Legislative Commentary: April 18, 2019

Dear Friends,

While I spent hour after hour this week debating and voting on legislation in the budget committee and in the Senate chamber, a woman from the town of Snohomish was out in front of the Capitol conducting what she calls a “fast in solidarity with starting southern resident orcas.”

An elderly woman staging a one-person protest to call attention to the orca situation is bound to attract the attention of the news media. It’s an easy story to tell, with lots of pictures and video to use. But what caught my eye are the words at the bottom of the white dry-erase board the woman is using to explain what she’s doing: Breach the Dams! Now!

One of the many reasons I didn’t support the Senate budget last week is its $750,000 appropriation to the governor’s office to study issues associated with breaching the four federal dams on the lower Snake River. I realize this funding is a result of the governor’s 2018 orca task force and its politically motivated finding that dam-breaching should be explored further. But as I explained when (unsuccessfully) offering a budget amendment to instead put that $750,000 toward increasing hatchery salmon production, the fact remains that the dams are federal property. Anyone who thinks the governor or the Legislature has any control over those dams is misguided – just like the budget appropriation. The state should invest those dollars where they can actually accomplish something: in our state-run hatcheries.

It was great to visit this week with Whitman County Commissioner Mike Largent and Franklin County Commissioner Brad Peck. Otherwise, and unfortunately, the week consisted of majority Democrats jamming dozens of House-approved bills through the budget committee Monday and Tuesday, and us spending the past three days out on the Senate floor, where our side worked to defend hardworking taxpayers, public employees, and others (like those who value the Second Amendment) against some lousy legislation. We didn’t wrap up until 9 p.m. today, and we’ll be working at least part of tomorrow (Saturday) also, so any trips home to the farm will have to wait until Easter weekend.

Fortunately, I was able to enjoy a taste of home yesterday – it was the annual and very popular “Beef Day” on the Capitol campus, when the Washington Cattlemen’s Association showcases our state’s livestock industry by grilling up a whole bunch of tri-tip (and asparagus).

Pressure continues for school-funding bailout

Headlines like today’s “Spokane schools issues 325 layoff notices amid budget shortfall” might lead readers to wonder what’s going on with K-12 funding, and conclude that the Legislature is the cause. Here’s information the news report doesn’t mention.

In the course of greatly increasing the state-level investment in K-12 education from 2013 through 2017, legislators also placed a cap of $1.50 per $1,000 assessed valuation on local levies. That was in 2017. We did it to rebalance the amount of state versus local funding going to schools, and prevent a future imbalance like the one that prompted the multi-year McCleary lawsuit.

Unfortunately, many in the education community are now saying the $1.50 cap is causing local funding shortages, and seeking a legislative bailout. This is in spite of the increased state funding, and also overlooks the effect of salary negotiations in 2018.

Spokane Public Schools saw a $46.4 million gain in total funding between last school year and the current school year. That’s a 15.4% increase despite the $1.50 local-levy cap (again, because state funding increased dramatically). The question is whether 325 employees are receiving layoff notices because of the local-levy cap, or because of the pay raises agreed to by SPS this past year, which averaged 13.2% (and at the time, the district knew that might push it into the red).

Democrats on the Senate budget committee have endorsed a “lift” of the $1.50 local-levy cap that could raise property taxes statewide by around $800 million. The House Democrats have proposed a different form of bailout – still a levy-related change, based on a percentage instead of a dollar amount. Either one would put state government back on the road toward another school-funding lawsuit.

Our side believes that if school districts still have common funding needs that aren’t being met by the tens of billions of dollars already going into K-12, we should be talking about how to address those at the state level, and leave the local-levy limit in place. An example is special education – districts were using that to justify the push for a levy-lid lift, but the Legislature is instead planning to make a significant new investment at the state level.