Uncertain how to vote on Prop. 976 (Tacoma, Bellevue: purchase, school, camp)

[AleeGee]

I read the explanatory statement, and the arguments for and against, and I'm still on the fence as to my vote. I know the car fees are exorbitant and questionable. I don't drive, but that doesn't mean I don't see the situation from a car owners perspective. I'm keaning toward approving it, but not at the expense of leaving our bridges in disrepair. Will there be money to repair and retro-fit the bridges which are in bad need of attention?

[xboxmas]

I personally voted 'No.' I don't want more taxes if we can help it.

And I have voted 'Yes' for school bonds/levies in the past so its not like I am completely "anti-tax."

[Flightoficarus87]

I'm kind of in the undecided camp myself - It's perfectly understandable for people to be unhappy with paying exorbitant car tab fees for ST3, especially for those living well outside of areas that will see any light rail benefits sooner than later. But at the same time, the bill comes off as a "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" approach to me - ending sky high car tabs, but making them unrealistically low, cutting significant funds needed for important infrastructure projects. I really would have preferred to see a more balanced initiative that gives more consideration to both sides of the debate/parties involved.

[pnwguy2]

As I understand it, 976 will to some extent fund Sound Transit. Why should Eastern Washington residents be taxed for something they never use? Yes, on the repeal on 976. Western WA residents should pay for Sound Transit.

[pnwguy2]

Originally Posted by xboxmas

I personally voted 'No.' I don't want more taxes if we can help it.

And I have voted 'Yes' for school bonds/levies in the past so its not like I am completely "anti-tax."

If you don't want higher car tabs you need to vote YES on this, not NO. Funny how they position these initiatives, meant to confuse.

[xboxmas]

Originally Posted by pnwguy2

If you don't want higher car tabs you need to vote YES on this, not NO. Funny how they position these initiatives, meant to confuse.

Oops, I DID vote YES, but it’s too late for me to edit the post now. I guess I wasn’t thinking as I typed.

[X.G.]

Originally Posted by AleeGee

I read the explanatory statement, and the arguments for and against, and I'm still on the fence as to my vote. I know the car fees are exorbitant and questionable. I don't drive, but that doesn't mean I don't see the situation from a car owners perspective. I'm keaning toward approving it, but not at the expense of leaving our bridges in disrepair. Will there be money to repair and retro-fit the bridges which are in bad need of attention?

Yeah, this is a no-brainer. Voting NO maintains the fee, however faulty the math may be to some. Here's the thing: between Puget Sounds infrastructure and the Earth's needs, we can't drive like we did. These tab fees will do a huge part in building excellent alternatives to being stuck in traffic, polluting our air. If you are a stubborn auto commuter, you still win -roads will be all-the-less clogged with other drivers if they can take a train to Bellevue, Redmond, Tacoma, Ballard, Lynnwood and the sooner, the better.

Tim Eyman is a long-time hated right-wing anti-tax zealot.He's been convicted of being a tax-cheat, ballot crook, a liar and a thief. Ignore is ifdiotic $-wasting initiatives by rejecting ALL of them, every time. Even conservative editiorial boards say reject this crap.

BTW, to any posters here who think they do their part by voting for some tax initiatives but not others, remember this: however flawed (and it is deeply flawed), WA State has no income tax for anyone. Not a penny's worth. So, these ballot initiatives are how we pay for stuff. Want a top-notch transport system> Vote to tax ourselves to pay for a big chunk of it. Want it built better, faster, swallow hard and vote to pay more. Or, just pend your life choking on smog in stand-still traffic while Tim Eyman makes a crooked state-coffer-sucking career off your ignorance.

Voter NO on i976 and maintain funding for the massive expansion of public transport that we so desperately need. :-)

[fassopony]

I am voting YES. I don't care about Eymans's background, a broken clock is right twice a day.


VOTE YES!!


We have a HUGE TAX SURPLUS in this state, they need better money management not more of our hard earned money. The average salary at Sound Transit is over $80,000.00 per year. That is the average.

[tomkatsu]

Originally Posted by pnwguy2

As I understand it, 976 will to some extent fund Sound Transit. Why should Eastern Washington residents be taxed for something they never use? Yes, on the repeal on 976. Western WA residents should pay for Sound Transit.

Sound Transit is entirely funded by people in the ST district. Nobody in Eastern WA pays a dime towards Sound Transit unless they travel to the ST district and purchase goods in stores. Meanwhile people in Western WA pay for Eastern WA's highways.

[CrazyDonkey]

Originally Posted by pnwguy2

As I understand it, 976 will to some extent fund Sound Transit. Why should Eastern Washington residents be taxed for something they never use? Yes, on the repeal on 976. Western WA residents should pay for Sound Transit.

What are you talking about? I-976 would largely defund ST. Apart from some federal grants, only tax-payers within the ST District (encompassing parts of King, Snohomish, and Pierce Counties) are paying for ST.

Voting Yes is a classic "cutting off your nose to spite your face" vote.

Regardless, this is just another Eyman unconstitutional for-profit "mess" of an initiative that will be overturned as soon as a challenge hits the courts.