Guest columnist
What's not to like about lower property taxes?

By Tim Eyman
Special to The Times

E-mail this article Print this article Search archive

We only have a few months to raise the funds and gather the signatures necessary to qualify our 25% Property Tax Initiative for the 2004 ballot. The more you know about it, the more you'll like it.

Why is this initiative necessary?

Our state has a huge property-tax problem. In 1980, citizens paid $1 billion in property taxes. In 2003, we paid $6.25 billion. That level of growth is obscene and unsustainable. Our state's economy is growing at a sluggish pace with high unemployment. We need an economic stimulus to boost the economy. There are over 1,700 taxing districts delivering local government services. This governmental structure is unwieldy, inefficient and filled with bureaucratic redundancy. Fundamental reform is long-overdue. The 25% Property Tax Initiative provides a sensible solution to these very real problems. It's a smart, balanced, reasonable proposal.

What does it do?

The initiative lowers property taxes for everyone, providing a $550 million permanent property-tax reduction that helps working families and struggling senior citizens and boosts our state's economy. It does not reduce sales taxes, utility taxes, business-and-occupation taxes, etc. — only property taxes. And not all property taxes are reduced. The initiative does not affect voter-approved property taxes. It does not impact property taxes that go toward education, like local school levies, teacher pay, classroom sizes, etc. The regular property-tax levies of local taxing districts are not eliminated, only reduced by a reasonable amount — 25 percent.

Didn't we solve our property-tax problem with a previous initiative?

In 2001, voters overwhelmingly approved Initiative 747, putting tighter limits on property-tax increases unless voters OK'd higher increases. It took effect without a single legal challenge and it has helped limit increases. But it did not address the cumulative property-tax burden that has built up over the past two decades. From 1980 to 2003, there has been a sixfold increase in property taxes. During that time, politicians have done nothing to address this very real problem. Without this initiative, our citizens and our economy will simply drown under an unfair, unsustainable property-tax burden.

How will the initiative help the state's economy?

The federal government dramatically reduced taxes to spur the economy. As a result, we're now seeing huge increases in economic growth at the national level. But that growth hasn't trickled down to our state. Why? Because the only thing state government did to boost our state's economy was to provide tax breaks to Boeing. In contrast, this initiative provides $550 million in tax incentives to all businesses and individuals. This helps everyone, both employers and employees. We mustn't put all our economic-incentive eggs into one basket. Let's diversify our portfolio of tax incentives to all sectors of the economy. We can't just sit back and wait and hope for unemployment to drop and wages to go up. We must adopt policies, like this initiative, to make it happen.

Even with the resulting economic growth and increases in tax revenues, changes will still be necessary. How should affected governments adapt?

State government received national acclaim by solving a $2.6 billion deficit, not by raising taxes, but by employing a process called "Priorities of Government." The initiative ensures this same process will occur for local governments. Last year, state politicians prioritized government services and allocated available revenues to achieve those priorities. It was decades overdue. They didn't do it because they wanted to, they did it because economic and political conditions gave them no choice. Fundamental reform does not occur when government is fat and happy. Having over 1,700 taxing districts delivering local government services is not the most cost-effective and efficient way to deliver them. But this structure will never be reformed unless voters approve this initiative.

Why doesn't the initiative affect voter-approved tax increases?

It's the safety valve. If a local government can convince the citizens in that community that all other options have been exhausted and that a tax increase is the only resort, then that's fine. That's called accountability. In the private sector, spending must be justified on a daily basis. It is perfectly reasonable for citizens to periodically have their elected officials explain and justify their spending of our hard-earned tax dollars. Besides, such a process helps engage the citizenry with its government and increases participation in our political system.

Doesn't this initiative help only the rich?

This is my favorite stupid question. This initiative helps everyone because we all pay property taxes and we all benefit from a strong economy. Rich people don't have to worry about taxes, they can afford them (one of the benefits of being rich). But working families and senior citizens disproportionately benefit from this initiative because the savings may very well be the difference between owning their home and being booted from their home.

Tim Eyman is a co-sponsor of the 25% Property Tax Initiative and heads up Voters Want More Choices, a grass-roots taxpayer-protection organization (425-493-8707, www.VotersWantMoreChoices.com).

Copyright © 2004 The Seattle Times Company