Last-minute campaigning with 2 more days to vote on Proposition 1

IF you haven’t yet marked and returned your ballot – just one issue, Proposition 1 for Metro and roads money – you have two more days; it’s due Tuesday night (April 22nd). Last-minute campaigning continues – dozens of “No on Prop 1” signs turned up along West Seattle arterials overnight; Prop 1 supporters say King County Executive Dow Constantine plans to campaign for it tomorrow morning at the California/Alaska RapidRide stop in The Junction before catching the bus to downtown, where he and Mayor Ed Murray plan a 9:30 am rally in the Benaroya Hall lobby.

Whichever way you’re voting, you can either put a stamp on your ballot and drop it in the mail, or you can drop it off – no stamp required – at the West Seattle or White Center ballot vans 10 am-5 pm tomorrow, 10 am-8 pm Tuesday. (There are dropoff locations elsewhere – maybe one close to someplace else you’ll be – locations are listed here.)

27 Replies to "Last-minute campaigning with 2 more days to vote on Proposition 1 "

  • Jay April 21, 2014 (5:53 am)

    I voted Yes.

  • miws April 21, 2014 (7:35 am)

    Me too. As of last week, ballot received, sig verified, and counted!



  • West Seattle Transportation Coalition April 21, 2014 (8:32 am)

    The West Seattle Transportation also has endorsed Prop 1 and encourages everyone to vote Yes:

  • West Seattle since 1979 April 21, 2014 (9:23 am)

    Here’s a closing argument for a Yes vote from the Seattle Transit Blog:

  • Doug April 21, 2014 (9:44 am)

    Thanks for reminding me…
    I will vote no on this now and every time until the Metro starts working within their means like I do and all other businesses do.
    Seeing 6 busses just sitting next to Westwood village and riders standing there waiting for a ride is really disgusting. Back in the day, a sub bus driver would jump on and drive while the other driver takes a break…
    That way the buses keep moving, people don’t have to stand in the rain and mutli million dollar busses are not sitting idle…

  • West Seattle Transportation Coalition April 21, 2014 (9:57 am)

    @Doug budget cuts tracing back to Eyman’s anti-tax measures eliminated those substitute drivers. The stance you take isn’t unfortunately reasonable.

  • AmandaKH April 21, 2014 (10:09 am)

    @Doug. Metro is not a business. It is a service. It does not operate to make a profit, but to move people around the County in as efficient manner as possible. Westwood Village is a layover spot, and the buses work on a schedule (that efficiency thing again). If you voted no, it will create an even more desperate situation for everyone – including you. Unless you never have to leave West Seattle, you will feel the affects if this fails.

  • West Seattle since 1979 April 21, 2014 (10:56 am)

    Doug, when you see buses laying over at Westwood, it means there are not routes scheduled for them at that particular moment–the layover is built into the route schedule.

    If there were no bus layovers and every bus was in motion every hour of the day, who would pay for the extra driver time, especially since you don’t seem to think that it’s worth even keeping the hours we have?

  • Mat April 21, 2014 (11:58 am)

    I still feel like I haven’t seen a solid explanation or argument from the pro prop 1 side of why we need to pass a regressive tax at the county level because the state is failing us. Does anyone have one that isn’t highly partisan? What happens if the state passes the package the county needed in the next session? I can’t imagine that would mean this tax goes away…

  • GAnative April 21, 2014 (12:23 pm)

    I voted NO!

    My FIL is a retired Metro bus driver and he says vote NO!

  • Moose2 April 21, 2014 (12:26 pm)

    I guess Doug doesn’t understand the concept that buses run to a schedule. And that drivers need a rest period at times (to use the bathroom, etc).
    To clarify Doug’s other point: “…until the Metro starts working within their means…”: This does not give Metro more money, it replaces money lost due to sales tax revenue decreases. Everytime anyone states that they are against giving more money to Metro it is clear that they don’t understand the situation.

  • Rick April 21, 2014 (1:04 pm)

    On average, metro delivers less than half what they promise so even if their alarmist claims come through, then the cuts should be half what they claim. Or history would dictate..

  • taxed out April 21, 2014 (1:28 pm)

    So if metro needs the money for running busses, then why are they clumping additional money for roads? Why not separate? Cause they want votes from riders and drivers. Why is metro using this money to start a 10 mill a year “rainy day” fund? Where will that money disappear to? Why is the owner of a new lotus pay the same as an owner of a 82 ford escort?

    • WSB April 21, 2014 (2:02 pm)

      ‘Taxed out,’ I do know the answer to your last question. The county said it preferred a Motor Vehicle Excise Tax – which would have meant more paid by the Lotus than by the Escort – but the Legislature didn’t step up. So this is all they can ask for WITHOUT further legislative approval.

  • Dug April 21, 2014 (1:56 pm)

    If the buses have time to sit around,
    Then the Metro “managers” should re do the schedule so people who ride the bus will have better service…
    Better service equals more riders…
    More riders equal more revenue…then maybe the bus service can pay for itself…
    It hilarious to me that all you bus riders want to defend busses sitting around when your duff is standing out in the rain…
    If you are ok with that stick to it, but don’t ask me to subsidize your bus ride…

  • West Seattle since 1979 April 21, 2014 (2:12 pm)

    @Dug, we can’t get better service if revenue goes down. They don’t have the money to have every bus run every minute . Sure it would be nice if they did, but they can’t . And voting no on this will make it worse. You are actually making an argument for a Yes vote!

