, and more sprawl--but the availability of an efficient, comprehensive public transportation system. But R-51, despite its nod to public transport, which gets at most about 20 percent of the total R-51 outlays, is essentially a roads bill. And despite the protestations of R-51 supporters to the contrary, defeat of R-51 is not a doomsday scenario; legislators can, and should, come back next year with a smaller, more targeted proposal, one that places more emphasis on public transport.
STATE SUPREME COURTJUSTICE POSITION NO. 3Vote for Mary FairhurstThe Glee Club is pissed, because in this race the best candidate was obvious: Michael Spearman, with nine years of experience on the King County Superior Court bench. Too bad nincompoops statewide voted him down in the primary. Of the two candidates actually left in the race, we endorse Mary Fairhurst, who seems serious, intelligent, and knowledgeable, even if a little too blandly well-meaning for our tastes. She's a former president of the Washington State Bar, and has worked for 16 years as an assistant attorney general. As for her opponent, Jim Johnson, he's just too conservative for us. He is a property-rights Republican who has received major financial backing from builders.
The other Supreme Court race, position no. 4, pits incumbent Charles Johnson against prosecutor Pam Loginsky. Johnson, a well-respected, civil liberties-minded jurist with 12 years of experience on the state's highest bench, deserves your vote over the partisan, law-and-order challenger.
The City of Seattle Charter Amendments Nos. 1-4Vote noThere are four City of Seattle charter amendments on the ballot this year, and you shouldn't vote for a single one. First of all, none of the four proposed amendments--two of which deal with the initiative process and the other two with publishing city rules--went through a public-notice process. The city council slid them to the ballot without a public hearing. (Opponents of the Amendments filed a lawsuit on the issue this week.)
Most importantly, the amendments themselves are flawed. The first two reduce public information. Charter Amendment No. 1 would allow summaries of ordinances to be published instead of the full text. Charter Amendment No. 2 would allow amendments to be published once a week in one newspaper, instead of the current 30-day run in both daily papers.
Charter Amendments Nos. 3 and 4 are attacks on the local initiative process. Amendment No. 3 extends the amount of time for the city clerk to notify the city council that an initiative petition has been filed. Currently, the clerk must notify the council 20 days after the petitions are turned in. If this amendment passes, the clerk wouldn't have to notify the council until 20 days after the signatures are verified. And Amendment No. 4 passes the responsibility for verifying the signatures from the city to the county. Essentially, initiatives could easily be tied up in signature verification if these deadlines are removed. VOTE NO on all four amendments.
