|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Seattle's November 4, 2008 General Election
|
Election Results Available at: |
||
|
King County Records & Elections |
||
There are two City of Seattle Ballot Issues on the November 4, 2008 ballot. Both are tax levies, one for Pike Place Market and the other for Seattle Parks.
|
Browse the Voters' Guide → (Click links on right) |
There are no regularly scheduled elections for City of Seattle elected offices in 2008. The next election for Mayor, City Council and City Attorney will be in 2009. See:
Acrobat PDF versions of Seattle's paper voters' pamphlet can be found here:
Other Candidates and Issues on Ballot in 2008
Campaign Finance Information
Voter Registration, Polling Places & Absentee Ballots
King County Records & Elections administers the voting process for Seattle City Offices and City Ballot Issues. All inquiries regarding the following subjects should be directed to them:
Links are here...
King County Records and Elections
Another source of information on this subject is the Washington Secretary of State, they can be found at...
The Seattle Ethics & Elections Commission is responsible for administering Campaign Finance regulations and the Voters' Pamphlet for Seattle campaigns, not the actual voting process.
Seattle Form of Government
Seattle is a Charter City with a Mayor-Council form of government. The Mayor is directly elected by the voters and most executive departments report to the Mayor. There are nine City Councilmembers, all of whom are elected at-large. The only other elected position is the City Attorney, who is also elected at-large. The regular term of all offices is four years.
Candidates for these offices must be U.S. Citizens, registered voters in the City of Seattle at the time they file their declaration of candidacy, and able to read and write the English language.
All City office elections are non-partisan, which means the top two vote-getters in the primary election are placed on the general election ballot. This is true regardless of whether or not one candidate received a majority of the primary vote. If two people or less file declarations of candidacy for any of these offices, that office does not appear on the primary election ballot, but does appear on the general election ballot. Parties do not nominate candidates to appear on the ballot and the ballots do not identify the candidates by party. Parties can and do endorse and support certain candidates, but play no other role in nominating candidates or determining who is placed on the primary or general election ballot.
Ballot issues may appear on your ballot in the primary, general or special election. Those issues are decided in the election where they appear.
Proposition 1 Ballot Title
CITY OF SEATTLE
PROPOSITION 1
The City of Seattle's Proposition 1 concerns increased property taxes for six years for Pike Place Market.
If approved, this proposition would fund seismic, safety, energy-saving, and other basic infrastructure improvements at the publicly-owned Pike Place Market, last renovated in the 1970s, as provided in Ordinance 122737. It would authorize regular property taxes higher than RCW 84.55 limits, allowing collection of up to $12,500,000 in additional taxes in 2009 (up to $73,000,000 over six years). Taxes collected in 2009 would be limited to $2.60 per $1,000 of assessed value, including approximately $0.10 of additional taxes.
Should this levy lid lift be approved?
Yes
No
Those in favor shall vote "Yes"; those opposed shall mark their ballots "No".
Note: This page was updated on October 21, 2008.
Proposition 1 City Attorney's Explanatory Statement
Proposition Number 1 would approve a six-year property tax increase to renovate the Pike Place Market. The measure would pay for improvements, such as plumbing, mechanical and electrical systems, roofs, elevators, windows, floors, building facades, restrooms, and seismic and fire safety systems. It would increase taxes levied in 2008 through 2013 and collected in 2009 through 2014.
Proposition 1 limits the use of the taxes raised to projects identified in an agreement to be made between the City and the Pike Place Market Preservation and Development Authority. The agreement sets out specific improvement projects, and states how much money from the levy is to be spent on each phase of these improvements. The agreement also sets out additional improvement projects that could be undertaken with the City’s permission. The Mayor and three quarters of the city council may eliminate or substantially reduce a specific improvement project. The City may approve a substitute project.
To pay for these projects, Proposition 1 would authorize the collection of $73 million more in taxes over six years than would otherwise be allowed without a vote under state law. Without a vote of the people, State law generally limits property tax increases to 1% per year for the City as a whole. No more than $12.5 million in additional taxes would be collected in any one year under the measure. The additional tax rate related to this tax increase for any property owner in the first year of collection would be approximately ten cents per thousand dollars of assessed value. If this proposition were approved, the total tax rate for the City in 2009 would be no more than $2.60 per thousand dollars of assessed value. The final year additional taxes will be collected under this measure is 2014. Taxes collected in 2015 will be limited under the 1% growth rule as if the taxes under this measure had never been collected.
Ordinance Number 122737, which placed Proposition 1 on the ballot, is reprinted in this voters’ pamphlet. The agreement referred to in the ordinance, and the attachments to that agreement, are available from the City either electronically or by U.S. mail. Information about obtaining copies of the agreement and attachments may be found in this voters’ pamphlet following the text of the Ordinance.
Statement For Proposition 1
Yes on Seattle Proposition 1: Support our Market!
For over 100 years, the Pike Place Market has been a unique Seattle icon—and the nation’s oldest continually operating farmers market. Nearly 10 million people visit the market every year.
But time, weather, earthquakes, and increased use have taken a toll on the dozen public-owned buildings that comprise the Market. The last major improvements were completed in the early 1970’s. Proposition 1 is a true, once-in-a-generation request for needed basic capital improvements to our Market.
Proposition 1 is a one time, six year levy for critical capital improvement.
The Market pays for regular operations and routine maintenance through rents charged to the vendors, artists and eateries that make the Market so special. Proposition 1 will pay for needed replacement and upgrades to the buildings themselves.
Because Proposition 1 will only pay for these one-time investments, the levy will expire in six years. The annual cost for an average Seattle household will be less than $42.
Support Our Market: A Home for Small Businesses, Local Farmers, Affordable Senior Housing, Health and Child Care, and More
We know the Market for fresh fish and flowers, fruit and produce, crafts and tastes from around the world. Successfully managed by a public non-profit organization, the Market must keep rents low to protect and nurture small business, family farmers, and local artisans. This policy also protects critical services including housing and services for low income seniors, a health care clinic and child care center.
Proposition 1 protects the Market’s diversity and mission --a small investment in a tremendous community asset.
Yes on Seattle Proposition 1: It’s Our Turn to Support Our Market!
