Home › Forums › Open Discussion › Joe McDermott votes in FAVOR to extend Taxes!!!
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 22, 2009 at 4:26 pm #590584
dirkbMemberSenator Joe McDermott voted Yes over the weekend to extend local excise taxes bill 6116 to help rebuild Husky Stadium.
This is a link to contact Joe McDermott directly;
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/memberemail/MailForm.aspx?Chamber=S&District=34
I think it is crazy that they have voted in favor to extend the taxes used to build Safeco Field and Qwest Stadium. We recently voted this last fall to create a new tax to help update the infrastructure on Pike Place Market and this money could have been used for this. But
instead we created a whole new tax for this.
Please contact Senator Joe McDermott and express you opinion of him favoring extending this taxe for Bill 6116.
April 22, 2009 at 4:47 pm #664856
DebiNordMemberDespite the worst State and Federal Budget crises since the Great Depression the University of Washington continues to push for $150 million for their Football Stadium while gutting their educational system. Enough is enough and this must stop. Follow this link to an article outlining the issues and what we need to do to stop this nonsense http://washingtonstate.scout.com/
Please forward to “all” contacts on your distribution lists and let Olympia know that we will hold them accountable for the decisions they are making.
April 22, 2009 at 5:51 pm #664857
KenParticipantNote this seems to be the excise tax on lodging. The benefits to the Seattle area include funding for the arts, low income housing and youth programs. The bill is still being passed around among committees and can still be changed, amended and modified before it even gets to the floor.
Google tells me:
Advocate for original bill:
http://www.ihateclay.com/support-senate-bill-6116-you-know-you-want-to/
Text of original bill:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2009-10/Pdf/Bills/Senate%20Bills/6116.pdf
Digest of original bill:(pdf)
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2009-10/Pdf/Digests/Senate/6116.DIG.pdf
Substitute bill (pdf)
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2009-10/Pdf/Bills/Senate%20Bills/6116-S.pdf
Digest of substitute bill:(pdf)
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2009-10/Pdf/Digests/Senate/6116-S.DIG.pdf
Reading the above posts, I am still unclear just what the objection is to Joe’s vote to pass it out of committee.
This seems to be the usual process all bills go through.
The bills themselves are hard to read since they are in that arcane language most legislative document are in, but I don’t see anything to panic over unless your planning to book several hundred hotel rooms in the city.
I personally don’t want to see an NBA team return to Seattle and the Key arena can go the way of the Kingdome for all I care, but this bill is not focused solely on that as far as I can tell, but if tourist money is used for that as well as all the other programs then that’s fine with me.
Note: a quick search of the pdf for the word
“University” doesn’t find it.
Anyone have a lucid explanation or is this just a purposely vague attack on Joe.
April 22, 2009 at 7:19 pm #664858
dirkbMemberDo you go down to Olympia and sit in on the hearings for how and what they would propose to spend the money one. The things you listed are possibilities for the money to be spent. But the lobbiest for the UW have greased the wheels for the money to be spent on a new stadium. We pay taxes when you eat an any restaurants, friends and family come to visit.
I guess if you attitude is someone else is paying for it, what do I care? Then that is just what has led to the over spending of this state and are now faced with trying to cut costs and raise tuituion by 17% for the next two years.
Bottom line, what is wrong with letting a tax expire like it is supposed too. We have a problem with never letting a tax die!
April 22, 2009 at 7:23 pm #664859
mrhinehMemberSB6116 2009-10
“Funding arts and heritage programs, tourism promotion, youth sport activities, regional centers, publicly owned stadiums, community development, and low income housing in a county with a population of one million five hundred thousand or more.
Revised for 1st Substitute: Concerning excise taxes in a county with a population of one million five hundred thousand or more and a county east of the crest of the Cascade mountains that has pledged lodging tax revenue for payment of bonds prior to June 26, 1975.”
Silly Koog!
Maybe West Seattle Stadium can get some funding too?
April 22, 2009 at 7:40 pm #664860
dirkbMemberThat is what they would love you to believe, the arts, West Seattle Stadium, regional centers, community developement.
We just voted for a new property tax to help pay for the improvements to Pike Place Market. If they new they would surplus then why would we need a new tax? Now they will find a way to keep that tax going and going and going.
I guess the question you should all have for Joe is how exactly is this money going to be spent? They have specific plans for this money and its going to be going towards Husky Stadium.
April 22, 2009 at 7:43 pm #664861
mrhinehMemberAre you a couglet? Why so much hate on the “one project”?
April 22, 2009 at 9:26 pm #664862
datamuseParticipantI want to know what evidence dirkb has, since he/she has yet to produce any.
Assertions are not necessarily true. I can insist that the sky is green. That doesn’t make it so.
April 22, 2009 at 10:23 pm #664863
dirkbMemberb) After the bonds issued for the construction of the baseball stadium are retired, the revenue from the taxes imposed under the authority of this section must be deposited in the special purposes account under section 6 of this act.
