Reporter's Notebook

Editor’s note: Today we invited Kim Capeloto, president/CEO of the Greater Vancouver Chamber of Commerce to share his views on Initiative 1033, a measure up for voter approval on this November’s ballot. For Vancouver Council for the Homeless executive director Craig Lyons’ thoughts on I-1033, see VBJ’s Oct. 16 Op-Ed here.

Don’t fall for Tim Eyman’s folly

Initiative 1033, conservative political activist Tim Eyman’s latest ballot measure, is bad for businesses large and small and could not come at a worse time for our economy.

Even as we all hear reports that the recession is coming to an end, businesses in Vancouver and all across Clark County continue to struggle. Turning our economy around will not be easy – especially if voters approve I-1033 this November.

Let us not forget mistakes made more than a decade ago by voters in another state. Shortly after Colorado voters passed a similar initiative in 1992, the measure had to be repealed because it cut-off essential funding for the state’s schools, roads and bridges and businesses. Colorado’s economic growth decreased and fell far behind neighboring states just as the country emerged from that decade’s painful recession. Funding for K-12 education in Colorado dropped to 49th in the nation, resulting in the state being ranked among the lowest in the U.S. in high school graduation rates.

Do we have any reason to believe it would be different in Washington state? Not really. Eyman imported two fundamental – and damaging – elements of Colorado’s law. Like the Colorado measure, I-1033 would cap state and local spending at today’s recessionary levels, making the cuts caused by the recession permanent and determining future increases with a flawed formula based on inflation and population growth.

Though this funding formula may sound reasonable, I-1033 would have an immensely negative impact on our ability to educate our workforce, as well as maintain our local roads, both of which are lifelines for a growing economy.

The recession has forced state and local government to cut $1.5 billion in funding to our public secondary schools and universities – with $4.7 million cut from Vancouver public schools alone. This has led to more crowded classrooms and fewer teachers in our schools. For our public colleges and universities, a $500 million cut resulted in double-digit tuition increases. I-1033’s arbitrary limits would make these cuts permanent and cost jobs as companies look elsewhere for a highly-trained workforce.

The quality of our schools will not be the only casualty of I-1033. Eyman’s initiative also looks to undercut other foundations on which our local economy could grow.

Under I-1033, the recent $2 million public investment in Vancouver’s waterfront might not have happened. The same is true for the $1.3 billion Vancouver Waterfront Redevelopment project set to create an estimated 12,000 construction jobs and 2,500 permanent jobs for the area.

Clark County recently announced I-1033 would mean choosing between building new roads and paying police officers because there wouldn’t be enough money to do both.

The nonpartisan Office of Financial Management released a study estimating a reduction in state revenues by $5.9 billion if voters approve I-1033. Cities and counties would drop $2.8 billion over the next five years.

Despite Eyman’s claims, I-1033 would mean fewer jobs and more crowded classrooms. Under his initiative, state residents would feel the recession’s impact long after the rest of the country begins to recover.

I-1033’s rigid and over-simplistic formula has been tested and it has failed miserably.

In closing, Eyman’s initiative is bad for business and would slow our economy just as it begins to rebound. Eyman may not want our government to grow, but under I-1033 businesses would not grow either.

More than 250 organizations are working together to defeat I-1033. These include the Greater Vancouver Chamber of Commerce, Camas-Washougal Chamber of Commerce, East Vancouver Business Association, Vancouver Education Association, Vancouver Firefighters, Vancouver Police Officers’ Guild, Washington State Hospital Association, Washington Education Association, League of Education Voters, Washington State PTA, Community Health Network of Washington, AARP Washington and the Washington Roundtable.

For more information, visit http://no1033.com.

Business Around the Northwest

Key economist sees long recovery ahead, South Sound Business Examiner

Avoid these scary investment moves, Kitsap Peninsula Business Journal

Workers’ compensation premiums could rise 7.6 percent, Bellingham Business Journal

► On the Record

“We believe in what the founding fathers believed was important – limited government.”

-- Jeff Kropf, state director for the Americans for Prosperity in Oregon and southwest Washington, in a speech on Tuesday at the Clark County Building Industry Association’s monthly meeting.

Reporter's Notebook

-John McDonagh can be reached at jmcdonagh@vbjusa.com

Business and the pursuit of being his Honor the Mayor

Almost from the moment the campaign began, many of our readers have asked whether the Vancouver Business Journal would endorse one of the candidates for mayor of the city of Vancouver.

We gave the matter much thought and deliberation. We poured over Councilmember Tim Leavitt and Mayor Royce Pollard’s positions on the issues, attended many of their numerous debates and heard both men talk about their vision for the future of a city many of us hold dear – America’s Vancouver.

Even after all that – a year or so after this much-contested mayoral race in Vancouver first started rolling – the Vancouver Business Journal has decided not to endorse either candidate in the contest.

Here’s why: For us to endorse a candidate for any office he or she should be the one best suited to address the needs of business through their elected position.