A generation ago Seattle residents rallied to save the Market from the wrecking ball.
Now it’s our turn. Vote Yes on Proposition 1!
Endorsed by: Neighborhood Farmers Market Alliance; Allied Arts; American Institue of Architects Seattle Chapter, Downtown Seattle Association; Friends of the Market; Greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce; The Market Foundation; 34th District Democrats; Mayor Greg Nickels and all nine City Council Members, King County Executive Ron Sims, and Peter Steinbrueck.
Chef Tom Douglas
Justin Hall, Fish Thrower
Representative Sharon Tomiko Santos, 37th LD
Rebuttal to Statement For Proposition 1
How wisely our tax dollars are being spent is the issue, not how much we love the Market. Removing the property tax limitation and raising property taxes for six years need serious justifications.
Pike Place Market is a 100% leased, income-producing property, generating millions in income annually, not a park. We should be asking ourselves, “Why isn’t the Market self-sustaining without burdening taxpayers?”
This ordinance sets a bad precedent, overriding a law enacted to protect citizens from over taxation. It is a misuse of property taxes and, as structured, financially irresponsible, costing millions extra in interest costs. Reading the entire ordinance reveals other negative ramifications that cannot be covered in the few words allowed here.
This ordinance is not the solution for many reasons. The City of Seattle has other justifiable needs for your tax dollars. A vote “No” is a thoughtful vote for financial responsibility.
Geri Kraft, Concerned Citizen
Statement Against Proposition 1
What this Ordinance Really Does as stated in the fine print of its 24 pages:
A “yes” vote RAISES property taxes for six years and REMOVES the property tax limitation previously enacted into law (Chapter 84.55.010 RCW) to protect citizens from over taxation. It is vital to keep this limitation in place.
A “yes” vote unfairly and unjustifiably shifts the costs of Market renovations onto property taxpayers. The City of Seattle, through the PDA, is running an “in city” shopping center. It is fully leased; there is a Tenant waiting list. Tenants pay rents and have over 10 million potential customers visiting each year, so why are property taxpayers funding the improvements? Any other shopping center owner must maintain his property without taxpayers help! Before property taxes are raised, the PDA (Pike Place Market Preservation and Development Authority) financial statements and operating procedures need to be examined. And why is the amount needed so great? ($73 million is more than the cost of our new 7 story City Hall and three fourths of the cost/square foot to build a new shopping center including land cost). What’s wrong here!!!
A “yes” vote will NOT result in $73 million being spent on the Market. A “yes“ vote will cost property taxpayers an extra $4.4 million in interest by authorizing the City of Seattle to BORROW $68 million for six years using levy collections to pay back the loan. Phasing construction would eliminate this extra $4.4 million tax burden and all $73 million could go to renovations, not just the $68 million. $4.4 million may not seem like much but it would buy 17 new city buses, so why pay $4.4 million unnecessarily? The Pike Place Market already pays $1.912,990 in annual interest payments.
A “yes” vote permits the PDA to use property taxes in a manner that enables it to obtain private investment in PDA owned buildings under Federal income tax credit programs . . .” Do we want private investors involved in our Public Market?
A “yes” vote will confirm and ratify “certain prior acts”. What are these “prior acts” not listed in the Proposition text? Why are they omitted? Citizens have a right to know what they are approving and what the associated costs are.
A NO vote is the only responsible vote on this very flawed ordinance. Please read the entire ordinance to understand its full ramifications before voting.
Geri Kraft, Concerned Citizen
Rebuttal to Statement Against Proposition 1
The Market is a Seattle treasure, providing affordable rent to local, independent business--not chain or "big box" stores that are displacing neighborhood businesses throughout Seattle. Periodic public support is critical to keeping the market safe, accessible, and unique, drawing millions of visitors and residents annually and generating revenues that benefit all Seattle.
There is no "fine print." Funds are 100% dedicated to specific seismic, electrical, plumbing, restroom and access improvements and will expire after six years--no exceptions. It has been nearly three decades since the last time Seattle voters were asked to invest in the Market; the current levy will make needed improvements to last another generation.
The Market is the physical reflection of our enduring Seattle values: an incubator for independent business, a provider of fresh, local foods, and a nurturing environment for the arts.
Keep the Market strong. Vote Yes!
Chef Tom Douglas
Justin Hall, Fish Thrower
Representative Sharon Tomiko Santos, 37th LD
Proposition 1 Complete Text
ORDINANCE 122737
AN ORDINANCE relating to regular property taxes; providing for the submission to the qualified electors of the City at an election to be held on November 4, 2008, of a proposition authorizing the City to levy regular property taxes in excess of the limitation on levies in Chapter 84.55 RCW for the purpose of renovating the Pike Place Market and its environs; authorizing the Executive to enter into an agreement with the Pike Place Market Preservation and Development Authority; creating a new fund in the City Treasury; providing for interim financing pending tax receipts; and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts.
