Say no to I-722: It is a bad piece of legislation

Like its predecessor Initiative 695, this year’s Initiative 722 bundles different subjects into a single hey-we’re-angry measure. That bundling of issues is forbidden by a long line of state judicial decisions, so it’s almost certain that I-722 would never go into effect even if approved.

So, it can be argued that it would be in taxpayers’ interest to reject the measure. After all, why waste good public money on court and attorney expenses over a sure-to-be-beaten piece of bad legislation?

There’s a much deeper reason to reject I-722, however. Voters should say no to I-722 because it would create an inequitable property tax system.

Fairness is one of the enduring strengths of Washington’s state constitution. No class of property can be subjected to higher or lower rates of taxation than other properties. I-722 would have the effect of shifting tax burdens onto homes and businesses that have seen little or no increase in their property values.

The measure calls for limiting the property tax increases on individual properties to the rate of inflation or 2 percent per year, whichever is less. That’s a bonanza for people in wealthy neighborhoods, where values tend to rise the most. That could make a huge difference in their property taxes over time. The real problem, though, is that tax burdens would be shifted to properties with slower or no appreciation in value. As recent boom markets have shown, those are usually more modest properties.

The effect is so transparently unfair that the courts might well toss out the plan even it were not paired with another issue. But voters should express their opposition to such an ill-disguised giveaway to the wealthy.

I-722 also seeks to repeal some tax and fee increases that were approved in the latter half of 1999. A variety of local governments around the state made those decisions in part because I-695 sought to have every such hike subjected to voter approval. A recent court decision found that I-695’s voting requirement was unconstitutional.

No matter how angry voters are about taxes, this measure provides no acceptable solutions, legally or philosophically.

Talk to us

More in Opinion

Editorial cartoons for Wednesday, Feb. 1

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

Marysville School District Superintendent Zac Robbins, who took his role as head of the district last year, speaks during an event kicking off a pro-levy campaign heading into a February election on Thursday, Jan. 5, 2023, at the Marysville Historical Society Museum in Marysville, Washington. (Ryan Berry / The Herald)
Editorial: Voters have role in providing strong schools

A third levy failure for Marysville schools would cause even deeper cuts to what students are owed.

Burke: Haven’t Americans had enough of Republican lies?

Take your pick: George Santos’ or scores of others’; lies for political gain are wearing thin on most.

County’s survey on homelessness underestimates numbers

Point-in-time count Giving undercount of the problem Snohomish County had its Point-in-Time… Continue reading

State provides enough support; vote no on Marysville levy

As a native of the state and long time resident of Snohomish… Continue reading

Voting yes for Marysville school levy is a no-brainer

This might be the biggest no-brainer in the history of n-brainers. In… Continue reading

Comment: What’s bonkers and what’s not in GOP’s ‘Fair Tax’ proposal

The plan to replace the income tax with a flat consumption tax makes sense, but not if it’s a sales tax.

Comment: Do special police units keep peace or disturb it?

Complaints are rising against cops jumping out of vehicles, stopping people and frisking them without cause.

Editorial cartoons for Tuesday, Jan. 31

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

Most Read