the official blog of the evergreen freedom foundation

King County Council holds public safety hostage in order to raise sales tax

Posted by Scott "The Piper" St. Clair - July 28, 2010

The Metropolitan King County Council wants voters to approve a two-tenths of one percent hike in county-wide sales and use taxes. Ostensibly, the increase, if approved, would go exclusively toward public safety services and replacing the King County Youth Services Center.
 
Why, of course - who could be against public safety? Let's everyone get on board, and we'll tolerate no dissenters because this tax increase is necessary or children will die...more or less.
 
Oh - really?
 
What if this is another example of King County holding public health and safety hostage in order to extract more money from the taxpayers? What if money to fully fund public safety services and replace the Youth Services Center was already in the budget, just apportioned to some other item or items? What if?
 
And if that is indeed the case, what does that say about the priorities of the King County Council?
 
But what should those priorities be? According to the English political philosopher John Locke, "Government being for the preservation of every man's right and property, by preserving him from the violence or injury of others, is for the good of the governed". (First Treatise, Chapter 9).
In other words, government is supposed  to safeguard the lives and property of the governed before it does anything else. So, is that what King County is doing?
 
In the current King County budget, which voters do not have a chance to vote on, are the following line items of appropriation:
 
King County civic television               $625,502
Federal lobbying                                368,000
Membership & Dues                           426,757
Internal support                              7,782,733
Cultural Development Authority        11,889,836
Youth Sports Facilities Grants              615,352
Northwest Immigrant Rights Project        10,000
Refugee Women's Alliance                      44,753
Unemployment Law Project                    12,500
Parks and recreation                        27,825,262
Geographic Information Systems          4,382,631
Employee Benefits                          221,547,877
 
I'm not going to total them up - your calculator is as good, if not better, than mine.
 
No doubt, these are worthy programs and projects. Not going to debate that here. But are they higher in priority or importance than cops on the street, a functioning criminal justice system and other related programs?
 
If the appropriations listed above were subject to a public vote, would they pass - or go down like a manhole cover in a lake? 
 
Should full public safety funding be at the top of the receiving line in the King County budget instead of being subject to a vote and increased taxes in order to make it happen?
 
You tell me, and we'll both know.
 
The Piper
 
 

Thoughts?   Add Comment -

VictoriaTexas.org said on Jul 28 2010 at 4:51pm
I wish you success residents.

SouthernRoots said on Jul 28 2010 at 6:04pm
ANY politician that votes to cut public safety before any lower priority item in the budget deserves to be voted out of office, for they are saying, through their actions, that public safety is of less importance than the lower priority items they didn't cut.

If the top priority of government is public safety, why does public safety almost always seem to be the first service threatened when there are revenue shortfalls? Not much of a priority.

Move all the money from "Cultural Development Authority" over to public safety and put "Cultural Development Authority" on the ballot.

MickeyD said on Jul 29 2010 at 6:39pm
Good info here. These people are a real piece of work at KC.

my name is Ben said on Aug 01 2010 at 5:46pm
Scott,

"these are worthy programs and projects. Not going to debate that here. But are they higher in priority or importance than cops on the street"

That's really a hard claim to make when you are putting a value judgment on "public safety". Some of those programs reduce the need for more police. So, to even insinuate that your readers shouldn't make a valuation as to their worth actually makes them do just that. Your article would have been more solid if left it out. All you are doing is telling people what to think rather than arming them with the knowledge to think for themselves.

See SouthernRoots comment if you don't believe me. SouthernRoots has now blurted out the need for King County to cut a specific program with not one cent of validating evidence.

Great job being a journalist. Maybe Brett will write a scathing post on your poor writing too.

SouthernRoots said on Aug 05 2010 at 5:25pm
my name is Ben -

I am a citizen that believes government's first priority is the safety of the people. Because of this, I made a decision that was based on a rock solid belief that police, fire, and criminal justice should always have the highest funding priority from the general budget. They should never be held hostage by wanting to keep lower priority items in the budget.

There may be adjunct programs that aid police, fire, and criminal justice in their job of protecting society, but they do not take precedence and, therefore, should have their budgets cut first before police, fire, and criminal justice. If their value is high enough, then there should be no problem funding them from a special levy.

So far, your only contribution to the discussion is to act like an elitist journalism instructor and criticize the author and everyone who expresses an opinion of which you don't approve.

Do you approve of cutting police, fire, and criminal justice so that the programs shown, or others not shown, are allowed to retain their funding?

Do you believe that police, fire, and criminal justice should always be subject to special levies for basic service?

Why do you condemn the work or decisions of others without really saying what you would do?

my name is Ben said on Aug 06 2010 at 12:38pm
SouthernRoots

do you know that for every $1 spent on early childhood education $4 is save in the judicial and penal system? Funding police and other protective services is no doubt neccessary but it is a reactive and costly solution. If you really believe in what you talk about then you would know what I just said about early child education and would see finding other neccessary resources as a quicker way to the things you believe in. Your current solution will only perpetuate the broken system we live in.

SouthernRoots said on Aug 06 2010 at 2:33pm
my name is Ben,

I'm sorry, but without a link or proper citations, I have no way of evaluating your claim.

my name is Ben said on Aug 09 2010 at 10:01am
What!?!?!?! SoutherRoots you want someone to give you proper proof before you will believe?

I tell you what, I'll give you five days to troll the internets with those skills you have proudly bragged about to support my claim. If, after five days you say "I can't find any information on this subject," I'll send you the supporting information. Otherwise, because of your Internet searching prowess if you remain quiet I will assume you know I am correct.

SouthernRoots said on Aug 09 2010 at 2:29pm
my name is Ben -
If I remain silent after this, it is because I have grown weary of your admonishments for people to provide you with more details, better examples, better explanation, and more appropriate links. When someone dares to ask you for the same, you get in a fit.

It's been fun bringing out more information, but I no longer have the time nor inclination to babysit your information needs.

Good luck finding another pen pal.

my name is Ben said on Aug 11 2010 at 10:44pm
Adios. I'm sorry we didn't become friends. Maybe in another life.