WHEREAS, the Pike Place Market has been a treasured landmark since it was founded by the City of Seattle in 1907, and is currently home to more than 250 businesses, 200 crafts vendors, 100 farmers, 500 residents, and has nearly 10 million visitors each year; and
WHEREAS, in 1973 the City of Seattle established the Pike Place Market Preservation and Development Authority (PDA) to own and manage the properties of the Pike Place Market with the objective of preserving its historic qualities, assuring its economic vitality, and promoting good management and harmonious relationships among Market users; and
WHEREAS, the PDA owns 85% of the property in the Pike Place Market Historic District, which includes many buildings that are more than 100 years old that have not had substantial renovation for nearly 30 years; and
WHEREAS, the Pike Place Market is in need of major repairs to, and replacement of, its basic infrastructure, including plumbing, mechanical and electrical systems, roofs, windows, floors, building facades, and seismic and fire safety systems; and
WHEREAS, in 2003, the PDA formed a Citizens Advisory Committee to evaluate the Market’s capital needs, and options for funding and financing such needs, and this Citizens Advisory Committee, over the past five years, studied and evaluated the Market’s operations, capital programs and various methods of funding such needs; and
WHEREAS, in 2006 the PDA began an in-depth analysis of its facilities to identify necessary capital improvements to improve accessibility, operational efficiency, and customer service, decrease annual repair costs, and preserve the Market’s historic integrity and traditional uses; and
WHEREAS, in November 2006 a Renovation Committee of the PDA Council was established to review the analysis and oversee and monitor the further development of the Market’s renovation plan; and
WHEREAS, a schematic design report dated October 19, 2007 identified priorities for renovation of Pike Place Market facilities totaling $80 million, and on November 27, 2007 the PDA Council affirmed its commitment and agreed to the plan’s further evaluation and development; and
WHEREAS, from November 2007 to May 2008, the PDA conducted public meetings with Seattle citizens and Market community members and completed both tenant and customer surveys to collect opinions on the plan’s proposals; and
WHEREAS, on April 29, 2008 the PDA Council adopted a revised schematic design report, which incorporated public input and identified $68.6 million in basic infrastructure improvements and $8 million in additional improvements to public and retail spaces; and
WHEREAS, the PDA has requested that the City place before the voters, on the November 2008 ballot, the question whether to levy property taxes to pay for and finance basic infrastructure improvements at the Market; and
WHEREAS, the City has supported the PDA in its renovation effort by authorizing the PDA to use the General Contractor/Construction Manager alternative contracting procedure under the City’s authority through Resolution 30989, and by dedicating City parking revenues from PDA operated parking lots in the vicinity of Pike Place Market to planning efforts for the Market renovation through Ordinance 122562; and
WHEREAS, current and future citizens of Seattle will reap the benefits of the basic infrastructure improvements made to the Pike Place Market to preserve its existence and traditional use for many years into the future; NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF SEATTLE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Definitions. As used in this ordinance, the following words when capitalized have the following meanings:
“Agreement” means the Agreement regarding Levy Proceeds by and between the City of Seattle and the Pike Place Market Preservation and Development Authority, attached and incorporated hereto as Attachment 1.
“City” means The City of Seattle.
“Core Market Infrastructure Projects” means the infrastructure projects described in Exhibit B to the Agreement (Attachment 1).
“Director” means the City Director of Finance.
“Levy Proceeds” means that portion of regular property taxes levied and collected as authorized by voter approval pursuant to this ordinance that are above the growth limit on levies in RCW 84.55.010, and all interest and other earnings thereon.
“Market Infrastructure Projects” means the Core Market Infrastructure Projects and any Supplemental Market Infrastructure Projects paid for with Levy Proceeds.
“PDA” means the Pike Place Market Preservation and Development Authority.
“Supplemental Market Infrastructure Projects” means the infrastructure projects described in Exhibit C to the Agreement (Attachment 1).
Section 2. Levy of Additional Regular Property Taxes - Submittal. The City hereby submits to the qualified electors of the City a proposition as authorized by RCW 84.55.050 to exceed the levy limitation on regular property taxes contained in RCW 84.55.010 for property taxes levied in 2008 through 2013 for collection in 2009 through 2014, respectively, raising up to Seventy-three Million Dollars ($73,000,000) in aggregate over a period of up to six (6) years. The proposition shall be limited so that the City shall not levy more than Twelve Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($12,500,000) additional taxes each year. All the Levy Proceeds shall be used to pay or finance the cost of major repairs to, replacement of, and additions to infrastructure such as plumbing, mechanical and electrical systems, roofs, elevators, windows, floors, building facades, restrooms, and seismic and fire safety systems at Pike Place Market. The taxes authorized by this proposition will be in addition to the maximum amount of regular property taxes the City would have been limited to by RCW 84.55.010 in the absence of voter approval under this ordinance, plus other authorized lid lifts. Pursuant to RCW 84.55.050(5), the maximum regular property taxes that may be levied in 2014 for collection in 2015 and in later years shall be computed as if the limit on regular property taxes had not been increased under this ordinance.
Section 3. Agreement. If the voters approve the levy as provided herein, the Mayor is authorized to execute, on behalf of the City, an Agreement regarding Levy Proceeds by and between the City of Seattle and the Pike Place Market Preservation and Development Authority, substantially in the form contained in Attachment 1, hereto.
Section 4. Deposit of Levy Proceeds. If the voters approve the levy as provided herein, all Levy Proceeds shall be placed in and segregated within the Pike Place Market Renovation Fund hereby created in the City Treasury. The Levy Proceeds may be temporarily deposited or invested in such manner as may be lawful for the investment of City money and all investment earnings shall be deposited in the Pike Place Market Renovation Fund.
Section 5. Use of Levy Proceeds. The Levy Proceeds shall be used solely for the purposes approved by the voters in accordance with RCW 84.55.050. Up to Sixty-Eight Million, Six Hundred Thousand Dollars ($68,600,000) of the additional taxes authorized under this ordinance shall be used to pay or finance costs of the Core Market Infrastructure Projects, as more fully described in Exhibit B to Attachment 1, and to the extent permitted under the Agreement, to pay or finance costs of all or a portion of the Supplemental Market Infrastructure Projects, as more fully described in Exhibit C to Attachment 1, or to pay or finance costs of an infrastructure project substituted by City Council under Section 7. Up to Four Million Four Hundred Thousand Dollars ($4,400,000) of the additional taxes authorized under this ordinance shall be used for the purpose of providing construction financing known as City Financing as more fully described in Attachment 2. If it is apparent that the portion of the Levy Proceeds for City Financing exceeds the amount necessary for the City Financing (Attachment 2), the Council shall reduce the levy.
Section 6. Bonds and Notes for Interim Financing. To the extent permitted by applicable law, the City may issue bonds, notes, or other evidences of indebtedness payable wholly or in part from the additional taxes authorized under this ordinance, and may pledge and may apply such taxes to the payment of principal of, interest on, and premium (if any) on such bonds, notes, or other evidences of indebtedness and to the payment of costs associated with them.
