Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Tell that to the OP who stated below. It's no where near the truth. Pierce County gets far more back than they put in, they aren't funding anything.
As for the "rest of Washington" - their arguments would be more persuasive if they were paying entirely for themselves. I didn't pick the argument but this sounds a bit like Mississippi complaining about New York City, when New York City pays far more than they get back while Mississippi is entirely dependent.
FWIW, I don't find their arguments persuasive either. And I understand your frustration: if KC is generating all of this revenue that's being spent elsewhere, shouldn't the recipients acknowledge that and show at least a tiny bit of gratitude?
But their arguments don't have to be persuasive, nor do they have to be grateful to King County for showering $3bn + on the rest of the state annually. Why not? Because they are winning the argument in the only place that counts: the state budget. If you believe that has to change, then Olympia is your battleground.
FWIW, I don't find their arguments persuasive either. And I understand your frustration: if KC is generating all of this revenue that's being spent elsewhere, shouldn't the recipients acknowledge that and show at least a tiny bit of gratitude?
But their arguments don't have to be persuasive, nor do they have to be grateful to King County for showering $3bn + on the rest of the state annually. Why not? Because they are winning the argument in the only place that counts: the state budget. If you believe that has to change, then Olympia is your battleground.
True but that’s why I make the point. When this was on the ballot, we heard all about how they thought they were funding King County. When it was shown the opposite was true, they got very quiet or more amusingly, started saying “we are all one state together”.
Up here in Whatcom county we are. The last time I looked at the tax/spend rates by county before the state hid them, we were 100.6
There is another problem though, things are quite inverted when it comes to transportation spending compared to gas taxes and weight fees collected on tabs. 130% plus of that is spent in the greater Seattle area, while in some Eastern WA counties its in the 40% range. We all pay nearly half of the operating costs for Puget Sounds Ferries, which are booked out months in advance during the summer and we cant even get on them.
I am all in favor of further localizing of tax and spend, you want it, you vote for it, you pay for it.
The issue with ST is that they have included people who will never be in the service area or will not see service until 2035 or something. If they've got a couple high value vehicles, that's $9,000 in taxes for nothing over 15 years. If they want to make it fair, expand the application of the ST tax AS SERVICE EXPANDS INTO THOSE AREAS.
Do that with everything, not just transportation. If one lives outside of the ST3 taxing area, car tabs are much lower, even Duvall is lower. But King County still pays for infrastructure they have no connection to whatsoever. Don’t pick and choose, make every county pay entirely for themselves in all things.
True but that’s why I make the point. When this was on the ballot, we heard all about how they thought they were funding King County. When it was shown the opposite was true, they got very quiet or more amusingly, started saying “we are all one state together”.
I get it; I've had more arguments over just one issue (ferry funding) with folks who lived in Spokane than I care to remember. And if one could ignore the law and say that all tax revenue collected in a given jurisdiction would stay there, the conversation would be dramatically different.
The reality is, though, that where the dollars come from and where they're spent isn't what's driving this discussion. It's political polarization driven by deeply-held values on both sides. You have a point when you say King County generates far more state tax revenue than it gets in return. And you (and Sen Carlyle, among others) have an even stronger point when you say that ST3 was supported by a majority of people in that taxing district and therefore the state has no right to interfere in what is clearly a local decision.
On the other hand, those in the 509, 360, and at least part of the 253 will argue that King County has an outsized power in state government due to its economic dominance over the rest of the state. And this is where the "values" part comes in. Many east of the mountains sincerely believe that the state government and associated regulatory apparatus is so dominated by Seattle and King County that their concerns are ignored. While I do have some sympathy for that line of reasoning in certain circumstances, I don't totally subscribe to it. Nonetheless, it is a widely held view on the other side of the Cascade Curtain, touching on everything from guns to criminal justice, to environmental issues, to more traditional battlegrounds such as the role of religion.
The disconnect has gotten so bad that the R's have nominated someone for governor who, when he was police chief of Republic, effectively declared that he would only enforce laws he agrees with by saying he would not enforce I-1639. In a sane world, that would disqualify him from office. But we don't live in such a world, so he's still getting around 40% in polling vs. Inslee.
This is not a Washington problem alone, though. It's a national one featuring many intra-state and local battles,
something I'm reminded of every day, living near enough to the Bay Area to be influenced by its politics but far enough away to get an earful one day from locals about how San Francisco has become Mumbai and the next hearing a rant about Sacramento overreach. Ironically taking place in a watering hole with a BLM banner in the window.
I wish I had a solution to this, but far greater minds than mine have opined on the subject to little apparent effect. It sounds trite but as long as we define ourselves by our differences more than by what we share I don't see much improvement in our civic discourse (or our ability to solve problems) anytime soon.
