From the Tri-City Herald http://www.tri-cityherald.com/opinion/2000/1016-1.html

I-722: Failed recipe for property tax relief Published Oct. 16, 2000

The people who brought you $30 car tabs are back and, boy, are they cocky.

Tim Eyman and the Tri-Cities' own Monte Benham are under the impression that, following the success of Initiative 695, all they have to do is utter the words "tax cut" and the electorate will be ready to blindly sign on for whatever the duo offer. We ask voters to prove them wrong.

The pair's latest endeavor, Initiative 722, is a sloppy mishmash of tax cuts that attempts to tackle too much and do it on the backs of people not lucky enough to live in more desirable neighborhoods.

Generally, the Herald's editorial board does not like initiatives because, in our opinion, legal change is best accomplished through the legislative process, where laws can be shaped into workable solutions rather than delivered whole without review.

I-722 is a prime example of what is wrong with the initiative process. Property taxes are a worthy candidate for reform, and we can hardly blame people for wanting to sign on because state lawmakers have failed to answer the outcry for tax relief. But I-722 offers simplistic solutions that could end up hurting rather than helping many taxpayers.

In a misguided attempt to prevent Washingtonians from being taxed out of their homes, the initiative would set a limit on how much a property's taxed value can increase each year. That's great for people whose homes are in locations where property values are skyrocketing.

But it's bad news for the rest of us whose homes are gaining value at more normal rates. We'd end up paying taxes on the full market value of our homes while folks who happened to buy in an up-and-coming neighborhood pay taxes on only a portion of theirs.

The result would be tax breaks for owners of quickly appreciating homes while other homeowners pay more - despite supporters' contention that everyone would pay less because of the initiative's provision limiting increases in property tax collections to 2 percent.

That's unfair - not to mention possibly unconstitutional.

And that's not all. Some people wouldn't even be eligible for I-722's protection against hikes in taxed property values. That's because the measure's authors, in an effort to make a point about the amount of taxes people in this state pay, goofed and put language in the initiative that arguably would leave out home-owners in five counties - including Walla Walla and Columbia - and 19 cities, including Kahlotus.

The initiative's other provisions - forcing local governments to refund fee and tax increases they adopted to cushion I-695's cuts and removing the incentive for local governments to postpone tax increases - also will not lead to meaningful property tax reform.

The Herald urges voters to vote no on Initiative 722.

-- BB (bbquax@hotmail.com), October 18, 2000