Section 7. Alterations, Deletions, and Additions to PDA’s Market Infrastructure Projects. A. The City intends that the PDA will construct all Core Market Infrastructure Projects shown in Exhibit B to Attachment 1 using Levy Proceeds and other funds that may become available. If, however, the City determines in an ordinance passed by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the City Council that it is impractical or no longer desirable to construct a Core Market Infrastructure Project identified in Exhibit B, that Core Market Infrastructure Project may be deleted or materially reduced in scope. If the City approves deletion or a material reduction in scope of a Core Market Infrastructure Project, it may also approve substitution of a Supplemental Market Infrastructure Project (Exhibit C to Attachment 1) or a different project; provided, however, that any such different project shall be a basic infrastructure upgrade to one or more PDA owned buildings in the Market. B. The PDA may seek supplemental, matching or additional funds from other sources to pay all or part of the cost of the Market Infrastructure Projects. The PDA may apply such other funds to one or more Supplemental Market Infrastructure Projects or one or more Core Market Infrastructure Projects. To the extent such other funds offset Levy Proceeds identified to fund Market Infrastructure Projects, a like amount of Levy Proceeds shall be available for application to other Market Infrastructure Projects, as provided in the Agreement.
Section 8. Contracting Outreach. The PDA will, when soliciting businesses for goods or services agreements in connection with Market Infrastructure Projects, perform outreach to small, economically disadvantaged businesses, including those owned by women and minorities. PDA agreements with businesses for goods and services and with other public entities and non-profits in connection with Market Infrastructure Projects will encourage these entities to employ a workforce reflective of the region’s diversity. All PDA agreements for goods and services in connection with Market Infrastructure Projects will require the contracting entities to comply with all then-applicable requirements for non-discrimination in employment in federal, state, and City of Seattle laws and regulations.
Section 9. Reporting. The Director of the PDA will prepare and submit to the City Council and the Mayor annual progress reports on the implementation of the Market Infrastructure Projects defined in Section 1. The City will have the right to audit the Market’s levy expenditures at its discretion.
Section 10. Election - Ballot Title. The King County Director of Records and Elections, as ex officio supervisor of elections, is hereby requested to conduct a special election, which the City hereby calls pursuant to RCW 84.55.050, to be held in conjunction with the state-wide general election on November 4, 2008, and to submit to the qualified electors of the City the proposition set forth herein.
The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed not less than eighty-four days prior to November 4, 2008, to certify the proposition to the King County Director of Records and Elections in the following form or as modified by the City Attorney pursuant to RCW 29A.26.071:
CITY OF SEATTLE
PROPOSITION NO. 1
The City of Seattle’s Proposition _ concerns increased property taxes for six years for Pike Place Market.
If approved, this proposition would fund seismic, safety, energy-saving, and other basic infrastructure improvements at the publicly-owned Pike Place Market, last renovated in the 1970s, as provided in Ordinance 122737. It would authorize regular property taxes higher than RCW 84.55 limits, allowing collection of up to $12,500,000 in additional taxes in 2009 (up to $73,000,000 over six years). Taxes collected in 2009 would be limited to $3.67 per $1,000 of assessed value, including approximately $0.10 of additional taxes.
Should this levy lid lift be approved?
Yes
No
Section 11. Ratification. Certification of such proposition by the City Clerk to the King County Director of Records and Elections in accordance with law prior to the date of such election on November 4, 2008, and any other act consistent with the authority and after passage of this ordinance and prior to the effective date of this ordinance, are hereby ratified and confirmed.
Section 12. Severability. In the event any one or more of the provisions of this ordinance shall for any reason be held to be invalid, such invalidity shall not affect any other provision of this ordinance or the levy of the taxes authorized herein, but this ordinance and the authority to levy those taxes shall be construed and enforced as if such invalid provisions had not been contained herein; and any provision which shall for any reason be held by reason of its extent to be invalid shall be deemed to be in effect to the extent permitted by law.
Section 13. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force immediately upon its approval by the Mayor or, if not approved and returned by the Mayor within ten (10) days after presentation, then on the eleventh (11th) day after its presentation to the Mayor or, if vetoed by the Mayor, then immediately after its passage over his veto.
Passed by the City Council the ____ day of _________, 2008, and signed by me in open session in authentication of its passage this _____ day of __________, 2008. _________________________________ President __________of the City Council Approved by me this ____ day of _________, 2008. _________________________________ Gregory J. Nickels, Mayor Filed by me this ____ day of _________, 2008. ____________________________________ City Clerk (Seal)
Attachment 1 to the Ordinance, Agreement regarding Levy Proceeds by and between the City of Seattle and the Pike Place Market Preservation and Development Authority
Exhibit A to Attachment 1 to the Ordinance, Projected Cash Flow
Exhibit B to Attachment 1 to the Ordinance, Description of Core Market Infrastructure Projects
Exhibit C to Attachment 1 to the Ordinance, Description of Supplemental Market Infrastructure Projects
Exhibit D to Attachment 1 to the Ordinance, Acceleration and Deceleration Examples
Attachment 2 to the Ordinance, City Financing
Proposition 2 Ballot Title
CITY OF SEATTLE
PROPOSITION 2
The City of Seattle's Proposition 2 concerns increased property taxes for six years for parks purposes. If approved, this proposition would fund acquiring, developing and restoring parks, recreation facilities, cultural facilities, green spaces, playfields, trails, community gardens, and shoreline areas; all as provided in Ordinance 122749. It would authorize regular property taxes higher than RCW 84.55 limits, allowing collection of up to $24,250,000 in additional taxes in 2009 (up to $145,500,000 over six years). Taxes collected in 2009 would be limited to $2.60 per $1,000 of assessed value, including approximately $0.19 of additional taxes. Should this levy lid lift be approved?
Yes
No
Those in favor shall vote "Yes"; those opposed shall mark their ballots "No".
Proposition 2 City Attorney's Explanatory Statement
Proposition number 2 would approve a six-year property tax increase. If approved, the measure would raise up to $145.5 million in additional property taxes. This is a new tax for parks. The current parks tax expires at the end of 2008.
The City Council has passed and the Mayor has signed a law that provides for how this money is to be spent. To change the spending plan, the Mayor and three quarters of the city council would have to agree. The money would be divided into four very general categories, which are: (1) Buying land for new parks or open space; (2) Improving or fixing existing parks; (3) Preserving the environment and promoting community gardens; and (4) Providing money for buying land or improving existing parks as identified by neighborhood or community groups. The general spending plan is described below. The specific projects are listed in an attachment to Ordinance 122749, which is included in this voters’ pamphlet.