I get it; I've had more arguments over just one issue (ferry funding) with folks who lived in Spokane than I care to remember. And if one could ignore the law and say that all tax revenue collected in a given jurisdiction would stay there, the conversation would be dramatically different.
The reality is, though, that where the dollars come from and where they're spent isn't what's driving this discussion. It's political polarization driven by deeply-held values on both sides. You have a point when you say King County generates far more state tax revenue than it gets in return. And you (and Sen Carlyle, among others) have an even stronger point when you say that ST3 was supported by a majority of people in that taxing district and therefore the state has no right to interfere in what is clearly a local decision.
On the other hand, those in the 509, 360, and at least part of the 253 will argue that King County has an outsized power in state government due to its economic dominance over the rest of the state. And this is where the "values" part comes in. Many east of the mountains sincerely believe that the state government and associated regulatory apparatus is so dominated by Seattle and King County that their concerns are ignored. While I do have some sympathy for that line of reasoning in certain circumstances, I don't totally subscribe to it. Nonetheless, it is a widely held view on the other side of the Cascade Curtain, touching on everything from guns to criminal justice, to environmental issues, to more traditional battlegrounds such as the role of religion.
The disconnect has gotten so bad that the R's have nominated someone for governor who, when he was police chief of Republic, effectively declared that he would only enforce laws he agrees with by saying he would not enforce I-1639. In a sane world, that would disqualify him from office. But we don't live in such a world, so he's still getting around 40% in polling vs. Inslee.
This is not a Washington problem alone, though. It's a national one featuring many intra-state and local battles,
something I'm reminded of every day, living near enough to the Bay Area to be influenced by its politics but far enough away to get an earful one day from locals about how San Francisco has become Mumbai and the next hearing a rant about Sacramento overreach. Ironically taking place in a watering hole with a BLM banner in the window.
I wish I had a solution to this, but far greater minds than mine have opined on the subject to little apparent effect. It sounds trite but as long as we define ourselves by our differences more than by what we share I don't see much improvement in our civic discourse (or our ability to solve problems) anytime soon.
There are several Sheriff's and Police Chiefs that are not enforcing some or all of I-1639, because they believe that portions of it are unconstitutional (they are). Then on the other side of things you've got the pair that shot up Seattle and killed people in an apparent drug/gang issue that had 120+ priors between the two of them and were still out on our streets and obviously had guns.
Do that with everything, not just transportation. If one lives outside of the ST3 taxing area, car tabs are much lower, even Duvall is lower. But King County still pays for infrastructure they have no connection to whatsoever. Don’t pick and choose, make every county pay entirely for themselves in all things.
I'm all for it. Again, my county is about even for taxes taken/spent here. But regarding Pierce, things start to get deep. Lots of Pierce county travels into Seattle for work, so lets use Boeing as an example. Boeing gets a tax break otherwise they could never compete having to pay B&O taxes on the "flow-through" money it takes to build airplanes. Someone trying to open a small business in Pierce county doesn't get that same break, and can't compete so they don't happen. So you end up with these "bedroom communities" that don't have much of a tax base and its occupants commute into king county for work. Of course the bedroom community doesn't make ends meet and becomes a sucking sound for state tax dollars. If you raise taxes on these people, it just makes the whole problem worse and perpetuates the issue. Really what needs to happen, is a sharp reduction in Pierce county and other struggling county B&O rates to spur job growth within. I think the state is just too greedy though, to be honest.
I'm all for it. Again, my county is about even for taxes taken/spent here. But regarding Pierce, things start to get deep. Lots of Pierce county travels into Seattle for work, so lets use Boeing as an example. Boeing gets a tax break otherwise they could never compete having to pay B&O taxes on the "flow-through" money it takes to build airplanes. Someone trying to open a small business in Pierce county doesn't get that same break, and can't compete so they don't happen. So you end up with these "bedroom communities" that don't have much of a tax base and its occupants commute into king county for work. Of course the bedroom community doesn't make ends meet and becomes a sucking sound for state tax dollars. If you raise taxes on these people, it just makes the whole problem worse and perpetuates the issue. Really what needs to happen, is a sharp reduction in Pierce county and other struggling county B&O rates to spur job growth within. I think the state is just too greedy though, to be honest.
So reduce taxes on the county that already contributes a half a billion dollars less than they get back? The people that commute to King County from Pierce are the ones likely using the transit system. And Pierce definitely needs the transit system, the faster, the more efficient, the better it is for them in increasing their property values. I don't know why this isn't more obvious. And yes, your county is about even, absolutely, my focus was on Pierce because the OP chose to make Pierce the subject when they happen to be the worst offender. Your county isn't part of ST3. Who knows, maybe in a decade or two, you would want to be, but that's a long way off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tifoso
I get it; I've had more arguments over just one issue (ferry funding) with folks who lived in Spokane than I care to remember. And if one could ignore the law and say that all tax revenue collected in a given jurisdiction would stay there, the conversation would be dramatically different.
