Money-is-no-object view doesn’t serve taxpayers well

My decision to veto the County Council’s $163 million property tax increase was easy. The $163 million property tax proposal to ask voters to pay for a new government building was simply too large, too expensive and ill-planned.

Public officials have an obligation to be thoughtful and use care to protect the public’s money from poor investments. Unfortunately, history demonstrates a pattern of decisions that have placed an unnecessary burden on the backs of Snohomish County taxpayers.

Several events in recent years lead me to this conclusion:

n In 2004, the County Council purchased more than 200 acres in South Everett known as the Cathcart property for $31 million. The council purchased this property with the hopes of selling it to a developer to make a windfall profit. After five years property values have dropped, the property still has not been sold and there is no prospective buyer. While the intent of this purchase was understandable, it is costing taxpayers more than $100,000 a month in loan payments.

n Beginning in 2004 the County Council directed the Snohomish Health District to spend its reserves for ongoing programs against the warnings of the health officer, Dr. Ward Hinds. Dr. Hinds informed the council that this action would lead to devastating cuts in front-line public health services by 2009. As promised, the district is facing a $4 million shortfall, significant layoffs and elimination of public health services.

n In 2005, the County Council voted to increase its pay and the pay of other county elected officials by more than 16 percent. I vetoed this proposal because it was out of line with the cost-of-living adjustments being given to front-line county service providers.

n In 2006, the County Council approved a budget that increased staffing levels and annual spending to unsustainable levels. Despite warnings from my office and county financial experts that projected revenues could not support their spending plans, the council passed the budget unanimously and without my signature.

n In 2007, in the face of a cooling national economy and slowing revenue projections, the County Council again added more county employees and increased county spending to unsustainable levels. We cautioned the council to take a more measured approach that would not leave our financial house vulnerable to a slowing economy and a declining housing market. The council passed this budget unanimously over my objections and without my signature. Just as with the Health District, unsustainable spending at the direction of the County Council will require deep cuts that were entirely predictable and avoidable.

n During 2008, despite quarterly financial meetings that consistently showed a slowing economy and reductions in revenue, the County Council has added more staff, which increases the projected deficit. To curtail this uncontrollable spending, I have vetoed legislation adding more staff only to have the council override this veto, unanimously. And, I imposed a hiring freeze, restrictions on spending and out-of-state travel for every department, only to have the County Council weaken these cost-saving measures through an emergency ordinance.

This summer, as the national economy slows and the cost of food and gas have soared, people are spending less; meanwhile, Snohomish County government faces a $9 million projected shortfall and the County Council proposes a $163 million property tax increase for a new government building.

The courthouse proposal continues a “money is no object” mentality that is out of touch with the residents of Snohomish County. The building size assumes that the staff operating in our courthouse will grow by more than 387 employees, or 52 percent, by 2025. This projected increase represents a rate of government growth nearly twice the projected population growth in our county’s Comprehensive Plan. It is unrealistic from a planning perspective, and from a financial perspective.

As your countywide elected executive, I take seriously the responsibility vested in me by the public. I believe this government should treat our taxpaying public with respect and we should never ask for more unless it is absolutely necessary or in time of an emergency. This proposal is too big, too expensive, ill-planned and out of touch with the taxpaying public.

Aaron Reardon is the Snohomish County executive.

Talk to us

> Give us your news tips.

> Send us a letter to the editor.

> More Herald contact information.

More in Opinion

toon
Editorial cartoons for Friday, Nov. 7

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

Warner Bros.
"The Lord of the Rings"
Editorial: Gerrymandering presents seductive temptation

Like J.R.R. Tolkein’s ‘One Ring,’ partisan redistricting offers a corrupting, destabilizing power.

Schwab: Trump continues course blithely as voters begin to rouse

Against a backdrop of Democratic election wins, Trump continued with the same old, same old.

Democracy is worth staying, fighting for

In response to a recent letter to the editor suggesting we offer… Continue reading

Issue of Epstein files hasn’t gone away for Trump

I really don’t care about your politics but I’m really concerned that… Continue reading

Bouie: Election shows Trump as albatross around GOP’s neck

Voters are telling Trump and Republicans that they’ve baldy misread the mandate of the 2024 election.

toon
Editorial cartoons for Thursday, Nov. 6

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

Stephens: Why do dumb ideas — from left and right — persist?

A little reflection on past failures ought to be enough to have us keep searching for solutions.

Comment: Food banks are indispensable, but can’t replace SNAP

SNAP has been the most effective anti-poverty program in U.S. history. Its work must be restored.

Comment: California’s gerrymander is sleazy, but necessary

And, as Tuesday’s vote shows, it had the support of a majority of Californians who oppose Trump’s agenda.

Comment: The devil for GOP is in the details of the election

If they care to listen, Republicans were given a warning about their prospects in the 2026 midterms.

Support local journalism

If you value local news, make a gift now to support the trusted journalism you get in The Daily Herald. Donations processed in this system are not tax deductible.