Buying land for new parks or open space.
In this category, the new tax would pay for two different types of purchases. First, the City would buy land in parts of the city that do not have enough parks or open space. Under state law, the City is required to have a plan for using land in the city. This plan sets goals for the amount of land that should be open space or parks. The parks department has used this goal to identify the neighborhoods in the city that do not have enough parks or open space. Under this proposal, the city would spend up to $24,000,000 to buy land in these neighborhoods.
Second, the City would buy land in existing green spaces. The city has undeveloped green spaces throughout the city. Some of these green spaces include undeveloped land not owned by the city. The city would buy some of this land to prevent future development in the green space. Under this proposal, the city would spend up to $6,000,000 to buy land in green spaces.
In addition to this spending, up to $ 5,697,000 of the taxes raised will be set aside to cover the costs of inflation related to buying new land for parks and open space.
Improving or fixing existing parks
In this category, the new tax would pay to improve 23 neighborhood playgrounds to bring them up to safety standards, building parks on top of three water reservoir lids, building three skate parks and three spray parks, two off-leash areas, and building 11 new neighborhood parks. Under this proposal, the city would spend up to $33,090,000 to improve, fix or build these parks.
Also in this category are improvements and repairs to two city-owned cultural facilities: the Seattle Asian Art Museum, in Volunteer Park, and the Langston Hughes Performing Arts Center. Both are managed by the Parks Department. The tax would pay for renovations including work intended to make both facilities stronger in earthquakes. The city would spend up to $11,500,000 on these two buildings.
In addition, under this category, the tax would pay to install artificial turf at four sand playfields and new lighting at one of the four fields. The city would spend $10,500,000 on these four fields.
The tax would also pay for additional improvements at major regional parks, including Jefferson Park, Discovery Park and Magnuson Park. The city would spend $10,950,000 on these improvements.
Finally, the proposal includes projects to build and extend trails. The proposal would include an addition to the Burke Gilman Trail, a trail and park along the Duwamish River and a link between Myrtle Edwards Park and Queen Anne. The City would spend $7,500,000 on these trails.
In addition to this spending, up to $ 14,002,000 of the taxes raised will be set aside to cover the costs of an inflation related to improving or fixing existing parks.
Preserving the environment and promoting community gardens
Under this category, the tax would pay for forest and stream restoration in the city as part of a partnership with a private organization. The city would spend $3,500,000 for this restoration. The city would also spend up to $600,000 to restore parts of the Kiwanis Ravine.
The tax would also support community garden areas known as “p-patches.” The money would buy land for new p-patches and pay to convert existing city land to p-patches. The city would spend up to $2,000,000 on p-patches.
Many city streets end at various points along the shoreline. This is public land that may provide access to the shoreline. Many of these street ends are not improved for public use. The tax would pay for to develop some of these shoreline street ends. The city would spend up to $500,000 on shoreline street ends.
In addition to this spending, up to $ 1,410,000 of the taxes raised will be set aside to cover the costs of inflation related to preserving the environment and promoting community gardens.
Providing money for buying land or improving existing parks as identified by neighborhood or community groups
Neighborhood and community groups from time to time identify property that they believe would make a good park. The tax would set aside money to be used to purchase and build these potential parks. The city would spend up to $15,000,000 on these projects.
The law also establishes a sixteen member oversight committee to advise the Parks Department and review the progress of the tax.
To pay for these projects, Proposition 2 would authorize the collection of $145.5 million more in taxes over six years than would otherwise be allowed without a vote under state law. Without a vote of the people, State law generally limits property tax increases to 1% per year for the City as a whole. No more than $24.25 million in additional taxes would be collected in any one year under the measure. The additional tax rate related to this tax increase for any property owner in the first year of collection would be approximately 19 cents per thousand dollars of assessed value. If this proposition were approved, the total tax rate for the City in 2009 would be no more than$2.60 per thousand dollars of assessed value. The final year additional taxes will be collected under this measure is 2014. Taxes collected in 2015 will be limited under the 1% growth rule as if the taxes under this measure had never been collected.
Statement For Proposition 2
Vote yes on passage of the Parks and Green Spaces levy today because it is good for our economic and environmental future.
The Parks and Green Spaces levy will provide for parks, trails, playgrounds and ball fields for all of Seattle at an average cost of $81.00 a year for the typical homeowner, a decrease of about $30 from the expiring Parks levy.
As our city grows and becomes denser, it is important to continue to invest in our parks and green spaces to protect our quality of life and provide for an active and healthy lifestyle for all of Seattle.
Investing in our parks for future generations to enjoy -- as we have enjoyed Green Lake, Seward Park, Lincoln Park and the Arboretum -- is good for our whole community. We need to make similar investments as our legacy for future generations.
New parks above the reservoirs in Jefferson Park, Maple Leaf, and West Seattle will allow us to use existing facilities while opening those areas to enjoyment and recreation.
The Park levy’s Opportunity Fund will allow other neighborhoods to create open spaces across our city, and provide for green space acquisition that will guarantee parks, bike trails, and p-patches will be available in Seattle’s most rapidly growing neighborhoods.
Just a few of the many environmental benefits the Parks and Green Spaces levy will fund include:
Clean water
Healthy forests
Protection of Puget Sound
Stream improvements
Shoreline enhancements
For our children, the Parks levy will provide for the retrofitting of twenty-three playground projects so that they meet current safety standards, including the fun and unique play facilities at Gas Works Park. And for our athletes of all ages, sand playfields will be replaced with new, all-season playfields.
Renewing Seattle’s Parks levy will promote involvement in our community. Parks are where our children play, our senior citizens walk, and our athletes perform. They entice us out of our homes and workplaces.
Parks are where we meet our friends and neighbors.
Please vote yes today for the Parks and Green Spaces levy.
And for more information please go to our website: seattleparksforall.com
James Kelley, Urban League
Mike O’Brien, Sierra Club
Abe Bergman, Seattle Pediatrician and Board Chair of the Seattle Children’s Playgarden
Rebuttal to Statement For Proposition 2
The forward-thinking voter will vote NO, because the proposal proposes too much as we face an economic downturn. Our economic future depends on sustainable budgeting. Perpetual levies are fiscally irresponsible, and render levy lids meaningless.
