Letters for May 8, 2023

Catastrophic repercussions

Voters in Spokane County Fire District 9 just voted not to fund the firefighter’s levy for 2025-2027. On the ballot, a poorly worded summary of the proposed levy made it look as if the property tax increase would be over 125%, when in reality it was an increase of just 13% (not a new tax, and just approximately $72 per year for the average homeowner).

The district will be cutting 70% of its staffing and closing seven of its nine fire stations. Layoffs can begin as early as today, though the fire department is funded through the end of October. The levy failed by less than 1%.

One of the layoffs will be my brother – a recent hire from Texas who is expecting his second baby any day. To lay off 70% of the district’s firefighters will have catastrophic repercussions in an area growing as fast and large as Spokane County. District 9 serves over 40,000 residents over 125 square miles and calls for service were up over 21% in the last three years as growth has exploded.

The public needs to hear about the repercussions of not funding this levy, especially as we head into wildfire season in the Inland Northwest.

Hannah Acheson

Rathdrum

A more sustainable future for Washington state

I am writing to express my support for voting “no” on Initiative 2117.

As a longtime electric vehicle owner, driving a Nissan Leaf powered by solar energy, I am deeply committed to reducing my carbon footprint and advocating for sustainable transportation options. For towing purposes, I recently purchased a Tacoma pickup, to be used for out-of-town trips. By choosing to restrict my use of the Tacoma pickup solely for out-of-town trips and not for local driving, I accept the responsibility of paying additional gasoline taxes.

I firmly believe that through the Cap-and-Trade Act, these contributions will be wisely invested in funding future alternative climate change projects, right here in Washington state. Investing in clean energy infrastructure and incentivizing the use of electric or hybrid vehicles not only benefits our environment but also creates new job opportunities and fosters economic growth. By voting against I-2117, we can ensure a more sustainable future for generations to come. By continuing to support the Cap-and-Trade Act, we give ourselves the means to fund innovative climate change projects within our state, ultimately reducing greenhouse gas emissions and mitigating the impacts of global warming.

I urge fellow citizens to carefully consider the implications of I-2117 and join me in voting “no.” Together, we can foster a cleaner, more sustainable future for Washington while simultaneously promoting a thriving economy through investment in alternative energy solutions.

Jorgen Rasmussen

Otis Orchards

Setting the record straight

As a home care provider, I have to set the record straight on the misleading column by Eleanor Baumgartner (“Washington voters could make long-term care payroll tax optional,” April 17). Until WA Cares came along, you either had to be wealthy enough to pay out of pocket for care or drain your life savings and sell your assets to qualify for Medicaid. When we pay what I consider to be a tiny amount (roughly $6 a week for someone making $50,000) in contributions to build our own benefit, we are taking responsibility for our long-term care needs and saving the state and taxpayers millions of dollars.

With WA Cares, we only contribute when we work. With private long term care insurance ($2,000-$5,000/year with rising premiums, 90-day waiting period and higher costs for women than men) you have to keep paying even if you are out of work or living on a fixed income after retiring. And buyer beware, if you have a pre-existing condition (like half of us do), you will likely be denied a policy in the private marketplace.

Washington’s new long-term care benefit program is a game changer, giving us choices and room to breathe during what can be the most vulnerable, stressful time of their lives. That’s why I was so upset to hear that some mega millionaire from California bankrolled Initiative 2124. They worded it to sound reasonable – make WA Cares voluntary, but experts say that would kill the program, taking our benefits away.

Susie Young

Spokane