Since 2007, county governments throughout Washington have been slimming down, adhering to a tax diet imposed by voters. Each year, counties are allowed to increase property tax collections by no more than 1 percent over the previous year without approval from the electorate.
This has led to lean and fit governments, combining with the revenue shortfalls of the Great Recession to force cuts to staffing and services. It also has led to a growing discussion about lifting the state’s lid on property tax increases as counties go from lean to starving. While strong arguments can be made on both sides of the issue, the bottom line is that the decision to lift that lid should be in the hands of voters — the same ones who nailed it down in the first place.
In 2001, 58 percent of statewide voters approved Initiative 747, a ballot measure supported by anti-tax crusader Tim Eyman. In 2007, the state Supreme Court ruled the measure unconstitutional, but a special session of the Legislature reinstated it with large majorities in both chambers, and Gov. Chris Gregoire signed it into law. In other words, the public, the House, the Senate and the governor all agreed that a 1 percent limitation should be imposed.
For this, county governments had only themselves to blame. Years of quickly escalating property tax levies, which previously could increase as much as 6 percent a year, had led to a revolt by taxpayers.
Yet, this is where it becomes complicated. In the ensuing decade, the 1 percent cap has moved beyond limiting many county governments to putting the squeeze on them. Clark County has not increased its property tax levy in recent years, but as The (Everett) Herald recently wrote editorially, “county officials throughout the state say the revenue cap isn’t trimming fat any longer, but cutting into the muscle and bone required to offer the services that county residents depend upon.”
The services in question include law enforcement, roads, mental health, parks and recreation, and numerous other amenities that help define a region’s quality of life. The Washington State Association of Counties notes that, among other things, there has been a 5 percent reduction in the number of law enforcement officers at the county level throughout the state, despite the diversion of road maintenance funds to cover public safety. The organization advocates for lifting the 1 percent cap and increasing local control over revenue collection.
We believe this is a valid argument. Rather than buying into the trope that government is an enemy of the people, it is important to recognize that public services represent a collective statement of shared values. At the county level, this means providing mental health services for those who need them, the maintenance of public spaces, the preservation and building of roads and bridges, and economic development that benefits all residents. This opinion is finding a measure of bipartisan support in the Legislature, where bills that would raise the property tax limit are being considered in committee.
Yet while lawmakers can take the matter into their own hands and provide relief for counties, public opinion should be the deciding factor. If there is support for lifting the lid, advocates can collect signatures and present the issue for a statewide vote.
Some 16 years ago, taxpayers opted to place a lid on revenue growth for counties. If those counties now desire to raise that lid, they must take their case to the people and convince voters that changes are necessary to create the best Washington possible.