The practical voter will vote NO, because a safety upgrade to a playground shouldn't cost $1.4 million. Because this year over $500,000 was added to an already sizable parks budget to maintain projects from the last levy expansion. Because the Department of Neighborhoods budget already includes money for p-patches and other opportunities for neighborhoods.
The tree-hugging voter will vote NO, because too little of this levy will go toward the environment. Because it was foolhardy to lid the reservoirs in the first place. Because impervious surfacing and increased auto access to the shoreline aren't “enhancements.” Because you know artificial turf from a green belt, and a building from a tree.
Christal Wood, J.D.
Statement Against Proposition 2
Connection with nature is indeed the lifeblood of the Emerald City, which is why, even without a levy, Parks and Recreation already consumes 8.4% of Seattle's general fund expenditures. That's more than we spend for many things some may argue we need more. The 2000 Parks and Seattle Center levies currently funnel an additional 8.4% of all city property taxes to the Department of Parks and Recreation. Also, don't forget the two King County parks measures passed last year, which are expected to raise $217 million for some of the same properties. Meanwhile, the Finance Department projects a $10-20M shortfall for the rest of Seattle's budget next year.
Voters deserve to know exactly what they're getting for an average $83 in extra property taxes each year for 6 years. What will $145 million buy in this case? Good God, who knows for sure! the Council presents an exhaustive project list that will confuse even the wonkiest of us. It's just as important to understand what this levy will not buy. This levy is not for maintaining current parks or protect current wild spaces. Rather this levy is for additional projects--in many cases more pavement than park. Some projects merely continue “master plans” from the first levy. Some projects begin “first phases” with no end in sight. Many projects might fail if voted on separately, as they've already been contentious among neighborhoods. As we have no line-item veto, we must vote them all up or down.
Should this levy pass, $multi-millions will go toward non-park building renovations, replacing sand with lighting and artificial turf at playfields, dressing up reservoir lids, changing wading parks to spray parks, and extending roads and boulevards (including “first phase”of another inroad to Allentown). There will be $11M in “safety” enhancements at 22 existing parks. We'll pay $24M for 21 new “neighborhood parks,” but 19 of them are planned for “Urban Villages” (a.k.a. malls) which will arguably benefit private corporations more than the public... Is this what you had in mind when you heard “parks?”
Love them or hate them, this proposal is for projects Seattle can't currently afford, and will likely not be able to maintain in the future--without more levies. This (or any other levy proposal) should be clearly defined, sensible--and the exception, not the rule. VOTE NO on the Park Levy That Ate Seattle--the sequel!
Christal Wood, J.D.
Rebuttal to Statement Against Proposition 2
The Proposition 2 citizens’ committee chose fiscally responsible projects to create safe, healthy places for all our neighborhoods:
Fixing twenty-three neighborhood playgrounds to meet current federal safety standards.
Creating new parks, trails, playground, spray pools and ball fields on existing City-owned property.
Acquiring new park land and open spaces before they are developed, so that as Seattle grows denser we protect our quality of life.
Taking care of our forests and streams.
It will do all this for about $30 less a year than the typical homeowner is already paying.
We've all benefited from past investments in Green Lake, Seward Park, Lincoln Park, and the Arboretum. Now we need to make similar investments as a legacy for future generations.
Please vote yes on the Parks and Green Spaces levy -- seattleparksforall.org
James Kelley, Urban League
Mike O’Brien, Sierra Club
Abe Bergman, Seattle Pediatrician and Board Chair of the Seattle Children’s Playgarden
Proposition 2 Complete Text
ORDINANCE 122749
AN ORDINANCE relating to additional regular property taxes; providing for the submission to the qualified electors of the City at a special election on November 4, 2008, of a proposition authorizing the City to levy regular property taxes for up to six (6) years in excess of the limitation on levies in Chapter 84.55 RCW for the purposes of acquiring, developing, or restoring, existing or new, parks, recreation facilities, cultural facilities, green spaces, playfields, trails, community gardens, and shoreline areas; providing for interim financing pending tax receipts; creating a citizens levy oversight committee; creating a new fund; and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts.
WHEREAS, the Department of Parks and Recreation submitted, and the Seattle City Council (Council) approved by Resolution 30868, the Seattle Parks and Recreation 2006 Development Plan, which outlines acquisition and development efforts to be pursued over the subsequent six years; and
WHEREAS, in 1995, the City of Seattle commenced its neighborhood planning process as part of an overall strategy to manage the City's growth through the Comprehensive Plan in response to the State’s Growth Management Act and has been implementing those plans since 2000, with many park recommendations still not completed in 2008; and
WHEREAS, the Council embraced the Goals and Principles of Open Space Seattle 2100 by proclamation in May 2006 and later endorsed Open Space Seattle 2100 concepts to integrate green infrastructure and urban sustainability efforts; and
WHEREAS, in 2007 the Seattle Parks Foundation updated the 1990 Bands of Green report to guide collaborative efforts to improve Seattle's green connections, including recommendations pertaining to Seattle's Department of Transportation and Department of Parks and Recreation; and
WHEREAS, the Seattle Green Partnership was created in 2004 by Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Seattle and the Cascade Land Conservancy to undertake a 20-year coordinated effort, including city and private funding and a large amount of volunteer support, to restore and maintain healthy urban forests; and
WHEREAS, Resolution 29370 adopted policies to guide the development of public access improvements to shoreline street ends, which has led to a 2008 draft of a Shoreline Street End Master Plan with identified implementation projects; and
WHEREAS, Resolution 30194 adopted a Five-Year Strategic Plan as guidance for the expansion of Seattle's community gardening program and actions to implement the plan; and
WHEREAS, in Resolution 29681, the City Council endorsed the 1997 Joint Athletic Facilities Development Program identifying priority athletic field and gymnasium improvements on City and Seattle School District property consistent with applicable adopted plans and the public process conducted by the Department of Parks and Recreation’s Sportsfield Review Committee; and
WHEREAS, the Council adopted Resolution 31019 in April 2008 establishing goals, creating a policy framework and identifying actions for the purpose of strengthening Seattle's food system sustainability and security; and
WHEREAS, in Resolution 31055 the Council created the Parks and Green Spaces Levy Citizens’ Advisory Committee to ensure citizen participation in the development of a potential package of parks, open space, boulevards, trails, green infrastructure, and recreation projects and a proposed set of options to fund the package; and
WHEREAS, the Parks and Green Spaces Levy Citizens’ Advisory Committee, after being duly appointed and after spending many hours in open meetings, receiving public testimony and deliberating, has voted by a strong majority to recommended that the Council place before the voters of Seattle a $140 million six-year levy proposal; and
WHEREAS, the City will seek to leverage funds through collaboration with County, State, and Federal sources and with private and non-profit organizations, including the Seattle Parks Foundation, through the development of partnerships for purposes of enhancing the projects funded through the levy lid lift; and
WHEREAS, interim financing may be needed prior to the receipt of tax receipts from the levy lid lift proposed in this ordinance; NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF SEATTLE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Definitions. As used in this ordinance, the following words shall have the following meanings:
"Green spaces" includes but is not limited to open space, greenbelts, greenspaces as defined in Resolution 28653 (also known as the Greenspaces Policy Resolution), and other open areas.
