I'm in the P-I and the Times and on TV!

Both the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and the Seattle Times quoted me today in their respective stories about the Seattle school levy.

From the Seattle Times story, by Sanjay Bhatt:

If the levies are approved, owners of a $336,000 home — the average residence value in Seattle last year — would see their total schools-tax bill rise from about $830 this year to $865 in 2005, $880 in 2006 and $899 in 2007. These figures factor in the assumed 6 percent annual increase in property values and include a previously approved new-school construction levy.

Some campaign mailers state prominently that the levies "renew existing ones and yes votes will NOT lead to homeowners paying more!"

Stefan Sharkansky, 40, who wants to send his preschooler to public school, calls this "marketing spin" and misleading. He plans to vote against both levies.

"I was originally going to support the levy," the Green Lake resident said. "And I just wanted a simple question answered, which was how much was this going to cost me as a taxpayer. I tried to get an answer to that and it was very, very difficult."

Goos said the campaign stands by its mailings, including the language Sharkansky criticizes.

"That's his interpretation," she said. "I interpret that to mean the rate at which I'm going to be taxed is not going to increase."

It takes a very special kind of person to keep insisting that an increase from $830 to $865 is not an increase.

From the P-I article, by Deborah Bach:

A Seattle Public Schools brochure characterizes the levies as renewals of existing ones and estimates that the tax rate for the levies will steadily decrease over the next few years, assuming that property values increase 6 percent a year. ... The brochure doesn't mention that the capital levy on the ballot is $28 million more than the last one approved by voters, in 1998.

"Let's be honest about it," said Sharkansky, who plans to vote no on both levies. "It just leaves a bad taste in my mouth to say it's a renewal when it's an increase."

The P-I also quotes a school official:

John Vacchiery, the district's director of facilities planning and enrollment, said the capital levy increase can be chalked up to inflation.

I should point out that the capital levy rose by 18.7%, while the local Consumer Price Index rose by 15.8% from Dec. 1997 to Dec. 2003., while Seattle school enrollment declined by 1.5% in the same period, from 47,457 to 46,730. So it's fair to say that capital spending is growing faster than justified by inflation and enrollment.

Neither report captured all the nuances of my position on the levy, which I express more fully here, but both reporters quoted me accurately and in the right context. I appreciate that they included my perspective in their stories.

I also just gave an interview on the same subject to KIRO-TV's Essex Porter. The segment should air on this evening's Channel 7 Eyewitness News sometime between 5-6.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at January 30, 2004 01:32 PM