4 minutes
Key PointsKing County's fiscal management has come under intense scrutiny as it faces a projected $150 million budget shortfall for the 2026-2027 biennium. This alarming deficit is not an isolated incident but rather the culmination of years of fiscal mismanagement and a persistent reliance on increasing taxes to cover escalating expenditures. The County Council's habitual approach of expanding services without implementing strategies to foster a robust business environment has exacerbated the financial strain, leading to a precarious fiscal situation.
Much of the blame has been directed at a state law enacted in 2001, which caps property tax revenue increases at 1% per year, plus revenue from new construction. King County Budget Director Dwight Dively emphasized this point: "This deficit is entirely due to the state law that limits property tax revenue increases to 1% per year, plus the value of new construction. This law has been in effect for 23 years."
However, attributing the county's financial woes solely to this tax limitation is a convenient excuse that overlooks deeper issues. The 1% cap has been in place for over two decades, providing ample time for the County Council to adjust its fiscal strategies accordingly. Instead, the council has continued its pattern of increasing spending without implementing meaningful reforms to control costs or enhance revenue through economic growth.
In November 2024, the King County Council approved a $10.2 billion budget for 2025, allocating substantial funds to various initiatives:
- $56 million in bond funding for affordable housing projects near transit stations.
- $113 million for increased bus and mobility services, expanded RapidRide service, and enhanced connectivity for Link light rail expansions.
While these investments address critical regional priorities, they also significantly increase the county's financial obligations. The council's decision to fund these initiatives without corresponding measures to boost revenue through economic development reflects a persistent "tax and spend" mentality and could have been avoided.
The council's failure to foster a pro-business environment has stifled potential revenue growth. The county has missed opportunities to broaden its tax base and generate sustainable income by not prioritizing policies that attract and retain businesses. This oversight has led to a greater reliance on existing taxpayers to shoulder the financial burden, resulting in repeated calls for tax increases.
The analogy of the King County Council operating as a private business is apt. In the private sector, a company continually increasing spending without managing costs or developing strategies to enhance revenue would quickly face insolvency. Such a business would be compelled to implement cost-cutting measures, innovate to stay competitive, and create value to attract customers. However, the council's current practices reflect a lack of fiscal discipline and strategic foresight that would be untenable in a private enterprise.
Moreover, the council's approach has led to a structural gap where revenues grow much lower than the cost of maintaining services. This gap is projected to result in a $35 million imbalance in the General Fund for 2025.
The council's response to these challenges has been to seek assistance from the state legislature, advocating for legislative fixes to address the county's structural financial issues. While seeking external support may provide temporary relief, it does not address the underlying problems of fiscal mismanagement and the need for internal reforms.
King County's fiscal crisis directly results from the County Council's longstanding mismanagement. The council's reliance on increasing taxes to fund expanding services without implementing strategies to foster economic growth and manage expenses has led to a precarious financial situation. The council must adopt a more disciplined fiscal approach, prioritize the development of a pro-business environment, and implement effective cost-management strategies to ensure the county's long-term financial stability. Continually returning to the over-taxed taxpayer and asking for more money while being fiscally irresponsible and misguided must stop. Ultimately, the voter must start replacing the existing council with more fiscally educated representatives who understand the concept of living within their means.
0
0
By 
