Seattle voters weigh fate of espresso tax
By Rebecca Cook

Sept. 16, 2003 | SEATTLE (AP) -- Voters in this caffeine capital went to the polls Tuesday to decide the fate of a proposed 10-cent tax on espresso drinks, an initiative that has jolted an otherwise sleepy, off-year primary with a double shot of controversy.

The tax would tap the lifeblood of a city where fancy espresso drinks are sold on nearly every street corner and where Starbucks _ and a generation of upscale coffee shops _ were born.

Initiative sponsor John Burbank says people who spend $3 to $5 on coconut mochas or iced vanilla lattes can afford an extra dime for kids. The tax would raise millions of dollars each year for the city's preschool and day-care programs.

"People will be very happy to purchase their tall double latte and know 10 cents is going to the children of Seattle," an optimistic Burbank said Tuesday.

But coffee shop owners, including Seattle-based Starbucks, have been fighting the tax.

Jeff Babcock, owner of Zoka Coffee and Roasters, staged a Boston Tea party-style protest earlier this month, throwing burlap coffee bags into Seattle's Green Lake.

The bags were filled with balloons, both to aid their recovery and because even the most ardent Seattle political protest doesn't warrant wasting perfectly good espresso beans.

"It's not a luxury item as far as the culture here," Babcock said Tuesday. "It's a cold, wet, damp environment. Coffee's big, and everyone loves their lattes."

Most of his customers are the sort of Seattle liberals who dutifully vote for every school bond levy, Babcock said, but they are not going for the espresso tax: "They just think it's a crazy tax."

The ballot measure, Initiative 77, would not tax regular drip coffee, only espresso drinks.

Proponents say it would raise at least $6.5 million a year, while a more conservative City Council estimate says the revenue would likely top out at $3.5 million annually.

If the tax passes, the money would pay for local preschool programs modeled on Head Start, grants to help poor families pay for child care, and raises for child-care workers with advanced training. Many of these programs are hurting for money after several rounds of budget cuts.