Hmmm, special purposes account and who gets to decide where this money is spent?
I not saying its not going to be spent on other projects through out Seattle and King County. The bulk of this money $150 million of it going to Husky Stadium.
“The University of Washington wants to renovate and upgrade Husky Stadium with help … on the proposal to ask the state Legislature for $150 million in public … The $150 million from the state would essentially rebuild the lower bowl”
Google it, this last part was in the Seattle times.
April 22, 2009 at 10:32 pm #664864
datamuseParticipantJust because UW asked for it doesn’t mean they’re going to get it.
April 22, 2009 at 10:59 pm #664865
beachdrivegirlParticipantAnyone out there that honestly believes that Husky stadium isnt going to get what they have asked for has not been following this bill for the past few months. I know that McDermott has lost all respect I have for him by supporting this bill & I have contacted him to let him know of my concerns.
April 22, 2009 at 11:29 pm #664866
walfredoMemberKen-
Come on. Husky Stadium sucks and someone is going to have to pay for it?
You are 100% correct- they are called Husky’s. Bigtime college football is a for profit revenue producing activity. Every other school in the Pac-10 built there stadiums w/out any support from public funds. They get to charge admission to the events- sell concessions and merchandise- and also sign lucrative TV contracts.
As a lifelong Duck- I will literally consider selling all of my homes in Seattle and changing my residency to somewhere outside of King County specifically to avoid having $1 of my money go to support Husky football. As a proud donor of the Duck Athletic Fund- a program that is 100% self-sustained without taxpayer money- who in fact through the football programs cash revenue is able to 100% support all of the schools athletic programs without any state funds- I find the whole concept completely offensive of a University begging for money to build a football stadium.
I haven’t read any of the bills- or anything specific- but anything that involves a tax to build a college football stadium- in a town that already sports a world class NFL and Soccer stadium the state and city paid for- would get an emphatic no from me. There is absolutely 0 public good from this- outside of Husky football fans- who if they bothered to buy tickets and sell out the stadium for their current team- wouldn’t need state money to begin with.
April 22, 2009 at 11:37 pm #664867
mrhinehMemberHmmm..when did USC build Memorial Coliseum? When did the Bruins build The Rose Bowl? Trust me, if it moves some Ducks out of Seattle, Bring. It. On. Got that Phil Knight ManCrush On?
April 22, 2009 at 11:48 pm #664868
beachdrivegirlParticipantmrhineh check your facts.
Memorial Coliseum Web page:
http://www.lacoliseum.com/pages/history.shtml
from there web page:
“no taxpayer funds are used to support the facilities. “
April 22, 2009 at 11:49 pm #664869
walfredoMemberMr. Hine- Are you seriously suggesting that USC uses state money to pay for the lease they have on the Memorial Colisuem for home games? You are honestly suggesting USC is not self-supporting?
This is a prime example of an existing NFL (in this case former NFL) stadium being leased for the games- without involving state dollars. Of course Qwest field would be adequate for the Huskies- and if people actually showed up to the games- they could pay the lease and turn a profit-and more power to them… Why exactly does Seattle need a stadium off of 520? What is it for?
If UW had been well run- like most of there peers are- they would easily be self-sufficient and have an alumni base that could support such stadium expansions- just like UO, OSU, WSU, BSU, Stanford, Cal, Fresno State, ASU, and UA have done the last 20 years.
April 22, 2009 at 11:52 pm #664870
mrhinehMemberThere’s no disputing Todd Turner and TyGroan ran the program into the ground. I don’t think tax dollars have been used for HS yet have they?
P.S bonus points for creative use of Mr. H?
April 22, 2009 at 11:55 pm #664871
mrhinehMemberAnd its nice to see its a Husky issue, rather than a Sonics ;)
April 22, 2009 at 11:59 pm #664872
beachdrivegirlParticipantWe are not talking about the past Husky support of tax dollars. This thread is about bill 6116. The bill which mentions supporting Husky stadium. The bill that was created at about the same time some lobbyist started asking for $150 in tax payers money. As a taxpayer, it isn’t my problem if the Todd Turner & TyGroan ran their program into the ground. And as a tax payer this is why I have contacted Joe McDermott to inform him that he has lost my support.
April 23, 2009 at 12:01 am #664873
walfredoMemberMr hine-
Nothing yet. They are floating this idea somewhat quietly- trying to slip in with a Sonics stadium fund and some other stuff. It may get on a ballot at some point. They are seeking state funds- which I think is especially ambitious. Didn’t at least half the state go to schools that hate the Huskies? 30% didn’t go to college. Now that you’ve lost the first 80% of the vote- whats plan B?