  • Fiwa Jcbbb April 21, 2014 (2:23 pm)

    “The Legislature” tried to step up, but were shut down by Republicans who control the State Senate thanks to Rodney Tom. I had to hold my nose and vote for this, because public transportation is essential and will become more so, but the way the money is collected is horrifically unfair. Thank Tim Eyman for that.You can also thank him for roadways that would rival the worst ones I’ve driven in Baja California. For a supposedly liberal state, we always seem to do whatever the rich people want, and they surely do love regressive taxation.

  • James April 21, 2014 (2:29 pm)

    I support increased funding for KC Metro. Proposition 1 probably has to include roads along with transit as there are short-sighted people who think that because they don’t personally ride the bus there would be no reason for them to fund a transit-only funding package.

    Roads, transit, cycling, and walking, and any other method of travel make up our transportation system. The more people can see a benefit to themselves of riding transit (convenience, cost savings, etc…) the more they will opt into transit over their cars. Not all trips can be made by bus, but the more easy it is for people to expand their ideas of what trips they can make by bus, the more roads that will be available to those trips that truly need to be made by car.

    If anything, Seattlites should be pushing for more transportation funding and options.

  • marty April 21, 2014 (2:29 pm)

    A little late for last minute support, most who will vote have already voted. I did, voted NO like most of tax-weary people of this area.

  • Marty April 21, 2014 (3:15 pm)

    Well the other Marty here voted ‘yes’, so I guess that cancels out our votes.

  • Marty April 21, 2014 (5:15 pm)

    Works for me!
    By the way, the polls show that this issue is losing badly. I guess people have had enough of Dow Constantax and his ever-increasing tax burden.

  • Moose2 April 21, 2014 (6:29 pm)

    @Dug, there are also good operational reasons for having a break between bus services. For example, it enables services to operate to a schedule (allowing for delays due to traffic, etc).
    What you see as subsidizing a bus ride, others see as providing an alternative to driving a car and thus reducing congestion for everyone. That is a huge benefit for drivers from maintaining metro service.

  • ScubaFrog April 21, 2014 (8:33 pm)

    I’m so glad Prop 1 is losing. The only right way to vote on this issue is to vote NO. The Prop 1 proponents were really confident about this (one priceless quote from a poster was “I can’t wait to see the “No” voters freak out when this passes lol”). Anyhow, no new taxes. I wonder how much the City of Seattle’s in debt? God only knows how much we’ve thrown away on the failed new 99 tunnel. These are merely microcosmic examples of why we can’t trust our local govt with our money.

  • JoAnne April 21, 2014 (9:00 pm)

    Metro continues the same strategy of promising to improve service in exchange for tax dollars. We have given them everything they asked for at least 3 times, and they have decreased service.
    Metro is spending more than they take in. Apparently their long-range plan does not include living within their means.
    Why should it, when we keep bailing out their failures?
    What’s surprising after all this is anyone can be naïve enough to believe they will really deliver the service “this time.”

  • Driver April 22, 2014 (7:53 am)

    Jo Anne, have you been paying NO attention for the past two weeks?

    The reason Metro has decreased service even though they have asked for money several times is that all the money they have requested STILL doesn’t cover what Eyman’s moronic plan took away. Even the additional funding provided by Prop 1 only provides 60% of what Eyman slashed years ago, and then doesn’t account for inflation.

    Everyone here complaining that their texes are too high should look at all the studies that say WA is generally a low-tax state, but also that it is a regressive state – which means the most tax burden falls on the poorest people.

    If any of you want to live in Mississippi, go ahead and vote No on Prop 1, because that’s where we are heading. Or else just move to Mississippi and stop spoiling this place for the rest of us.

  • ScubaFrog April 22, 2014 (1:34 pm)

    Well JoAnne’s absolutely right.

    Moreover ‘Driver’, Washington State taxes and Seattle’s city taxes aren’t the same thing. For example, people pay a different amount in Yakima, than they do here in Seattle.

    When you make comments like “most of the tax burden falls on the poorest people” in this state, and in Seattle – how can you possibly substantiate that claim? We don’t have an income tax here – but we have the 4th highest sales tax in America. I’m pretty sure that higher-income earners (let’s say the middle to upper-middle class) spend more than the poorest people.

    Prop 1, and indeed all new tax measures presented before Seattle voters must be rejected. Metro’s got to reform/revise it’s existing practices, before we inject more money into this currently unsustainable entity. It’s fatally flawed, and injecting money into it won’t solve it.

  • GaryS April 22, 2014 (8:37 pm)

    Joann is right.
    Funny that Driver would bring up the term “Regressive”, because Proposition 1 would impose another Regressive tax on working-class drivers.
    That was probably Eyman’s long-term goal – to have more regressive taxes, like Toll Roads and additional Vehicle Tab Fees.
    Why should voters continue to reward Eyman?

Sorry, comment time is over.

WP-Backgrounds by InoPlugs Web Design and Juwelier Schönmann