In recent weeks, we’ve outlined some of the budget considerations in addition to K-12 education that the Legislature is going to have to address when it convenes in January, including transportation, community colleges and the state’s Wildlife and Recreation Program.
As we’ve said before, much of the Legislature’s focus will be on basic education and the mandate that the state allocate enough funding to satisfy the state Supreme Court’s order under the McCleary decision. Despite some legislators’ contention that all the Legislature need do is to budget for education and deny funding for anything else that doesn’t fit, lawmakers will have to make some careful choices about spending and about revenue. Otherwise, we risk losing programs that are beneficial to our county and our state and worth the investment of taxpayer dollars, such as the Snohomish Conservation District and the state Conservation Commission.
The conservation district, comprising much of Snohomish County and Camano Island and formed in 1941, is responsible for a range of programs that protect and manage our natural resources, including lease payments to livestock farmers for setbacks from streams to protect salmon habitat, residential storm water management programs that limit pollution running off into Possession Sound and Puget Sound, and Firewise, the Conservation Commission’s program to limit wildfire hazards.
In recent years, the Snohomish Conservation District has looked to partner with other conservation districts.
“We start with locally led priorities, but we’re looking beyond for the common issues with other districts connected to Puget Sound,” said Monte Marti, district manager for Snohomish.
Likewise, the Conservation Commission is looking for ways to improve its effectiveness and avoid duplication of effort by cooperating with other state agencies, such as the Department of Ecology and Department of Fish and Wildlife, said Ron Shultz, the department’s policy adviser.
Even as it has found ways to get the most from its taxpayer support, the Conservation Commission, which provides funding to the individual districts, has been asked, as other state agencies have, to present a budget request that reflects a 15 percent cut to its operations, cutting $2 million from the agency’s $13.5 million budget for 2015-17.
The result, Shutlz said, when you factor in the loss of in-kind investments from farmers, landowners, agencies and others, is the elimination of more than 100 jobs statewide, $13.5 million in economic output and environmental benefits from projects that are delayed or can’t be funded at all.
There are choices to be made by lawmakers as to what we can afford and how we pay for worthwhile investments, but few cuts will come without consequences. In this instance, the health of our land and water in Snohomish County is what’s involved.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
