ELECTION 2023: Two more days to vote on $1.25 billion crisis-care levy

| Health | West Seattle news | West Seattle politics

82 percent of local voters have NOT sent in their ballots yet for the April 25 special election. You’re asked to help make a $1.25 billion decision, approving or rejecting a countywide levy to fund crisis-care centers. Here’s an info-sheet. As reported in January, it’s a nine-year levy that King County says would “cost approximately $119 per year in 2024 for a median-priced home of $694,000.” Tuesday (April 25th) is the deadline to get your ballot postmarked and into USPS mail, or (by 8 pm) into a dropbox. West Seattle has three: In The Junction on the south side of SW Alaska west of California (with 5-minute parking spots next to it in the lot behind Key Bank), by High Point Library on the south side of SW Raymond just east of 35th SW, and on Puget Ridge in front of the South Seattle College [6000 16th SW; WSB sponsor] administration building. See the full countywide list, including dropboxes in White Center and South Park, here.

Flivver April 23, 2023 (5:59 pm)

WSB. How granular does elections go? Would they show what neighborhood did what-i/e Alki vs Admiral vs Gatewood etc?

WSB April 23, 2023 (7:15 pm)

Yes, they release the precinct-level stats soon after the election is certified (and a preliminary version sooner). I don’t have data-journalism chops nor the money to hire someone who does, so you will generally see those analyses in Seattle Times coverage. Example:
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/how-did-your-neighborhood-vote-in-seattle-primary-see-where-council-candidates-did-best-worst/

937 April 23, 2023 (6:13 pm)

Thats a “no” from me….But this one will pass at….57%

Buddy April 23, 2023 (7:49 pm)

Did my part to vote NO.
Alki resident April 23, 2023 (8:07 pm)

I don’t know anyone voting “ yes” on this. I hope you’re wrong on it passing.
- West Seattle Mad Sci Guy April 23, 2023 (9:44 pm)
  
  I don’t know anyone voting no. I guess we all have our bubbles.
  - Beach lover April 24, 2023 (7:28 am)
    
    We both voted YES!!
- Mr J April 23, 2023 (10:05 pm)
  
  BREAKING! Echo chamber confirms everyone is voting the same way I do.
Anw April 23, 2023 (11:02 pm)

Voting Yes. Curious to see what those voting No propose as feasible fiscally responsible realistic alternatives.

Burgerman April 23, 2023 (10:00 pm)

Voted no on this, and I emphatically suggest everyone else vote the same. There’s no accountability for the money they want from us from this bill, and too much ambiguity. Seriously. It’s like another Netflix subscription for every single property owner in Seattle. Who wants to pay another $11 a month for something that has no guaranteed results? Ridiculous! VOTE NO!!

WS Girl April 24, 2023 (5:05 am)

I agree. Too little accountability. Meanwhile, over the past few years, my property tax has gone from around $4,000/year to now being $6,000 for my modest house, with no end in sight. That’s the crisis–people being taxed out of their homes. I’m tired of being bled dry for projects of dubious quality, benefit, and long-term value. I am voting “No.”
- WS Res April 24, 2023 (10:34 am)
  
  Your property tax has gone up because the value of your home has risen, “modest” or not.
  - WS Girl April 24, 2023 (4:46 pm)
    
    WS Res – The value of my “modest” home has actually gone down the past few years, as the real estate boom has cooled. That does not seem to be reflected in my tax bill.
WS Res April 24, 2023 (10:33 am)

What on earth does “no guaranteed results” mean, anyway? If the levy passes, they will build five crisis centers. Once those are built, the centers will be staffed, and people can self-present, be brought by family, be brought by crisis responders, etc. There is a detailed map of the flow of assessment and services published in the Seattle Times. Insomuch as anything in the future can be “guaranteed” (spoiler: it can’t), there is a clear plan for how this is meant to go.
WestSeattleBadTakes April 24, 2023 (1:53 pm)

Attacks “ambiguous” policy ambiguously.

wssz April 24, 2023 (12:02 am)

I’m a strong “yes” vote on this. There’s a desperate need for a consistent regional network of crisis care centers.

Our current approach — emergency rooms and jail (or worse, getting shot by police) have proven to be completely ineffective and a waste of resources. Anyone in a mental health crisis needs appropriate and proven treatment, not a bandaid or an overnight stay in a jail cell.

Speaking personally, I have family members who suffer from debilitating mental illness that’s derailed their ability to have any sense of a normal life — they’ve been fired from every job, their marriages failed as their mental health deteriorated, and their kids suffered (and continue to suffer) from the fallout. It brings this issue very close to the bone for me.

With proper medical intervention and support, we can start to actually improve the lives of the people most affected, which can help their families as well.

Allowing them to continue to fall through the cracks helps absolutely no one. If the naysayers have a better solution they should step up and provide it.

