Published: Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Might Snohomish County budget fixes come due in 2010?
Though he let it pass, Executive Aaron Reardon sees problems with the County Council's budget
EVERETT — Snohomish County Executive Aaron Reardon has called the County Council's 2010 budget the equivalent of an adjustable-rate mortgage that will balloon in the future.
The year ahead will show whether his prediction is right.
Reardon warned that the council's plan is full of one-time financial fixes that won't get the county “out of the soup.” He let it pass last week, saying he couldn't sign it in good conscience, but knew any veto by him would be overridden.
“Clearly I was hoping for a more responsible approach, especially after last year,” he said. “I told them the budget wouldn't last a full 12 months and we were back in March fixing it.”
Council Chairman Mike Cooper and his council colleagues have acknowledged that they might have to make future changes. Cooper contends, however, their budget is a responsible and creative way to meet the county's recession challenges.
Their plan gives most of the county's 2,700 workers five unpaid furlough days. That's equal to a 1.9 percent pay cut. Reardon's earlier proposal, which they scrapped, called for 15 furlough days or a 5.7 percent pay cut.
Unions still have to agree to the concessions.
The general fund budget supporting essential county services for next year is $202.7 million. That's about the same as in 2009 — after county leaders and labor unions passed emergency cost-saving measures to carve out an additional $6.7 million in savings. The bulk of the savings came from 11 furlough days for most of the county work force. Next year, sheriff's deputies and other public-safety workers will face pay cuts equivalent in value to the mandatory furloughs. They were exempt this year.
The 2010 budget also:
Restores $300,000 in funding for Washington State University Snohomish County Extension programs.
Keeps money for senior centers, family support centers and youth services, veterans support and nurse and family partnerships.
Mandates a study for taking the county's Department of Information Services away from the executive's office and placing it under the auditor's office, to save money and improve efficiency. Reardon called that proposal a “distraction” that makes no sense.
Orders the planning department to develop, by June, a strategy to cope with reduced revenue from the sluggish housing market and annexations of county areas into nearby cities. Much of the planning department's funding comes from building permits.
The council passed its budget 4-1 on Nov. 23. Councilman John Koster, the council's only Republican, cast the lone dissenting vote, saying the budget raised property tax rates instead of lowering them in line with provisions of Initiative 747.* Reardon had 10 working days — until Friday — to sign or veto the budget, or to let it become law without his signature.
The county also passed a new fee, countywide, to fund the Snohomish Conservation District. The fee is $5 per parcel, plus 5 cents per acre. The owner of a 10-acre parcel would pay an extra $5.50 per year. Storm-water fees were reduced in most areas to offset the fee.
The budget still leaves at least a few details for county leaders to work out in the weeks and months ahead.
If labor negotiators don't reach agreement on furloughs, county departments might have to make other sacrifices, Cooper said.
As part of the budget, the council also pledged to work on a plan to lower compensation for all elected officials by the equivalent of 1.9 percent to be in line with the rest of the county work force. The cuts would not come from salaries for elected officials, which are set by a commission. Instead, they would have to be found by reducing other sources of compensation, such as car allowances.
Reardon, meanwhile, has cast a wary eye toward 2010. On Tuesday, he offered another metaphor for the budget he didn't support. He likened it to the Wimpy character from the Popeye cartoons who always promised, “I would gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today.”
“That Tuesday keeps on getting delayed,” he said. “It's being put off until it the number's going to be so big, that it will paralyze the county.”
Noah Haglund: 425-339-3465, nhaglund@heraldnet.com.
*Correction, Dec. 17, 2009: This article originally misstated Koster's reasoning.
The year ahead will show whether his prediction is right.
Reardon warned that the council's plan is full of one-time financial fixes that won't get the county “out of the soup.” He let it pass last week, saying he couldn't sign it in good conscience, but knew any veto by him would be overridden.
“Clearly I was hoping for a more responsible approach, especially after last year,” he said. “I told them the budget wouldn't last a full 12 months and we were back in March fixing it.”
Council Chairman Mike Cooper and his council colleagues have acknowledged that they might have to make future changes. Cooper contends, however, their budget is a responsible and creative way to meet the county's recession challenges.
Their plan gives most of the county's 2,700 workers five unpaid furlough days. That's equal to a 1.9 percent pay cut. Reardon's earlier proposal, which they scrapped, called for 15 furlough days or a 5.7 percent pay cut.
Unions still have to agree to the concessions.
The general fund budget supporting essential county services for next year is $202.7 million. That's about the same as in 2009 — after county leaders and labor unions passed emergency cost-saving measures to carve out an additional $6.7 million in savings. The bulk of the savings came from 11 furlough days for most of the county work force. Next year, sheriff's deputies and other public-safety workers will face pay cuts equivalent in value to the mandatory furloughs. They were exempt this year.
The 2010 budget also:
Keeps money for senior centers, family support centers and youth services, veterans support and nurse and family partnerships.
Mandates a study for taking the county's Department of Information Services away from the executive's office and placing it under the auditor's office, to save money and improve efficiency. Reardon called that proposal a “distraction” that makes no sense.
Orders the planning department to develop, by June, a strategy to cope with reduced revenue from the sluggish housing market and annexations of county areas into nearby cities. Much of the planning department's funding comes from building permits.
The council passed its budget 4-1 on Nov. 23. Councilman John Koster, the council's only Republican, cast the lone dissenting vote, saying the budget raised property tax rates instead of lowering them in line with provisions of Initiative 747.* Reardon had 10 working days — until Friday — to sign or veto the budget, or to let it become law without his signature.
The county also passed a new fee, countywide, to fund the Snohomish Conservation District. The fee is $5 per parcel, plus 5 cents per acre. The owner of a 10-acre parcel would pay an extra $5.50 per year. Storm-water fees were reduced in most areas to offset the fee.
The budget still leaves at least a few details for county leaders to work out in the weeks and months ahead.
If labor negotiators don't reach agreement on furloughs, county departments might have to make other sacrifices, Cooper said.
As part of the budget, the council also pledged to work on a plan to lower compensation for all elected officials by the equivalent of 1.9 percent to be in line with the rest of the county work force. The cuts would not come from salaries for elected officials, which are set by a commission. Instead, they would have to be found by reducing other sources of compensation, such as car allowances.
Reardon, meanwhile, has cast a wary eye toward 2010. On Tuesday, he offered another metaphor for the budget he didn't support. He likened it to the Wimpy character from the Popeye cartoons who always promised, “I would gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today.”
“That Tuesday keeps on getting delayed,” he said. “It's being put off until it the number's going to be so big, that it will paralyze the county.”
Noah Haglund: 425-339-3465, nhaglund@heraldnet.com.
*Correction, Dec. 17, 2009: This article originally misstated Koster's reasoning.
Comments
(