"Neighborhood parks” includes but is not limited to existing parks, new parks identified in neighborhood plans, new parks identified in the Seattle’s Parks and Recreation 2006 Development Plan, boulevards, and other properties purchased by the City for open-space and recreational purposes.
"Playfields” includes but is not limited to existing or new athletic fields, open play spaces, and similar areas, including spectator enhancements such as seating. Playfields does not include facilities designed for professional sports organizations.
Section 2. Levy of Additional Regular Property Taxes - Submittal. The City hereby submits to the qualified electors of the City a proposition as authorized by RCW 84.55.050 to exceed the levy limitation on regular property taxes contained in RCW 84.55.010 for property taxes levied in 2008 through 2013 for collection in 2009 through 2014, respectively, raising up to One Hundred Forty-Five Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($145,500,000) in aggregate over a period of up to six (6) years. The proposition shall be limited so that the City shall not levy more than Twenty-Four Million Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($24,250,000) in additional taxes each year. All the Levy Proceeds shall be used to acquire, develop, or restore, existing or new, parks, recreation facilities, cultural facilities, green spaces, playfields, trails, community gardens, and shoreline areas.. The taxes authorized by this proposition will be in addition to the maximum amount of regular property taxes the City would have been limited to by RCW 84.55.010 in the absence of voter approval under this ordinance, plus other authorized lid lifts. Pursuant to RCW 84.55.050(5), the maximum regular property taxes that may be levied in 2014 for collection in 2015 and in later years shall be computed as if the limit on regular property taxes had not been increased under this ordinance.
Section 3. Use of Funds. Proceeds and interest earnings from the additional taxes levied pursuant to this ordinance shall be applied as follows:
A. Categories, subcategories and projects: There are four major categories for funding: 1) Acquisition; 2) Development; 3) Environment; and 4) Opportunity Fund. These categories are subdivided into subcategories, and projects, as shown in Attachment A to this ordinance, which is incorporated herein by reference. Each year as part of the annual budget process, the Superintendent of Parks and Recreation (the “Superintendent”) shall submit a proposed spending plan allocating expected additional taxes and interest earnings among the categories, subcategories, and projects for the coming year. Over the term of the levy, total funding from levy funds for each category and subcategory will be consistent with the amounts identified in Attachment A, unless the City Council by three-fourths (3/4) vote determines otherwise, after considering any recommendations that may have been made by the oversight committee established in Section 5.
1. The scope for each project will be defined in the City of Seattle’s Capital Improvement Program. Council anticipates that the proposed scopes of projects will be developed by the Department of Parks and Recreation through a community process, building upon already developed plans where they exist. Projects may be deleted only by a three-fourths (3/4) vote of the City Council after considering any recommendations that may have been made by the oversight committee established in Section 5. If the City Council approves deletion of a project, the Council may also approve substitution of a different project.
2. Subcategories in the Acquisition, Development and Environment categories shall be allocated from the 2008 Parks Levy Fund created by Section 4 up to the amounts shown as the respective subcategory allocations in Attachment A. The City may seek supplemental, matching or additional funds from other sources to pay all or part of the cost of a project and, if successful, may apply such funds to accomplishment thereof or to complement or enlarge a project. If all of the projects in an Acquisition, Development or Environment subcategory have been completed or deleted and additional taxes collected under this ordinance (and any interest earnings thereon) that were allocated to that subcategory remain unexpended, then those proceeds and earnings shall be added to the Opportunity Fund category.
3. Funds allocated to the Opportunity Fund category shall be used only as provided in this subsection 3. Projects identified by neighborhood and community groups may be funded as part of the Opportunity Fund category by ordinance, after City Council consideration of any recommendations that may have been made by the oversight committee established in Section 5. Opportunity Fund resources can be used to pay for projects including, but not limited to, the acquisition and/or development of off-leash areas, community gardens, P-Patches, trails and neighborhood parks. In making its recommendations regarding the funding of Opportunity Fund projects, the oversight committee will consider the following criteria.
a. Has the project been subject to a public review process or is it consistent with approved plans, such as a neighborhood plan or a watershed plan?
b. Does the project address a park or open space deficiency or underserved community?
c. Is the project in an area experiencing growth, particularly an urban village or urban center?
d. Does the project address an immediate health or safety problem, or take advantage of an opportunity that will be lost unless action is taken?
e. Does the project contribute to solving major challenges facing our community, such as climate change, the health of our waterways, or growth management?
f. Does the project have the potential to leverage other resources through the actions of other public agencies, funding from public, private or philanthropic partners, and/or in-kind contributions of time and energy from citizen volunteers?
g. Does the project result in significantly higher operating costs for the City?
h. Does the project demonstrate new and creative methods to meet the community’s needs for parks and green spaces? and/or
i. Does the project demonstrate a high degree of neighborhood involvement and support?
B. Funds and appropriations unexpended at the end of any budget year shall automatically be carried over to the next budget year.
