We only have a few months to raise the funds and gather the signatures necessary to qualify our initiative for the 2004 ballot. The more you know about it, the more you’ll like it.

Why is the 25% Property Tax Initiative necessary?

Our state has a huge property tax problem. In 1980, citizens paid $1 billion in property taxes. In 2003, we paid $6.25 billion. That level of growth is obscene and unsustainable. Our state’s economy is growing at a sluggish pace with high unemployment. We need an economic stimulus to boost the economy. There are more than 1,700 taxing districts delivering local government services. This governmental structure is unwieldy, inefficient and filled with bureaucratic redundancy. Fundamental reform is long overdue. The 25% Property Tax Initiative provides a sensible solution to these very real problems. It’s a smart, balanced, reasonable proposal.

What does it do?

The initiative lowers property taxes for everyone, providing a $550 million permanent property tax reduction that helps working families and struggling senior citizens and boosts our state’s economy. It does not reduce sales taxes, utility taxes, business &occupation taxes, etc. — only property taxes. And not all property taxes are reduced. The initiative does not affect voter-approved property taxes. It does not impact property taxes that go toward education, like local school levies, teacher pay, classroom sizes, etc. The regular property tax levies of local taxing districts are not eliminated, only reduced by a reasonable amount — 25%.

Didn’t we solve our property tax problem with a previous initiative?

In 2001, voters overwhelmingly approved Initiative 747, putting tighter limits on property tax increases unless voters OK’d higher increases. It took effect without a single legal challenge and it has helped limit increases. But it did not address the cumulative property tax burden that has built up over the past two decades. From 1980 to 2003, there has been a 600 percent increase in property taxes. During that time, politicians have done nothing to address this very real problem. Without this initiative, our citizens and our economy will simply drown under an unfair, unsustainable property tax burden.

How will the initiative help the state’s economy?

The federal government dramatically reduced taxes to spur the economy. As a result, we’re now seeing huge increases in economic growth at the national level. But that growth hasn’t trickled down to our state. Why? Because the only thing state government did to boost our state’s economy was to provide tax breaks to Boeing. In contrast, this initiative provides $550 million in tax incentives to all businesses and individuals. This helps everyone, both employers and employees. We mustn’t put all our economic incentive eggs into one basket. Let’s diversify our portfolio of tax incentives to all sectors of the economy. We can’t just sit back and wait and hope for unemployment to drop and wages to go up. We must adopt policies, like this initiative, to make it happen.

Even with the resulting economic growth and increases in tax revenues, changes will still be necessary. How should affected governments adapt?

State government received national acclaim by solving a $2.6 billion deficit not by raising taxes but by employing a process called "Priorities of Government." The initiative ensures this same process will occur for local governments. Last year, state politicians prioritized government services and allocated available revenues to achieve those priorities. It was decades overdue. They didn’t do it because they wanted to, they did it because economic and political conditions gave them no choice. Fundamental reform does not occur when government is fat and happy. Having more than 1,700 taxing districts delivering local government services is not the most cost-effective and efficient way to deliver them. But this structure will never be reformed unless voters approve this initiative.

Why doesn’t the initiative affect voter-approved tax increases?

It’s the safety valve. If a local government can convince the citizens in that community that all other options have been exhausted and that a tax increase is the only resort, then that’s fine. That’s called accountability. In the private sector, spending must be justified on a daily basis. It is perfectly reasonable for citizens to periodically have their elected officials explain and justify their spending of our hard-earned tax dollars. Besides, such a process helps engage the citizenry with their government and increases participation in our political system.

Tim Eyman heads up Voters Want More Choices, a grassroots taxpayer-protection organization (425-493-8707, www.VotersWantMoreChoices.com.