Headed for the November ballot: County ‘Best Starts for Kids’ levy

The County Council has just voted to send “Best Starts for Kids” to the November ballot. As explained on the county website, it’s a “six-year levy lid lift at a rate of 14 cents per $1,000 of assessed value, which would raise about $58 million in the first year and a cumulative $392.3 million, at a cost to the average King County homeowner of about $56 per year.” King County Executive Dow Constantine proposed it earlier this year as a way to help give more young people a better chance at a trouble-free life with prevention/intervention early on, instead of just casting them to the wind in the early going and finding them in trouble with crime, addiction, etc. later. Here’s the full county announcement explaining the levy and today’s vote.

Melissa Westbrook July 22, 2015 (12:27 pm)

There are two problems with this levy.

One, the State, the County and the City all provide services like this (some form of early learning/intervention services). Are these efforts duplications? Are they coordinated? I don’t want to vote for yet another levy where it sounds like something that is already funded in some manner.

Two, do you like parks, libraries, schools, kids? Me, too. Trouble is that our ballots are starting to look like a shopping list.

It’s tough to hear “it’s only $100 more on your property tax” when you see how many levies we already support. As well, what about low-income folks and seniors? $100 a year IS real money to them.

The Mayor and Council have this $900M+ transportation levy as well coming on the ballot and don’t forget the School District’s Operations and Capital levies in Feb. 2016.

I’m not sure how I get paying for all these levies.

Ex-Westwood Resident July 22, 2015 (12:38 pm)

Is there anywhere a homeowner can find out all the added levy’s, bonds, riders…ect. on our property taxes???

Jason July 22, 2015 (1:39 pm)

The simple solution is to ask your legislators to enact an income tax, or to vote for an initiative enacting one. We’re stuck with these levies because Washington voters refuse to pay income tax. Our only other option is living in an Ayn Randian dystopia.

DevNull July 22, 2015 (1:42 pm)

@Ex-Westwood Resident try http://info.kingcounty.gov/Assessor/eRealProperty/default.aspx

The scary part is, if you look at the history, the voter approved taxes have gone up from 24.27% to 27.51% in the last 5 years.

Mark schletty July 22, 2015 (1:51 pm)

But it’s for the children! Enough is enough. Way too many special interest levies. Vote no and force the politicians to do what we elected them to do– prioritize spending through the general fund budget process.

m July 22, 2015 (2:19 pm)

There is another levy moving its say to the ballots for “Culture Access Washington”. I’d rather support that as it has broader community and cultural impacts. The arts are so sacrificially underfunded in WA (we’re pretty much at the bottom of the list of States). When one looks at the impact non-profits like the Seattle Childrens Theatre are having on the development of young people (especially low-income) I’d like to put more tax dollars there.

WSB July 22, 2015 (2:28 pm)

M – I had to look that up. It’s not a levy but rather a bill enabling local governments to propose more local-option taxes for not only culture but also mental health among other things.
.
http://www.culturalaccesswa.org/
.
Here’s the bill that passed the Legislature.

.
http://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2015-16/Pdf/Bills/House%20Passed%20Legislature/2263-S.PL.pdf
.
Looks like options for taxes that could be proposed/imposed … sales, property … but local officials would first decide to do that.

Seattlite July 22, 2015 (2:25 pm)

Vote No. Put KingCounty’s leaders’ feet to the fire on fiscal responsibility. Seniors on fixed incomes are being taxed out of their homes. It seems KC’s leaders are too lazy to work on figuring out how not to keep asking tax payers for more and more money.

Kimmy July 22, 2015 (2:58 pm)

“The proposed six-year levy would provide funding for prevention and early intervention programs designed to increase the number of youth who reach adulthood healthy and ready to succeed.”
.
Could he not come up with something more vague?

Melissa Westbrook July 22, 2015 (3:15 pm)

Ex-Westwood, it is right on your tax bill (although not completely broken out). You can always call and have them walk you thru it but good question.

taxpayer July 22, 2015 (3:32 pm)

The early intervention levy is being described/sold as a cost savings measure because it will purportedly cut down on future bad outcomes which are costing Seattle the majority of the general fund budget. I don’t doubt that is true.

However, people move around. Constantly. Especially unstable households who this money would be spent on. So Seattle would be taxing itself to pay for less bad outcomes 20 years in the future, but a large chunk of those avoided bad outcomes would not be in Seattle anyway.

If the rationale is cost savings in the future then this only makes sense when implemented on a larger scale- countywide at a minimum, preferably state-wide or even national.

