Effective government

Tax any Non-Profit Who Pays any Executive over $100,000

Did you know that a MAJORITY of commercial properties in SE Seattle are owned by non-profits? Please check with County tax assessor records, which is avbailable online. And there's more on the way.


Any private development that will create jobs and economic development in the SE (such as the Goodwill/Target project proposed for Dearborn Street) are consistently frustrated by the Limousine Liberals on the Council (such as Sally Clark).


Hey, but you have a low-income housing project, an "artists commune," some ex-convicts, current habitual drunks and drug dealers who need a rehab spot? Well, then why didn't you say so in the first place? The City will give you funding and roll out the red carpet of approval before you can say "starving pygmy children in the Kalahari".


So here's my question. How do our schools and other public infrastructure that depend on property taxes get funded, when the vast majority of commercial property is tax-free? Adding insult to the injury of the lost opportunity cost of jobs and other economic benefits that a private sector business would have brought instead of yet another "funded by the Seattle Housing Levy" project!


As for the non-profits, only a handful (literally, less than 10 out of the 100s) have a mission that they are truly effective in achieveing. With the vast majority (and I won't name any names, but you know who you are), it's really hard to understand their mission or raison d'etre, other than of course to perpetuate their existanece, shout that the sky is falling and the homeless will fall out of the sky if their funding is touched, all the while paying huge salaries to their executives and charging higher rents than private proeprty owners for supposedly "affordable housing" subsidized by taxpayer dollars.


Many of these non-profits "execs" do not have the skills or education to get a job heading the mail room of any Fortune 500 company.



76 votes
Idea No. 181