I just find the idea offensive. I get that to have world class professional sports franchises- you need to build facilities- and pay athletes etc. etc… From what I know- I have never heard of an instance of a state stepping up to build a University a football stadium upgrade. I can vouch that it has never happened at a BCS level school on the West Coast. I don’t follow this stuff elsewhere. But when you play in a conference of 10 teams- and 9 out of 10 teams are self-sufficient and completely funded by ticket/apparrel/concession/tv/donor revenue- and the other team is asking the state for $150/million dollars to renovate a stadium because they hired 3 incompetent head coaches in a row- after firing a guy for gambling on college athletics- so now they no longer have revenue from tickets/apparrel/consession/donor revenue (every pac-10 team gets the TV revenue) they should get laughed out of the room never to be heard from again…
Heck- Seattl isn’t a small city. I could even see- like Stillwater, OK trying to make the argument- that building a first class stadium could bring U2 to town someday- and the state should chip in- because w/out the stadium U2 flat out won’t come to Stillwater- ever! So then at least you have some sort of pro and con argument why the state should pay for this thing… U2 might come- or we keep the $150 million- lets let the voters decide!
With the Huskies- no matter how much cash they pour in- it will be nothing compared to Qwest or Safeco- which we already paid huge dollars for as taxpayers. So the only use- the only one is 6 Husky homegames per year- a team that sold less then 40% of its seats to there stadium last year. This is a mockery of a sham…
April 23, 2009 at 12:25 am #664874
beachdrivegirlParticipantThere are two *major* issues with this asinine bill. The first is that this is not the time to be raising tax dollars for extracurricular activities like football when the state has a $5 million + deficit. The second is that the state needs to treat Pac 10 schools equally to maintain competitive balance.
And for those of you out there that think this would *never* happen, can you explain to me why UW hired former Gov. Dan Evans to push the proposal?? I am sure that wasn’t cheap!
And comparing the Sonics to the Huskies, you are quite witty! Unlike the Sonics, the Huskies aren’t going anywhere….hate to break it to you but they can’t!
April 23, 2009 at 3:15 am #664875
dirkbMemberWalfredo & West Seattle Residents,
This isn’t going to the people for a vote, it was past in the Senate Comittee for Ways and Means. Now it is scheduled to go to the floor for a vote with the State Senate and State Reps. Joe voted for this on this Senate Committee.
That is why you need to contact Joe McDermott directly in the link(my first posting) above and tell him of your disapproval for this bill 6116.
You need to spread the word to other folks in W. Seattle as well. Otherwise you are going to being selling your homes here in Seattle in the bottom of R.E market and lose even more money!
April 23, 2009 at 5:28 am #664876
HMC RichParticipantOh Irony. I have to chuckle. It isn’t your money anymore and he’s your elected official. Now you know how I feel most of the time.
Dirkb, I give you credit for bringing it up. But, I guess you won’t be buying a Jake Locker jersey soon. :-)
April 23, 2009 at 5:42 am #664877
jamminjMemberthis is great news. as someone who is now unemployed due to the downturn in construction jobs, its nice to see the state and city realize that investment in the local infrastructure is worth investing in.
As far as the tax, it may affect me a few dollars a year, but worth it to see hundreds of jobs made available… glad that the politicos aren’t bowing down to the can’t do crowd this time.
April 23, 2009 at 8:41 am #664878
JeffroMemberThat a small portion goes to “the arts, low income housing and youth programs” shows that a little hush money goes a long way in placating a few bleeding hearts. I’m not against an excise tax on hotels and car rentals, but I am amazed at the ability of our dear leaders to find back-channel funding for big-ticket items that would never get approved by way of a popular vote. It’s just plain bad government, just like it was when Nickels fought tooth and nail to get Key Arena rebuilt despite having had their extreme makeover just ten years prior.
It takes something special to be the absolute worst sports team in all of Seattle. If only we could ship Huskies football to Oklahoma like we did the Sonics (just football, we keep all the other teams). My guess is they’re trying to get the funding locked down before they announce the layoff of 1,000 workers (http://www.seattlepi.com/local/405144_uwlayoffs15.html) and the ensuing reduction in the quality of education.
When we sent the Sonics packing, we struck a blow against the sense of entitlement possessed by every sports franchise in the country. It would be a shame to take such a stand against the notion of pro-sports-as-government-enterprise only for the UW to take the money that we denied the Sonics.
I’m a Husky fan, and I for one would like Huskies football to be the self-sustaining entity that it proclaims itself to be (see http://blog.seattlepi.com/schoolzone/archives/156266.asp?from=blog_last3). I think Husky Stadium looks just fine as it stands now, and a bunch of new luxury suites at our expense won’t make it any prettier.
April 23, 2009 at 6:00 pm #664879
walfredoMemberJeffro- I think you can at least make an argument for professional sports teams. Either we will have an NBA team or we won’t. Is it worth public money to subsidize big league sports? I’m not sure there is an absolute answer to that- in some cases yes, some no.
For a college athletic team to demand public moneys to build a football stadium is upsurd. Just upsurd. Win games- get fans- build your own crap. That is the model of every other team in the conference. Good to see that the headline is the bill today is “dead, really dead”. Anything that might be good legislature in the bill needs to be seperated from this steaming pile of turd that is Husky Stadium renovation.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.