There are many considerations for choosing our mayor. Our interest is by definition easy – is the candidate one who understands business and willing to advocate strongly on our behalf? In our opinion the differences between these two candidates is hardly significant.

When we look at the many issues facing this city, the campaigns of Leavitt and Pollard have much more similarities than differences. And most importantly given the focus of this publication, after studying each candidate’s claims of being the person the business community can rely on to advance their needs through 2013, we see no clear distinction.

Let us first consider their endorsers. A check of their campaign websites shows both Pollard and Leavitt with the support of a variety of businesses, both large and small. So, from a business community support standpoint, there’s not much difference.

Both candidates claim more will be done on behalf of Vancouver businesses. Both claim job creation is the key to economic vitality and offer promises to put plans in motion to address the issue. Both promise to create a business advisory group to help focus the city’s efforts.

The incumbent candidate points to his personal effort to keep major employers and their jobs in the city. His challenger offers his personal experience running a local business as the reason he can carry the business-issues banner best.

At the end of the day, the mayor of Vancouver is one vote on a seven member council. How that vote is leveraged is really what this long mayoral contest is all about. Or as Hamlet might say: ‘Whether ‘tis nobler to travel boldly and smash Portland-themed coffee mugs – or facilitate discussion closer to home, inviting comment and collaboration?’ That is our question.

In recent weeks, the candidates have made attempts to distance themselves from the other, and of late have taken to the tactic of proclaiming the shortcomings of their opponent rather than explaining why they deserve your vote.

Here comes the disappointing realization. Aside from whether or not bridge tolls should be part of the proposed Columbia River Crossing project – a subject which the Mayor of Vancouver has some influence but no decision-making authority – there is little difference between the candidates as it relates to doing business in the city of Vancouver.

We are a city of large employers and Mom & Pops; boutiques and manufacturers; professional servicers and distributors.

Vancouver is a business community of size and consequence in the region because we have all of these elements and more. Without any of these businesses we are less complete. Consequently, our city’s future business strategy cannot be a zero-sum game. It can’t be large employers at the expense of small boutiques, just as it cannot be the Mom & Pop store at the expense of professional services.

Both candidates have missed an opportunity to unite the business community behind their candidacy. Our next mayor needs to provide the leadership that assures large employers and small businesses of their local value and contribution.

Business Around the Northwest

State touts tax ranking, South Sound Business Examiner

Washington County gives developers a tax break, Portland Daily Journal of Commerce

Reports of newspapers’ death greatly exaggerated, Idaho Business Journal

► On the Record

“We need a single program … which will assure that every American in need has access to affordable, quality medical care.”

-- Rep. Brian Baird (D-Vanc.), calling for a single, pre-paid healthcare program in an editorial in Monday’s Seattle Times. Baird also advocated a repeal of the federal income tax, to be replaced by a “progressive” sales tax on goods and services.

Reporter's Notebook

Paul Leonard can be reached at pleonard@vbjusa.com


Turning out the vote

If you’ve been driving, shopping or just walking your dog down the block the past couple of weeks in or around Clark County, the signs of next month’s ritualistic exercise in American Democracy seem to be everywhere.

Literally.

The signs, billboards, mailers, canvassers – even people allegedly impersonating as canvassers – have sprouted from Fircrest to Hazel Dell. With the first contested Vancouver mayoral race in decades and two statewide initiatives touching on the hot-button issues of gay civil unions and taxes, it seems everyone has an opinion that they aren’t afraid to print in big, black letters or drape in red, white or blue bunting.

While the extra color along Clark County roadways and strewn on kitchen countertops may be good for the region’s sign-makers and direct-mailers, it may not translate into one crucial thing – higher voter turnout.

According to Clark County Election Supervisor Tim Likness, only about 45 percent of eligible voters are expected to mail in their ballots in this year’s general election. Even with the recent dust-up between contenders Councilman Tim Leavitt and Royce Pollard over tolls, taxes and everything East Vancouver-related, that’s an increase of only 2 percent over the county’s last off-year election in 2007.

Granted, that figure includes many Clark County voters outside Vancouver city limits. But between Tim Eyman’s potentially fiscally-disastrous Initiative 1033 and voters deciding the fate of Washington state’s “everything-but-marriage” law with Referendum 71, there’s plenty riding on this election for everyone.

So why is voter turnout in off-year elections so stubbornly low?

Speaking to VBJ this afternoon, Likness had a few ideas. First, Vancouver’s mayoral contest aside, only 34 races are contested out of a total of 81 across the county. And though the two statewide measures up for voter approval are contentious, in past years there have been as many as six initiatives or referendums on the ballot.

Even still, this year’s general election numbers are set to be half that of 2008, with the thousands of new voters helping to make history on the national stage last year seemingly content to sit this one out.

Today, the focus of some poll-watchers is decidedly smaller. “Unfortunately, this is a local election,” said Leavitt campaign manager Temple Lentz, speaking of Clark County voter turnout projections. “This is the most we could expect.”