KT July 22, 2015 (3:54 pm)

I used to keep track of the levies that property owners are saddled with. I stopped. I gave up. I know there is a Parks Levy; there is a Low Income Housing Levy (which the City wants to double next year); there is a Families and Education Levy (which they doubled a couple of years ago); there is a Libraries Levy; there is a Seawall Levy; There is a Bridging the Gap Levy (expiring this year which the City wants to replace with the almost $1billion Transportation Levy on the fall ballot); there is a Pre-Schol Levy. What did I miss?

Now, the comment will be made that these are all passed by the Seattle voters. True. Also true is the fact that the levies based on a political calculation of what voters will accept. No levy has ever passed with 100% or even 80% of the vote. Why do people vote against them? No one ever thinks about that. Because they are cranky, cheap misers? Property values are higher than ever before resulting in higher than ever before property taxes before you even think about levy add ons. A house currently valued at amounts never before seen does not put money in people’s pockets. When retired people and seniors find that paying the exorbitant property taxes of the City of Seattle will drastically reduce their standard of living then we are going too far. Seems like seniors and middle class taxpayers are never taken into any consideration by the leaders of this city. Just the poor and the rich.

John Moses Browing July 22, 2015 (4:21 pm)

Jason

“The simple solution is to ask your legislators to enact an income tax, or to vote for an initiative enacting one.”

I think the solution is to have the government do their job and reign in unnecessary spending rather than throwing other peoples hard earned money at the problem.

Teri Ensley July 22, 2015 (4:21 pm)

Has my vote. Children are our collective future.

Mark schletty July 22, 2015 (4:47 pm)

Thank you teri ensley for demonstrating exactly how these levies so often pass. You have absolutely no idea how one penny of this money will be spent, who it will be spent on (or not spent on), who will recieve it or who will decide if the spending will actually achieve the stated goals. You know it would fit under the goal of “increase the number of children who reach adulthood healthy and ready to succeed”, in some peoples mind, to take all children from their parents and raise them in boarding schools with ultrastrict discipline and restricted diets to ensure health and proper behavior for “success”. I know this is not what you want or is likely to happen, but it could with a blind yes vote for this kind of open ended garbage.

WSB July 22, 2015 (5:31 pm)

The entire text of the legislation is here:
.
http://mkcclegisearch.kingcounty.gov/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2272643&GUID=CBE73912-E2E8-440D-A87C-90A0E4B7C0DE&Options=ID%7CText%7C&Search=2015-0177&FullText=1
.
While it doesn’t include specifically “x million will be given to X agency for X program,” it does say at #16 that most of the money will go to “community partners” to deliver services. Toward the bottom, “Section 5” has more on what’s eligible, and includes the declaration that the first $19 million will go toward a youth-and-family-homelessness-prevention initiative.

M July 22, 2015 (6:48 pm)

My son receives early intervention therapy for some minor developmental delays. It’s provided by a local private non-profit and FULLY funded by the state.

While I very much appreciate the services provided to my family and it is making a difference in my son’s life, I have always found it strange the state pays for it.

I am an upper income earner and don’t necessarily need the support. The organization isn’t allowed to take my money since his delay qualifies him for state funding. (Please note I do my best to resolve the inequality by making a private donation).

I agree with one of the previous commentors that it seems like perhaps a bunch of overlap bringing this new county initiative to a vote.

Just seems like a lot of this is a waste and it’s the middle class paying for it.

Kimmy July 22, 2015 (7:34 pm)

Thanks WSB, I read the details too. I continued to find it incredibly vague.

Question Mark July 22, 2015 (9:17 pm)

Count this one under the category of taking a look at the current general fund budget (i.e. discretionary funds) and seeing how it is being spent in the current budget plan [1]:
. Sheriff – 20%
. Adult and Juvenile Detention – 18%
. Superior and District Court – 10%
. Prosecuting Attorney – 8%
. Public Defense – 7%
. Jail Health Services/Judicial Admin. – 5%
–
In total this is 68% – more than 2/3 of King County discretionary spending. The above public safety categories alone represent more than $1 billion in spending over two years (2015-2016). And the share of the general fund budget for these services is increasing. And bottom line it basically represents counter-productive (besides expensive) outcomes.
–
The real question is, do we as a county want to keep going further that direction? If not, what’s going to be the solution?
–
[1] http://www.kingcounty.gov/depts/executive/psb/budget/2015-2016/general-fund-services.aspx

anonyme July 23, 2015 (9:40 am)

It’s time that reproduction come with responsibility. Breeding should incur a tax penalty, not tax incentives. I want children to be properly taken care of and educated, but this approach is all wrong.

I agree with Jason. Enough with all the crazy levies. Lower the sales tax and implement a state income tax. It’s the only equitable way forward.