The reality is, though, that where the dollars come from and where they're spent isn't what's driving this discussion. It's political polarization driven by deeply-held values on both sides. You have a point when you say King County generates far more state tax revenue than it gets in return. And you (and Sen Carlyle, among others) have an even stronger point when you say that ST3 was supported by a majority of people in that taxing district and therefore the state has no right to interfere in what is clearly a local decision.
On the other hand, those in the 509, 360, and at least part of the 253 will argue that King County has an outsized power in state government due to its economic dominance over the rest of the state. And this is where the "values" part comes in. Many east of the mountains sincerely believe that the state government and associated regulatory apparatus is so dominated by Seattle and King County that their concerns are ignored. While I do have some sympathy for that line of reasoning in certain circumstances, I don't totally subscribe to it. Nonetheless, it is a widely held view on the other side of the Cascade Curtain, touching on everything from guns to criminal justice, to environmental issues, to more traditional battlegrounds such as the role of religion.
The disconnect has gotten so bad that the R's have nominated someone for governor who, when he was police chief of Republic, effectively declared that he would only enforce laws he agrees with by saying he would not enforce I-1639. In a sane world, that would disqualify him from office. But we don't live in such a world, so he's still getting around 40% in polling vs. Inslee.
This is not a Washington problem alone, though. It's a national one featuring many intra-state and local battles,
something I'm reminded of every day, living near enough to the Bay Area to be influenced by its politics but far enough away to get an earful one day from locals about how San Francisco has become Mumbai and the next hearing a rant about Sacramento overreach. Ironically taking place in a watering hole with a BLM banner in the window.
I wish I had a solution to this, but far greater minds than mine have opined on the subject to little apparent effect. It sounds trite but as long as we define ourselves by our differences more than by what we share I don't see much improvement in our civic discourse (or our ability to solve problems) anytime soon.
I get it, I really do. I would be more sympathetic if they weren't being so heavily subsidized by the county they resent. I go to eastern Washington exactly never, but my tax dollars do. And while they are complaining about Seattle politics and their so called "values", they elect people like Matt Shea.
There are several Sheriff's and Police Chiefs that are not enforcing some or all of I-1639, because they believe that portions of it are unconstitutional (they are).
rkcarguy, You once again indicate that portions of I-1639 are unconstitutional--which court has so ruled? In fact, the constitutionality of the law was upheld by a WA court in August:
If that changes on appeal, then so be it, but your comment that law enforcement officers are selectively not enforcing the law because 'they believe' it is unconstitutional is frightening, and flies in the face of separation of powers under our federal and state constitutions. It is not for police to decide which laws are constitutional--it is their job to enforce them.
So reduce taxes on the county that already contributes a half a billion dollars less than they get back? The people that commute to King County from Pierce are the ones likely using the transit system. And Pierce definitely needs the transit system, the faster, the more efficient, the better it is for them in increasing their property values. I don't know why this isn't more obvious. And yes, your county is about even, absolutely, my focus was on Pierce because the OP chose to make Pierce the subject when they happen to be the worst offender. Your county isn't part of ST3. Who knows, maybe in a decade or two, you would want to be, but that's a long way off.
I get it, I really do. I would be more sympathetic if they weren't being so heavily subsidized by the county they resent. I go to eastern Washington exactly never, but my tax dollars do. And while they are complaining about Seattle politics and their so called "values", they elect people like Matt Shea.
Your frustration is duly noted. Although to be fair, not everyone over in Spokane Valley is a loathsome swamp creature like Matt Shea. In fact, the investigation that eventually led to his defrocking in the state legislature was instigated by the Spokane County Sheriff Ozzie Knezovich.
But to the main topic, why don't you reach out to your state rep and senator and ask them why year after year they go along with a budget that clearly disfavors King County? My guess is you'll get some version of the unconvincing "We're all in this together" spiel. But nevertheless, I'd be very curious to hear what they have to say.
Your frustration is duly noted. Although to be fair, not everyone over in Spokane Valley is a loathsome swamp creature like Matt Shea. In fact, the investigation that eventually led to his defrocking in the state legislature was instigated by the Spokane County Sheriff Ozzie Knezovich.
But to the main topic, why don't you reach out to your state rep and senator and ask them why year after year they go along with a budget that clearly disfavors King County? My guess is you'll get some version of the unconvincing "We're all in this together" spiel. But nevertheless, I'd be very curious to hear what they have to say.
I think you're right.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