Just saying no is how we ended up in our current mess. This levy offers real support.

Understanding the details of why and what we’re voting for is in the info-sheet — https://cdn.westseattleblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/220926_13064w_crisis_care_1pgr.pdf.  Reading it, it’s a clear “Yes” vote for me.

ok April 24, 2023 (6:40 am)

I’m a yes as well, but I also have family members with mental illness who have the same struggles as yours–trouble holding jobs, etc. We have spent decades shifting funding away from mental health services and into police, who just exacerbate mental health issues, and we need to reverse that trend.
michele April 24, 2023 (7:22 am)

NO
Alki resident April 24, 2023 (8:02 am)

Zero accountability for the millions of dollars already “ spent” on this issue and you want to throw more money out? This is exactly why so many are voting “NO”, this time.
- Ok April 24, 2023 (12:26 pm)
  
  There is a huge amount of transparency about how the city spends money, as well as accountability for those who are willing to actually look things up for themselves. “Accountability” has long been a smokescreen for people who want to vote “no” on funding without admitting they just don’t want to pay for things other people might benefit from besides themselves.
  - Canton April 25, 2023 (8:17 am)
    
    Please share the link to the fiscal transparency…
- WestSeattleBadTakes April 24, 2023 (2:00 pm)
  
  Can you be more specific? What accountability are you looking for? Do you understand the problems? Do you have other solutions?

IJinWS April 24, 2023 (2:57 am)

Mental health care needs to be a priority around here. My partner and I voted YES.

anonyme April 24, 2023 (7:02 am)

There should be a voter participation threshold, under which a levy or initiative is considered null and void if failing to meet a certain percentage. Especially when we’re considering a billion-dollar-plus tax levy, which is just one of a series of such levies in line for special elections. It appears the expectation is that most voters are so uninformed and have such short memories that they will fail to add up the totals – including the millions of extra dollars spent on special elections. This kind of fiscally irresponsible trickery is just one of the reasons I voted NO. I read the elections pamphlet as closely as possible (much of it is indecipherable) and do not see a workable plan there. As with the recent housing levy, this levy includes millions for planning, but not much in the way of detail otherwise. There is also the issue of a shortage of mental health care workers and providers. Money alone won’t solve that problem, as we’ve seen with the police. Enough of taxpayer-funded incompetence.

Jeepney April 24, 2023 (7:13 am)

When you vote, please vote with logic and not emotion.

Derek April 25, 2023 (8:36 am)

I did. Which is why I voted YES.

Joe Z April 24, 2023 (7:13 am)

This one felt too important to not approve given the obvious need for a massive expansion of these type of services.

Scubafrog April 24, 2023 (7:14 am)

Most people with a sense of empathy and compassion will vote yes on this. The usual ‘until it happens to them’ faux-conservatives will vote no, and benefit when the time comes. WA was 45th in the nation for mental health treatment in 2019, I can’t imagine it’s improved much. Troglodytes who vote no clearly don’t care about mental health, homelessness nor addiction (even though they’re likely the biggest whiners to that end). We have a chance to stop complaining about King County’s mental health woes, and the affects the effects therein eg homelessness and addiction. Let the nay-voters out themselves, and let them lose credibility regarding the aforementioned issues in perpetuity.

Julian April 24, 2023 (8:19 pm)

Anyone who thinks levies like this will have any impact other than providing jobs for people who should contribute to society elsewhere is extremely deluded.
- CAM April 25, 2023 (1:53 pm)
  
  Julian – I am crossing my fingers that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what this levy is actually funding because I cannot fathom another defense for your suggestion that the mental health workers that could be hired from it “should contribute to society elsewhere.” Or are we now, anti-teacher, anti-science, and anti-mental health?
  - Julian April 26, 2023 (12:42 pm)
    
    Really obvious straw man there. I understand this levy and others as well as the relevant systems involved much better than the majority of people who actually vote.

shotinthefoot April 24, 2023 (8:45 am)

I voted yes, and happily. Not only because it’s the right thing, but also because it sticks it to Tim Eyman. :D

RayWest April 25, 2023 (3:05 pm)

shotinthefoot – If you feel it’s the right thing, that’s great, but you lost me at, “also because it sticks it to Tim Eyman.” That makes as much sense as, “just want to own the Libs.” I’m tired of people using tribal gut responses to decide how they vote on issues, rather than weighing the merits, even when it is something that actually harms them in the long-run.

IJinWS April 24, 2023 (9:24 am)

My partner and I voted YES. We need to start making mental health care a priority around here.

