Welcome, class, to Math 101. Yes, Jimmy?
“Professor, don’t you usually teach politics or journalism or logic?”
Very true, Jimmy. And I’d be the first to admit math is not my strong point. But it’s always good to have a little math background when you’re dealing with politicians.
You see, politicians control lots and lots — and I mean lots — of your dollars, so sometimes even a little simple addition will help you try to figure them out.
OK, let’s get started. As you know, it’s a class requirement to read The Columbian. Anyone see anything in it recently where the city might be trying to raise some extra cash? Jake?
“Indeed. It had a story about the city considering a parks levy. Nothing set in stone yet, but, if passed, it could raise $7 million for parks.”
Very good. Now does anyone know what the city now spends on parks? Hannah?
“Yes, the story said the city currently is spending $9 million, I think from the general fund.”
That’s correct. So, do the math. How much would the city be spending on parks if the levy passes? Max?
“Well, that’s pretty simple professor: $9 million plus $7 million is $16 million.”
Noodles, you have something to add?
“The Columbian story said if the levy passes, the parks would be getting $10 million, not $16 million. What’s up with that?”
Ahhhhhh. Nice catch, Noodles. What is up with that? See how math is important? Where is the missing $6 million? Cooper?
“It’s not really missing, professor. That $6 million is right there in the general fund where it always was. And the city will simply spend it on other things. And the city has been very upfront about all of this.”
Fair point, Cooper. But does anyone feel anything a little off-kilter about all of this? Danni?
“Well, as I think about it, the city is asking to vote for a $7 million levy for parks. But what the residents really are getting is $1 million for parks. Indirectly, the residents are voting to increase the general fund much more than a parks fund. A cynical person might even call this a bait-and-switch.”
That might be a little harsh, Danni, but in the end it does look like if voters pass the parks levy, the end result will be 87 percent of the extra money would not go to parks but rather to the general fund. Fernando?
“But isn’t there something to be said — if the levy passes — for the idea that at least the money raised would be dedicated to parks?”
Good point, Fernando. But, again, one can’t escape the math. The numbers are the numbers. You know, it’s much more difficult to go to the public and ask for a general fund increase. That’s because the public is very skeptical of how politicians spend our tax dollars. And this appears to be a way of asking the public for a specific thing — parks — but the end result would be the extra money would go to a general thing. Jimmy?
“I wonder what the mayor would say about all of this?”
Well, I asked the mayor about all of this. Here’s what he said:
“The numbers could be perceived that way.”
Danni?
“I love math, professor!”
Class dismissed.
Lou Brancaccio is The Columbian’s editor. Reach him at 360-735-4505, http://twitter.com/lounews or lou.brancaccio@columbian.com.
