|
Printer Friendly |
Metro Transit poll illegal, Eyman says
Metro Transit poll illegal, Eyman says
Thursday, October 7, 1999
By GEORGE FOSTER
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER
Initiative 695 author Tim Eyman is accusing King County's Metro Transit of
staging an illegal "push poll" in a campaign against his measure.
The agency recently called 800 people to ask how they would react to potential
fare increases and service cuts if Metro's funding drops by $100 million per
year.
While the poll doesn't mention I-695 or tax limitation, Eyman notes that $100
million is Metro's estimate of what it would lose if I-695 passes.
"We believe using taxpayer's dollars to lobby against I-695 is illegal, reprehensible,
but no surprise," Eyman said.
State law forbids government agencies from taking a position on ballot initiatives.
Push polls are used by political campaigns as a way of passing loaded information
in the guise of a neutral survey.
John Arthur Wilson, chief of staff to King County Executive Ron Sims, yesterday
called Eyman's accusation a "slapdash statement." He said the survey is similar
those done several times a year when changes in operations are anticipated.
Wilson said the county was sensitive to such charges, though, and sent the
26-page survey to the state Public Disclosure Commission for review before it
was administered.
"We frankly took the initiative of contacting the PDC because we wanted to
be sure we didn't run afoul of the law," Wilson said.
The agency gave its approval and even asked if other public agencies could
use the survey as a model for similar polls, according to an e-mail sent by
the Susan Harris, the PDC's assistant director.
The poll asks a number of questions about commuting habits, then turns to
possible budget cuts. Participants are asked if they would continue to use Metro
if fares were raised to certain levels, and about the personal impact of reduced
bus service.
Polling began Sept. 22 and is to end today.
The King County Council must pass an annual budget by Thanksgiving, and "it
is challenging to know how to proceed," said Ron Posthuma, the county's acting
deputy transportation director. "If we had the luxury of waiting until after
the (Nov. 2) election, we would have been happy to wait."
Patricia Fullmer, a Metro researcher, said that after certification of I-695
as a ballot measure in July, "we knew we would have to have some kind of input
from the public on the types of decisions that would have to be made if we have
a major shortfall of revenues."
Eyman, however, maintains the county "is using threats, lies and scare tactics"
in the form of a survey.
"We believe the entire poll is illegal," he said, although he added that he
will not formally challenge it.
"Given the amount of money we have . . . we can't hire lawyers to fight every
agency. We are counting on people to use their common sense."
Poll question 11
For the next part of this survey, we will be talking about Metro's planning
for the next couple of years. There is a possibility that Metro could receive
about $100 million a year less in revenue than it does now. This accounts for
about 30 percent of Metro's annual operating budget. This revenue loss could
be offset fully or partially by other funding from the state, or by reallocating
funds within the County. Or Metro spending may need to be cut to the new level
of revenue . . .
Metro is looking at options in the event this revenue loss does happen. If
so, Metro may have to either increase fares or reduce service. I would like
to ask you how these actions would affect you if they were to occur . . .