HS April 24, 2023 (9:43 am)

I’ve sat on this bc I’ve been undecided. Mostly due to cost, but I am casting my ballot today. Several of the recent crime reports and/or large emergency responses for our area specifically resulted from a person in a mental health crisis. We are paying for the police, emergency responders time and equipment or even the extra security around the junction. But a person in mental health crisis is not the same as a shooting in encampments around the freeway. There is a very real demand on our police in this city. The ‘full text’ of the ordinance clearly lays out a weighty increase in demand for crisis mental health services. Our kids are still struggling with the affects of the pandemic – eating disorders with youth have absolutely skyrocketed. In addition, the news coverage of kids stuck, in a hospital room, because of severely limited or unavailable mental health care facilities / staff also part of this umbrella. So if you haven’t, try to get your ballon in.

WestSeattleBadTakes April 24, 2023 (10:46 am)

The accountability bots are here. Funny how they never describe what accountability means.

Julian April 24, 2023 (8:21 pm)

Funny how people complaining about “accountability bots” never actually have responses that rebut a lack of accountability…
- WestSeattleBadTakes April 25, 2023 (7:44 am)
  
  How can we have a discussion if I don’t know what they are looking for exactly? I ask for clarifications and specifics, then nothing. You can see those questions right here in this very comment thread, but I am no longer surprised by dishonesty from WSB commenters.
  
  If you’re claiming there is no accountability it is fair to assume you have a specific definition and evaluation in mind. If you can’t state what is lacking, how could you possibly affect any change?
  
  If we were to assume that they actually want improvements in accountability, is it not also fair for us to understand what they want?
  
  I am more than happy to have a discussion about what accountability means, where I think we fall short, and how we can get better.
  
  Hence, myself and others have asked what it is they feel is lacking – especially since it is being used as a justification to vote no on this levy. How can we do anything to improve our community (and society) if so many will simply vote no based on some inscrutable definition of accountability that they are unwilling to convey?
  
  So yes, my responses to the accountability bots isn’t a rebuttable, because it can’t be. If you identify as an accountability bot, I’d love to hear what issues you might have.

Jeepney April 24, 2023 (2:01 pm)

What if people experiencing mental health challenges refuse treatment?

ok April 24, 2023 (6:39 pm)

What if people experiencing physical health challenges refuse treatment? Measures like this one aim to increase the level of support for mental health to the same investments we’ve made in physical health. It is not to force people into choices or take away their agency (we don’t do that with physical illness), but rather to provide options so that when someone DOES want treatment for their issues, it’s actually there for them.
WestSeattleBadTakes April 25, 2023 (7:50 am)

Then our treatment isn’t good enough and we should do better.

WSB April 24, 2023 (3:59 pm)

There seems to be an inordinate amount of confusion about this levy. In the interest of accuracy, whether you decide to vote yes or no or not vote at all:

1. It is not a homelessness levy. Every single day, we hear dispatches for people experiencing behavioral-health crises inside private homes and apartments, as well as on the streets (and in schools).
2. It is not a housing levy.
3. It is not a city, state, or Regional Homelessness Authority of King County levy.

You can find the pro, con, rebuttals, exact text all linked from one page on the King County Elections website:
https://info.kingcounty.gov/kcelections/Vote/contests/ballotmeasures.aspx?lang=en-US&cid=100765&groupname=County
4.

Fred April 24, 2023 (5:39 pm)

I used to vote yes for most of the ideas that came with a
tax increase. I no longer do that because over and over, I fail to see our
biggest problems getting solved.

Ultimately, government accountability is about maintaining
the trust between government officials and citizens. Local governments not only
need to operate lawfully and ethically, but they need to work hard to avoid
even the appearance of impropriety. Accountability is equated with
answerability; we need a detailed account of what exactly has been done, how, where
the money was spent, over what period of time, and by who.

I agree with the no vote on this. If politicians believe
this program is essential, they already have tons of taxes for it. WA has one
of the highest sales taxes in the nation (state/local), highest gas taxes,
employee taxes, utility taxes, business taxes, and tons of fees. We’re taxed
enough already! Besides, state and local governments got billions more in
federal bailout money.

Voting no forces politicians to prioritize spending using
existing revenue. Vote no.

Roddy3 April 24, 2023 (10:35 pm)

@Fred : EXACTLY!
Ferns April 24, 2023 (11:39 pm)

I disagree with you and some of your facts, Fred. Plus, your text bolding is obnoxious. Explain how WA has “one of the highest tax rates” if there is zero income tax??? Other states have similar taxes to WA plus state income tax. Maybe some context to your cherry picked “facts” would more accurately color them?
WS Girl April 26, 2023 (3:51 am)

I agree we are already taxed too much, and let’s not forget that Governor Inslee recently added a 7% capital gains tax on investments over a certain amount. While it sounds like it only affects the wealthiest Washington citizens, it will actually gut many peoples’ retirement accounts they depend on to live out their “golden years.” It’s not that I don’t want to help others, it just that I’m finding it increasingly difficult to take care of myself with inflation, more fees, new taxes, and higher taxes. Enough!