EVERETT — Snohomish County lawmakers sounded a cooperative tone on the budget Monday, even as the gravity of failing to get over their disagreements became clearer.
The impasse stems from Executive John Lovick’s decision on Wednesday to veto the council’s 2015 budget.
If the five council members fail to muster at least four votes for a new budget plan by Dec. 31, all but the most essential government functions would cease as of Jan. 1.
“I look forward to working with all of you to make sure we don’t take that route,” Councilwoman Stephanie Wright said.
Wright was on the short end of the 3-2 vote council vote that led to the budget’s approval late last month.
Council Chairman Dave Somers, who played a lead role drafting the budget that Lovick vetoed, said he also feels the sense of urgency.
“We all share council member Wright’s strong commitment to work this out and avoid a shutdown,” Somers said.
It’s unclear what a shutdown would look like. County attorneys could find no sign that it’s ever happened in Washington.
“There are a number of issues that are unprecedented in Washington state,” said Jason Cummings, the county’s chief civil deputy prosecutor. “It’s the first time that our office that has been able to identify that a county has been in a situation where there’s been a concern of an inability to pass a budget. That is all hypothetical at this point, because the council has a certain amount of time within which it can act.”
The County Council on Monday hinted at ways to reach consensus but didn’t take action. Concrete proposals are likely to surface during the council’s regular meeting at 9 a.m. Wednesday. Before then, expect a flurry of one-on-one meetings behind closed doors and efforts to draft compromise legislation.
The council’s operating budget would have provided for about $226 million in services. Because it set aside recent property-tax increases to pay for a new $162 million courthouse, the council version of the budget had less money available than Lovick’s $230 million plan for next year. Lovick’s budget used the extra taxes for other needs, reasoning that bonds for the future courthouse wouldn’t come due until 2016.
To offset the decrease, the council budget included 1.5 percent cuts to most county departments. The decrease was half that amount for the Sheriff’s Office, which also operates the jail.
The council’s spending plan highlighted sharp differences with Lovick’s administration.
They cut funding in half, to $450,000, for the First Steps program that supports young mothers and newborns; rolled back salary increases for six top-level managers in Lovick’s administration; and abruptly cut a recently hired manager at the Medical Examiner’s Office, leaving the department leaderless.
The most urgent question to resolve is whether to include new property taxes in next year’s budget. Wednesday is the deadline. After that, it will be too late for the county treasurer to add the tax increase to the tax rolls, Cummings said.
A 1 percent increase in the county’s general levy would add about $822,000 next year. That could help smooth over some of the differences between Lovick’s administration and a majority of the council. In theory, that could help avoid some staff cuts and restore funding for First Steps.
Both Lovick and Somers supported the 1 percent tax increase, but it got voted down by a majority of the council. It would cost an extra $2.53 per year for the owner of a house assessed at the countywide average of $244,000.
Reaching agreements on the budget will require council members to set aside disagreements that have grown increasingly personal.
On Friday, Councilman Brian Sullivan sent Somers a letter criticizing his leadership and accusing him of seeking political gain by disagreeing with Lovick. All council members and The Daily Herald were copied on the letter.
Sullivan wrote about being disappointed in the decision of a majority of the council to spend $15,000 to hire an attorney to investigate alleged comments by Lovick’s top administrator, Deputy Executive Mark Ericks. Somers and two other councilmen believe Ericks’ comments were hostile and threatening toward them.
Meanwhile, county managers need to prepare in case council members can’t resolve the deadlock.
“As we move forward, one of our main concerns is what happens in a government shutdown,” Cummings told the council.
Should that happen, law enforcement and the jail would have to keep running. Some law enforcement duties of a less urgent nature might need to be put on hold.
Public safety isn’t the only mandatory or essential function of government.
Under state law, the county is obligated to continue some investment and tax functions, treasurer Kirke Sievers said.
There’s also the question of trash disposal, given the essential role of county transfer stations.
There’s little case law and few past examples to guide the county.
“By no means is this a clear-cut pathway — it’s not,” Cummings said.
Noah Haglund: 425-339-3465, nhaglund@heraldnet.com. Twitter: @NWhaglund.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
