The next deadline for the 2017 Legislative session is March
29th. That is the day that bills (except
for budget related bills) must be out of the second house policy committees in
order to continue to be “alive.” So the
next three days are going to be busy moving these bills out.
However, compared to previous years, there really are not a
lot of policy bills left to discuss.
Legislators have really cut down that number to provide time for
education and budget negotiations, both of which are still expected to push the
Legislature past the April 23rd date for the end of the regular session. Many big issues are not necessarily moving
but are still being negotiated, such as climate bills and paid family leave. Fixes to the Hirst decision pertaining to
water access are still being debated as well.
The Legislature has already passed, and the Governor has signed, the fix
to the “levy cliff” situation which allows local districts more time to take
advantage of levy dollars since no permanent fix to McCleary is expected in
time for 2017-18 local district budgets to be established.
This past week was pretty exciting. Between hearings on policy bills, the State
Senate found time to release and pass a budget over to the House of
Representatives. The Senate budget
spends $43 billion in 2017-19 and $50 billion in the 2019-21 biennium. It also does the following in the major SSCLC
areas:
- Adds $1.8 billion in additional K-12 spending in the 2017-19 biennium and then pushes that to $5.9 billion additional K-12 spending in 2019-21.
- Adds $95 million in 2017-19, then $129 million in 2019-21 for staffing and other increases in the state mental health hospitals and for developing additional community options
- Add $75 million in 2017-19 ($88 million in 2019-21) for additional higher education enrollments, maintaining the state need grant, and additional medical school funding
The Senate budget has its share of controversy. Cuts in TANF spending, refusal to adopt the
negotiated state employee collective bargaining agreement, and a move away from
the prototype school model to drive education spending in favor of a per
student FTE minimum are all going to be areas of disagreement with the
House. The House budget is expected to
be released on March 27 and will most likely move out of the House over to the
Senate by the end of the week.
One major difference we will see is that the Senate budget
used cuts and budget transfers to obtain balance with the increased
spending. The House budget is expected
to have a revenue package attached to it instead. Once both budgets are out there, the public
negotiation process will begin.
EDUCATION:
The Senate does have a tax proposal attached to it’s
education bill (a combination of ESSB 5607 and ESSB 5875). It’s a levy swap proposal which creates a new
Local effort levy tax that moves to a rate of 1.55% per $1000 in assessed
value. You have to look at both 5607 and
5875 to get the full education funding proposal. They do a per student FTE minimum of $9,200
starting in the 2018/19 school year, it moves to $10,200 in the 2019/20 school
year and then is indexed to inflation after that. There are then local matches attached to
bring the per student minimum across the state to $12,500. Attached are several links to help you
evaluate the proposal:
- Here is a link to the bill summary for 5875. It includes a summary of 5607 and then what has changed in 5875 — http://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2017-18/Pdf/Bill%20Reports/Senate/5875-S.E%20SBR%20APS%2017.pdf
- Here are links to the “by school district” impact of the proposal to taxpayers —
My hope is that once the House passes its budget, some good
chart making experts will put together a comparison between the House and
Senate to help us really compare the two proposals and the funding
sources. They will be very different to
start since the House proposal that has passed (ESHB 1843) relies on the
prototype school model for determining the per student FTE for basic education
funding.
TRANSPORTATION:
The Senate has moved their Transportation bill to Rules for
a floor vote next week. Overall
transportation revenues are up about $166 million with most of that coming from
toll revenues since fuel tax revenues have remained flat. Total transportation revenues are forecasted
at $6.4 billion for the 2017-19 biennium.
The total transportation budget for the 2017-19 biennium is $8.4
billion. FAST grants from the federal
government are included in the budget assumptions as well.
Some changes are being made to the Connecting WA projects,
but nothing too controversial. The
SSCCLC has spent some time this year working with 509/167 supporters on the
requirement for local funding that was part of the budget proposal in 2015. Senator O’Ban put language in the Senate
budget to delay the need for local match money until the 2027-29 biennium. Rep. Fey is planning to do the same for the
House budget which will provide more time to find and secure the local funds. Below is the exact budget proviso language:
- It is the intent of the legislature that $30,000,000 of motor vehicle account—private/local funds in the 2021-2023 fiscal biennium, $30,000,000 of motor vehicle account—private/local funds in the 2023-2025 fiscal biennium, and $30,000,000 of motor vehicle account—private/local funds in the 2025-2027 fiscal biennium for the SR 167/SR 509 Puget Sound Gateway project (M00600R) be moved to the 2027-2029 fiscal biennium and be replaced in those three biennia with connecting Washington account—state funds from the 2027-2029 fiscal biennium.
AEROSPACE TAX
INCENTIVES:
The Aerospace Works for Washington Coalition held a series
of meetings at the Capitol this week.
Vicky Baxter of the Renton Chamber came down and attended the meetings
on behalf of the Renton Chamber and the SSCCLC. With the introduction of HB 2145 and HB
2146, there were concerns that the tax incentives for aerospace were at
risk. Although the sponsors of the bills
(Rep. DeBolt (R) and Rep. Frame (D)) both have real reasons for introducing the
bills pertaining to concerns about overall tax policy and jobs, the discussions
went well and the group felt that they were able to show benefit for the tax
incentives beyond the Boeing company.
Highlighted in the meetings were small aerospace companies who also were
benefiting and representatives such as Vicky who could talk about the indirect
benefits of these types of incentives.
No hearings have been scheduled for either bill at this time. We will keep an eye on them just in case.
Carolyn Logue,
Lobbyist
South Sound Chamber of Commerce Legislative Coalition