C. If the Council does not appropriate at least Twelve Million Dollars ($12,000,000) in the annual budget for park and recreation capital purposes from resources other than the levy proceeds, the Council may not levy any revenues for collection in that budget year unless the City Council by a three-fourths (3/4) vote determines that a natural disaster or exigent economic circumstances prevents the Council from appropriating the money from other resources.
Section 4. Deposit of Proceeds. The additional taxes authorized under this ordinance shall be deposited into the 2008 Parks Levy Fund, which is hereby created in the City Treasury. Money in that Fund may be temporarily deposited or invested in such manner as may be lawful for the investment of City money and interest and other earnings shall be deposited in the Fund. The additional taxes and any interest or other earnings from their deposit or investment shall be applied solely for the projects authorized pursuant to this ordinance. The Finance Director is authorized to create other funds, subfunds, or accounts as may be needed to implement the purposes of this ordinance.
Section 5. Oversight Committee. The 2008 Parks and Green Spaces Levy Oversight Committee (“Oversight Committee”) is hereby established to review the expenditure of the additional tax proceeds and resultant interest earnings, to advise upon expenditures and allocations for the following year, and to make recommendations on the implementation of particular projects and on any reallocations. The Oversight Committee shall have immediate and direct access to the financial and accounting records of all levy funded projects for the life of the levy. The Oversight Committee may solicit public comments on the expenditures and the financial accounting of all levy projects. Unless changed by a majority of the Committee, the Committee will meet at least bi-monthly with the Superintendent or his/her designee, beginning in the calendar quarter following the successful passage of the levy lid lift. The oversight committee shall consist of sixteen members, and shall include representatives from the following categories: (a) six (6) committee members shall be Seattle residents representing diverse geographic areas; (b) one (1) committee member shall be a member of the Board of Parks Commissioners; and (c) the remaining nine (9) committee members shall be selected from among the diverse constituencies served by and interested in the projects to be funded by this measure. The mayor and city council each shall appoint eight oversight committee members. Four of the initial oversight committee appointees shall be chosen from among the Park and Green Spaces Levy Citizens’ Advisory Committee; two of these members shall be chosen by the mayor, and two by the city council. Upon the resignation, retirement, death incapacity or removal of an oversight committee member, the appointing authority shall appoint a replacement to serve the balance of the term. All oversight committee members appointed or reappointed by the mayor, including replacements, are subject to confirmation by the City Council. Oversight committee members shall be appointed to three (3) year staggered terms subject to reappointment, except that five (5) members of the body shall be initially appointed for a single year term, five (5) members for a two (2) year term, and a the remainder for a three (3) year term. Members shall be subject to removal by their appointing authority. Members shall serve without pay, but may be reimbursed their expenses, including payments for child care while attending meetings. The Oversight Committee will adopt criteria, including but not necessarily limited to those listed in Section 3, for making its recommendations concerning the Opportunity Fund category and will make recommendations to the Superintendent, Mayor, and City Council. The Oversight Committee may adopt rules for its own procedures, including quorum requirements and the frequency of meetings. The Oversight Committee will make annual reports to the Mayor and City Council and will prepare a mid-point report to the citizens of Seattle. The Department of Parks and Recreation shall provide staff and logistical support for the Oversight Committee. The Oversight Committee shall continue in existence through December 31, 2014, and thereafter if so provided by ordinance.
Section 6. Bond and Notes. To the extent permitted by applicable law the City may issue bonds, notes, or other evidences of indebtedness payable wholly or in part from the proceeds of the additional taxes authorized under this ordinance, and apply such tax proceeds to the payment of principal of, interest on, and premium (if any) on such bonds, notes, or other evidences of indebtedness and to the payment of costs associated with them.
Section 7. Election - Ballot Title. The King County Director of Records and Elections, as ex officio supervisor of elections, is hereby requested to conduct a special election, which the City hereby calls pursuant to RCW 84.55.050, to be held in conjunction with the state-wide general election on November 4, 2008, and to submit to the qualified electors of the City the proposition set forth herein.
The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed not less than eighty-four days prior to November 4, 2008, to certify the proposition to the King County Director of Records and Elections in the following form or as modified by the City Attorney pursuant to RCW 29A.26.071:
CITY OF SEATTLE
PROPOSITION NO. 2
The City of Seattle’s Proposition 2 concerns increased property taxes for six years for parks purposes.
If approved, this proposition would fund acquiring, developing and restoring parks, recreation facilities, cultural facilities, green spaces, playfields, trails, community gardens, and shoreline areas as provided in Ordinance 122749. It would authorize regular property taxes higher than RCW 84.55 limits, allowing collection of up to $24,250,000 in additional taxes in 2009 (up to $145,500,000 over six years). Taxes collected in 2009 would be limited to $3.67 per $1,000 of assessed value, including approximately $0.18 of additional taxes.
Should this levy lid lift be approved?
Should this levy lid lift be approved?
Levy, Yes
Levy, No
Those in favor shall vote "Yes"; those opposed shall mark their ballots "No".
Section 8. Severability. In the event any one or more of the provisions of this ordinance shall for any reason be held to be invalid, such invalidity shall not affect any other provision of this ordinance or the levy of the additional taxes authorized herein, but this ordinance and the authority to levy those taxes shall be construed and enforced as if such invalid provisions had not been contained herein; and any provision which shall for any reason be held by reason of its extent to be invalid shall be deemed to be in effect to the extent permitted by law.
Section 9. Ratification. The City Clerk’s certification to the King County Director of Records and Elections of the proposition referred to in section 7 and any other acts taken after the passage of this ordinance and consistent with its authority, are hereby ratified and confirmed.
Section 10. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force immediately upon its approval by the Mayor or, if not approved and returned by the Mayor within ten (10) days after presentation, then on the eleventh (11th) day after its presentation to the Mayor or, if vetoed by the Mayor, then immediately after its passage over his veto.
Passed by the City Council the ____ day of _________, 2008, and signed by me in open session in authentication of its passage this _____ day of __________, 2008. _________________________________ President __________of the City Council
Approved by me this ____ day of _________, 2008. _________________________________ Gregory J. Nickels, Mayor
Filed by me this ____ day of _________, 2008. ____________________________________ City Clerk (Seal)
Attachment A: Allocations for Subcategories and Projects
(3mb)