Legislators seek permanent property tax hike for education
by Marsha Richards, Evergreen Freedom Foundation
Ten state legislators are sponsoring a bill that claims allowing regional
cost-of-living salary increases for teachers is necessary for the
immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, or support
of the state government and its existing public institutions.
HB
1484 would permit school districts to run school levies that permanently
increase property taxes by as much as $0.75 per $1,000 assessed value (about
$165 a year for a house worth $220,000). The new tax would pay for regional
cost-of-living salary increases (on top of the increases provided by Initiative
732), and more education programs (as defined by Initiative 728).
The bill violates or overrides three constitutional provisions put in place
to protect taxpayers. These require that 1) a minimum of 40 percent of the
voters who participated in the last general election turn out to vote on
school levies; 2) levies earn super-majority approval of at least 60 percent;
and 3) levies be reauthorized every four years (Article
VII, Sections 1 and 2).
By declaring emergency, HB 1484 sponsors prohibit voters from repealing
the tax through referendum, and they allow counties to run special (sometimes
known as stealth) levy elections. The legislation also exempts
the new levies from the increase caps that govern other regular levies,
and it opens a Pandoras
Box of constitutional issues related to funding equalization across
districts.
When legislators temporarily suspended funding for I-732 and amended I-728
to plug gaping budget holes in 2003, members of the education establishment
and teachers union loudly accused them of thwarting the will of the
people and demanded reinstatement. Legislators refused; most are well aware
that voters approved the initiatives (in 2000) on the explicit
promise that neither would require new or increased taxes.
This prompted education and union officials to draft their own tax increase
proposal (Initiative
884) for the November 2004 ballot. Despite a multi-million-dollar campaign,
the measure went down in flames, 61-39 percent.
Foiled again, theyre now teaming up with a more willing legislative
body.
Washington citizens have spoken loudly and clearly. Theyre beginning
to question the decades-old claim that more money results
in higher student achievement. Besides, the state has $1.5 billion in new
revenue to spend this budget cycle. Spenders say its not nearly enough,
but voters say prioritize.
No means no. It will be interesting to see whos
listening.
Marsha Richards is the Education Reform Center Director for the Evergreen
Freedom Foundation, a non-partisan, public policy watchdog organization,
focused on advancing individual liberty, a free-market economy, and limited
and responsible government.
Contact: Marsha Richards |
Education Reform Center Director | 360.956.3482
At a March 23, 2005, House Appropriations hearing on a bill to gut the voter-approved I-601 spending limit, Rep. Jim McIntire (D) asked a supporter of I-601’s two-third supermajority requirement for the legislature to raise taxes the following question:
"Can you name a time when we [legislators] have actually not just set it [supermajority requirement] aside by majority vote? I mean, this is in many respects a procedural motion that has no bearing. It’s a statutory constraint that cannot constrain any legislature that chooses as a majority to set it aside . . . have we ever used a supermajority [to raise taxes]?"