Eyman hopes I-892 gamble will pay off

Businessman gathers support and criticism in Moses Lake

Tim Eyman's latest gamble has people throughout the state supporting him, while others look at it with unfriendly eyes.

The anti-tax crusader from Mukilteo said that the way his latest initiative, I-892, known as "Just Treat Us The Same," works, is by imposing a new tax on gambling, and later using that revenue from that tax to reduce property taxes.

Eyman said I-892 allows non-tribal gambling establishments to operate slot machines, and, he said, it does not touch any state programs.

"It takes a 35 percent tax and it puts it on a new account," he said.

The account, called the "Equal Treatment; Equal Lower Property Tax"account, would take whatever amount is gathered from that gambling tax on a given year, and then apply it to the state property tax figures for the next year.

For example, Eyman said, if the initiative takes effect in 2005, generating $400 million, the following year the state property levy instead of reaching $2.4 million, it would reach $2 million, thanks to the gambling tax money.

The initiative, which needs to collect 200,000 signatures by early July, has found supporters and detractors in Moses Lake.

Bruce Russell, part-owner of Lake Bowl, said that the effect on his business of not being able to have slot machines is significant. However, he said the issue is not as much about finances as it is about fairness.

"How come if they (slot machines) are legal in the state, we can't have them?" he asked. "There are casinos being built all over the state by the tribes, they pay no taxes, and they put nothing back into the system."

Joseph Pakootas, chairman of the business council of the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, did not return the Herald's phone calls.

Russell added that it is not a huge expense to play the slots, so placing them locally would be a way for everybody to benefit from them.

Lake Bowl owners contributed $2,500 to Eyman's cause, Russell said. The reason for the support, he added, was because he believes the initiative will fulfill its promise of property reduction by one-fourth and it will not cost anybody anything.

Others are not so convinced.

Bob Taylor, accounting division manager for the city of Moses Lake, said that Eyman's plan to offset revenue reductions by means of a gambling tax is not a sure thing.

"A sure thing is something people do constantly," he said. "Everybody pays property taxes, you know exactly what they are going to be each year."

Gambling, he said, is done by those who can afford it, or have access to it, and the total figures could vary from year to year.

Eyman refuted the predictions of uncertain financial outcomes for the state, saying the revenue will not be based on mere projections.

"It's impossible for the state to lose any money," Eyman said, "because the initiative creates new revenue." He added that one percent of the revenues would go towards helping the plight of problem gamblers.

Jim Whitaker, city attorney for the city of Moses Lake, said that the initiative assumes that there is much more gambling in Washington than there actually is.

"It would not generate near the revenue (Eyman) thinks it would," Whitaker said, adding that with electronic slots throughout the state, Washington would begin to look like Nevada.

"I don't know if Washingtonians are ready for that," he said. Besides, he added, most people who want to engage in some kind of gambling already can.

Whitaker hinted that Eyman's idea of offsetting property taxes with building revenues is a risky one. "What if he is wrong, and we don't generate as much (gambling) income," he asked. "This is a new revenue source, but it will not enhance state revenue if there is a loss of property taxes."

All the opposition spurs Eyman's desire to see his latest initiative through.

"If this were a wacky idea with no hope of passing," Eyman said, "the newspapers would not spend column inches on it and the opponents would not go hysterical. They are going hysterical because they know voters are listening."

Whitaker added that his biggest concern regarding I-892 is not that it would severely affect local governments such as Moses Lake, but that it may violate Washington's two-subject rule, where one law contains two subject matters, which is what led the state's supreme court to declare Eyman's I-695 unconstitutional.

Eyman said that that people's dislike of the idea would be like adding gasoline to the fire of public enthusiasm.

"Supporters and opponents are doing whatever they can to advertise (the initiative)," he said. "I say 'keep bashing on it.'"