Tag Archives: No on 1033

Kemper Freeman’s Shortsighted $25,000 Contribution to Eyman’s Initiative 1033

The Seattle Times today gives prominent front page coverage to Kemper Freeman’s long range plans at Bellevue Square. The article is in response to the opening of the upscale “The Shops at the Braven” only a few blocks away from Bellevue Square. A Neiman Marcus store is one of the new shops opening in the new retail shopping area.

Freeman is reported spending $40 million in a recent remodel of Bellevue Square. He has lots of money tied up in his real estate and that has to mean high property taxes. Was that his motivation behind his contribution of $25,000 on June 4, 2009 to help Tim Eyman get his signatures to get Initiative 1033 on this November’s ballot? After Michael Dunmire’s $300,000 contribution, Kemper Freeman’s is the second largest cash contribution to Initiative 1033. Michael Dunmire is a retired investment banker that lives in Woodinville.

Kemper Freeman’s contribution was given through his real estate development company – Kemper Holdings LLC based in Bellevue Washington.

From a civic betterment and community economic sense Freeman’s contribution makes no sense. I-1033 is will freeze all revenue spending by Bellevue, King County and the state of Washington at it’s current recession level. As the economy improves Bellevue will not be able to invest new tax dollars like from increased sales taxes in making improvements in the Bellevue community – no additional money for street repairs or sidewalks or parks or additional police or fire protection. Any expenditures above the baseline would require a public referendum.

But maybe Kemper Freeman is a cynic and sees I-1033 for what it is – a wealth transfer scheme from renters and low income working families and seniors that don’t have property but who will still pay sales taxes, to property owners to help them pay less property taxes.

Initiative 1033 disperses its property tax reductions from the fund Eyman sets up called lower property taxes fund into which any revenue above this year’s spending level goes. As the economy improves the property tax reductions increase.

State law requires all property to be treated the same. Some 40% of property taxes are for commercial property. The State Office of Financial Management has estimated that I-1033 will reduce state revenue by some $8.7 billion over the next 5 years.

Of course the more property one owns the more of a reduction in total dollars property owners will see. So Kemper Freeman will get a great return on his $25,000 investment if voters make the mistake of approving I-1033.

Maybe Kemper Freeman is not really concerned about renters and senior citizens and working families that own no property who will see no property tax rebate or new public services. After all how many go to Bellevue Square now to shop. The bulk of shoppers at Bellevue Square are higher income and property owners. If they see reduced property taxes Kemper Freeman will be providing them an upscale mall to spend their dollars at.

Call me a cynic but Kemper Freeman has no heart. It’s all about the money – his money.

Initiative 1033 -Eyman’s Sugar Coated Poison Pill

I-1033’s goal is to freeze government spending, that’s the poison pill Eyman’s hiding. Giving voters the illusion that they’re going to see some reduction in property taxes is the sugar coating covering this goal that he hopes will induce voter’s to unknowingly swallow the poison pill.

Eyman’s fear mongering of out of control government spending and runaway taxes is over hyped. Taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society. He supports a limited role of government in society and a free market economy where it’s everyone for themselves.

I support a role for government that helps and assists. I much prefer our representative style of government that deliberates and involves public input into writing our laws and budgets and sets priorities.

I-1033 is a bad idea. It is a radical approach that is complex. It imposes a permanent freeze on public spending for services that everyone uses. The freeze does not take into account any public needs. It imposes a cumbersome costly process of voter referendums to raise revenue for any reason at the city, county and state level.

It is a reverse Robin Hood wealth transfer scheme that takes tax dollars from the poor and gives them to the wealthy to reduce their property taxes. Renters, senior citizens and working families will still pay sales taxes and other taxes but if they own no property they will see no benefit from I-1033.

Large property owners, like shopping malls, real estate developers and corporate property owners, will see the most benefit from the special tax break Eyman is giving them at the expense of providing public services.

It is an unnecessary and costly shell game transferring money from the less fortunate to wealthy property owners, businesses and corporations to pay their property taxes.

I am not crying wolf as to its impacts. We already have seen the results and impacts of this approach in Colorado. Go to http://www.teachersalaryinfo.org/ and see how this approach of freezing public spending and services has decimated Colorado’s educational system.

The average teacher salary in Colorado is the lowest in the country. The average teacher salary in Colorado compared to the median household income is 49th lowest out of 50 states. Do we want to compete with Colorado to see who can have the lowest teacher salaries?

I-1033 is a radical experiment we don’t need to try in Washington State to know what will happen. It was tried in Colorado and failed. Public services have plummeted there.

I-1033 will lock us into a permanent recession, prohibiting state and local governments from restoring services lost as a result of the recession. Things are already bad enough without making them worse.

I-1033 also prohibits any new investments in public infrastructure and services and ignores changing demographics like more seniors needing help as the population ages.

Just Vote No on Initiative 1033 and keep Eyman out of our pockets. Dealing with budgets by referendum has failed in California and isn’t needed here.