|
Printer Friendly |
Is a King County poll a veiled campaign against I-695
Is a King County poll a veiled campaign against I-695?
by Brier Dudley
Seattle Times staff reporter
Would Initiative 695, the $30 car-tab measure on the Nov. 2 ballot, hurt poor
people and make traffic worse?
You may think so after talking to pollsters working for King County, even
though the county is barred by state law from campaigning for or against ballot
measures.
The county is spending $24,000 on a telephone poll now under way that asks
residents to choose among drastic steps that may be needed if Metro Transit
loses a large portion of its revenue.
Without mentioning I-695, callers doing the poll tell those receiving the
calls that Metro is looking at fare increases, then say:
"The more that fares increase, the less services would need to be cut. But
higher fares would have the greatest impact on low-income people. Also, if people
switch from riding the bus to driving cars, this could increase traffic congestion."
Then the callers ask whether fares should increase 25 percent, 50 percent
or neither.
County officials say the poll is legal, but I-695 sponsor Tim Eyman called
it "a standard, classic campaign strategy of threats, scare tactics and lies."
"It is illegal for the government to lobby the public against the initiative,
but they're getting so desperate it's obvious they've decided to not push the
envelope but toss it aside," said Eyman, a Mukilteo entrepreneur.
King County is one of many local governments walking a fine line this fall
as they try spreading the word about I-695's potential effect on budgets, without
appearing to criticize or endorse the measure.
Officials say the public needs to be informed because bus service may be cut,
fares increased and other government services trimmed if I-695 passes.
Rolling back the car-tab tax would cost King County $122 million a year, mostly
in transit funding, and trim the average city budget by 7 percent.
In addition to reducing the vehicle tax, I-695 would also require public votes
on all tax and fee increases.
Initiative proponents say shortfalls could be covered by the state budget
surplus. They also say it would force politicians to prioritize spending.
Poll an attempt to prioritize?
One response by King and Snohomish counties has been to hold public workshops
at which officials discuss Initiative 695, cuts in bus routes, higher fares
and reduced services to the elderly and disabled.
Notices of potential service cuts are posted on buses, and press officers
are distributing fact sheets that detail potential cuts.
King County also is doing the poll. It initially was rejected by County Executive
Ron Sims, who was concerned it would appear to be a "push poll" intended to
sway voters in a certain direction.
But Sims agreed to it after the questions were toned down and prosecutors
said it was legal.
"There were a number of questions that were deleted because I thought they
overreached," Sims said. "I said we're not here to poll, we're here to make
intelligent decisions about how to reduce services if it occurs."
What the law says
So far, nobody has complained about the poll or other I-695 events to the
state's election watchdog, the Public Disclosure Commission.
But the agency has had to edit numerous fliers prepared by local governments
because "some or certain words could be interpreted as advocating a position,"
said acting director Vicki Rippie.
"It is not unusual for them to need some minor revisions," Rippie said.
For workshops, polls or other activity to be legal, they must be considered
"normal and regular conduct."
"Public agencies are legally permitted, and one could argue required, to communicate
with folks in that jurisdiction, but it has to be regular," Rippie said. "It
has to be an activity that is typically undertaken, that is not unusual."
An advisory letter her agency provides to governments says it's fine to provide
a fair, objective explanation of how a ballot measure may affect them.
However, it "may not advocate a position, either expressly or through the
judicious application of style, tone, tenor or timing."
Callers told to obscure link
The poll for King County is being done by Northwest Research Group of Bellevue,
where field manager Troy Hawkins declined to comment.
Callers working for the company were told the poll is to help the county make
budgeting decisions in case I-695 passes. But they are instructed not to disclose
that the survey is related to I-695.
The instructions say: "If a respondent asks, `Is this about I-695?' simply
say, `I don't know. The only information I am given is that this is a planning
study for King County and Metro Transit.' "
However, sources told The Seattle Times that numerous people who were called
figured out that the poll was related to I-695. They may have been helped in
part by a Sept. 21 news conference where Sims and Metro officials broadcast
their concerns about the effect on transit, roads and other services.
Sims routinely holds public workshops on major policy issues, and Ron Posthuma,
acting deputy director of the county Transportation Department, said his agency
commonly polls riders. This time, it wanted to see how people would react to
the 25 percent to 50 percent fare increases that might be needed if I-695 passes,
he said.
"We think we're on pretty firm ground with what we're doing in this case,"
he said.
Eyman disagreed.
"Common sense tells you that the King County government has decided that they
can't beat 695 in a fair fight," he said, "and that they need to break the law
in order to try and scare voters away from it."
Brier Dudley's phone is 206-515-5687.
