Someone needs to ask whether the developments in Seattle are paying their own way? The obvious implication of this editorial is that Seattle taxpayers should subsidize the developers because it is good for jobs! Not only that, since Seattle services support the entire King County, so we need to subsidixe Medina and Issaquah as well. Have the taxes fallen for the owner of the bungalow Mr. Scholes appeals to? Who is going to pay the costs of developing schools and other infrastructure to support all these new homes?
Seattle Flirts with a Cut Off Your Nose to Spite Your Face Transportation Policy
Excerpts from a guest op/ed at Publicola,
Two equally misguided tax proposals were floated this week to raise additional funding to pay for public services in Seattle.
First, in a Sunday column, Seattle Times columnist Danny Westneat proposed that new Seattle residents pay impact fees to help fund things like parks and transit service.
Then, on Monday, City Council members Nick Licata and Kshama Sawant suggested taxing employers for every worker they employ in Seattle.
While the intent of these proposals, to fund transit service and other public programs, is laudable, the approach would do more harm than good. By penalizing density, both proposals would exacerbate the issues each measure intends to address by threatening continued economic growth in Seattle’s urban centers.
Impact fees would unfairly force individuals who recently moved to Seattle to pay twice for the same services all current residents enjoy.
Bought that Craftsman in Ballard in 1997? You’re in luck! Plan on following your significant other to Seattle for a new job and looking for a new apartment in Ballard? Get ready to pay the Seattle new-resident fee … plus your share of existing city, county, school district, state and special levy taxes.
Westneat’s premise that new growth and new residents are getting a free ride is inaccurate. New residents pay the same property, sales and vehicle taxes that longtime residents of Seattle pay, but would be required to pay additional fees embedded in new apartments or condos under his proposal. ………………………….
Meanwhile: The Licata/Sawant proposal to tax employers for each person they employ is the wrong message to send to employers that are here, and to those that are looking to create jobs in Seattle.
This is a shortsighted policy at any point in time, but is particularly problematic at a time when the city of Seattle is poised to significantly increase the costs on small and large businesses through a 60 percent increase in the minimum wage, to $15 an hour from $9.32………………..
Continued development in downtown and other urban centers in Seattle is the Craftsman homeowner’s best friend— keeping taxes low and focusing growth in a defined area. ………………
If job creation and new development are made more expensive and difficult in Seattle’s urban centers, the property tax rate on single-family home wners necessary to support these levies will automatically increase to meet the revenue target established by law in each levy.
Jon Scholes is vice president of advocacy and economic development at the Downtown Seattle Association.