May 2002
State Legislature
Budget Cuts and Policy Erosion Characterize 2002 Legislature
by Washington Environmental Council staff
a legislative session dominated by debates over transportation and the budget, lawmakers left Olympia on time. The short session spared the environment any major rollbacks but caused some policy erosion and inflicted deep cuts in natural resource programs.
The Washington Environmental Council (WEC) monitored more than 100 bills during the recent 60-day session that concluded on March 14 and took positions on 47 of them. Ultimately, only a handful of bills actually made it through the legislative gauntlet and, depending on actions taken by Governor Locke, the final assessment is likely to be a classic one step forward, two steps back.
This session was tougher on the environment than we expected, said WEC Executive Director Joan Crooks. The disproportionate influence of rural lawmakers on natural resource policy was more evident than ever and demonstrated that control of the legislature by a party doesnt ensure good environmental law.
WECs Legislative Priorities Saw Plenty of Action
1. A symbolic water bill was passed in the waning moments of session;
2. Lawmakers chose budget cuts over raising permit fees and closing tax loopholes;
3. State foresters were denied additional management flexibility;
4. The regulatory rollback agenda of the Competitiveness Council largely faltered; and,
5. The Legislature is sending a multi-billion dollar transportation package to the voters that contains a decent amount of money for transit, carpools and other transportation choices.
Many successes were characterized not by what happened, but by what did not. Killed at one point in the process were the following: a bill to divert state superfund cleanup money to science educators; a transportation mitigation banking bill that would have allowed habitat destruction to be made up elsewhere through unproven schemes; bills to potentially weaken emerging stormwater standards; and a whole host of bills that would roll back existing health and environmental safeguards.
Budget Was Strongest Policy Statement
Ultimately, the single largest policy statement was that of the budget. While a 60-day session typically calls for a course correction, the $1.6 billion budget hole necessitated a budget rewrite; process that shortchanged funding for the environment.
The natural resource programs took a disproportionate hit, noted Josh Baldi, WECs policy director. While these programs only make up 1.6 percent of the states general fund, they were burdened with 8.6 percent of the cuts.
What it came down to for legislators was the false choice of kids versus the environment or elderly care versus our quality of life, said Josh. Since lawmakers were loath to raises taxes in an election year, there was little choice but to impose harsh cuts.
Below and to the left are report cards that grade the Legislature on a broad range of issues and recognize several lawmakers who worked especially hard for the environment during the session.
Water: Incomplete
Partisan politics in the Senate hijacked the governors effort to reform policies aimed at providing adequate water for people, farms and fish. A modest bill that provides additional management tools did pass keeping some momentum for reform on an issue that has seen political gridlock for seventeen years.
Growth Management: C
Extending timelines for growth management compliance and the slight loosening of provisions for rural development were offset by smart growth bills that guide state spending to reinforce the Growth Management Act and seek better coordination between land use and transportation planning.
Forests: C-
The Legislature found the time to address small and corporate landowner concerns about implementation of the controversial Forests and Fish rules on private lands, but failed to provide state foresters with contract harvesting, a tool to improve environmental oversight and increase revenue for counties and schools.
Salmon Recovery: C-
Rather than impose fees on hydraulic permits (currently free) that impact fish habitat, the l
Legislature all but eliminated the states Salmon Recovery Office through budget cuts and passed a bill to weaken the habitat authority of the state Fish and Wildlife Department.
Pollution: C+
A push to limit the use of mercury faltered when false economic scare tactics were raised, but the Legislature did pass a bill allowing administrative judges to throw out controversial scientific studies that guide water cleanup plans. Funding for a rescue tug to prevent oil spills and a modest neighbor notification bill helped maintain a passing grade.
Transportation: B-
The $1.2 billion in choices (e.g., rail, transit, trip reduction, etc.) of the $7.8 billion state referendum fell short of a balanced transportation package but did represent a significant step forward by historical standards. Interestingly, the Legislatures failure to pass a bill in Olympia forced lawmakers to provide more choices so the referendum would have a chance with voters.
Budget: C-
Taking a fair share of the budget cut was assumed given the $1.6 billion hole lawmakers had to fill in an anti-tax climate. However, the Legislatures axing of more than $21 million in natural resource programs was 8.6 percent of the total cuts; a disproportionate amount of pain given that environmental programs comprise merely 1.6 percent of the General Fund. Funding for key programs, such as the rescue tug, eased some of the sting.
Shorelines: D
The Legislature cut the states shoreline program by 15 percent and exempted existing agriculture from the Shoreline Management Act. The latter was not unexpected given that powerful rural lawmakers had pushed for a bill and the Locke administration signaled its support two years ago. The exemption was originally part of a package to implement improved shoreline rules everywhere else, but the bill moved in spite and in front of broader shoreline negotiations. The governor did work to ensure that the exemption did not extend to the Growth Management Act.