For a few years now, as part of my radio news job, I've interviewed members of the Washington State Association of Counties (WSAC), specifically, members of the WSAC Legislative Steering Committee (LSC). The LSC is made up of County Commissioners and Councilmembers from throughout Washington State. Their job is to establish a "message" to send to the legislature and the governor that is representative of the needs, wants, and concerns of the state's county governments.

Over the past few years, an underlying concern of the WSAC LSC members I've spoken to has been what's called "unfunded mandates". Unfunded mandates begin as pilot programs established by the state. The programs can cover practically anything - law & justice, social issues, ecology, etc. The state legislature (with the governor's signature) establishes a program with a limited "funding mechanism" (read: new taxes and/or state spending) that provides funding for the program for a couple of years. After that state funding dries up, counties (and cities) are required to maintain the program's level of service, but at their own expense (the state is off-the-hook to provide funding for the program). If a county (or city) is unable to provide that program's level of service, they become unqualified for other funding from the state (for other programs). So these municipalities let loose a collective groan when these new programs are created, because they know they'll get stuck with the bill before long. Hence, unfunded mandates. Meanwhile, the state takes the money they don't have to pay for those programs with to provide "seed money" for new programs the municipalities will get stuck with later. As you can see, this is a vicious cycle.

With the years-proven spending habits of the Democrat-controlled legislature (and governor's mansion), citizens of the state voted, via initiatives, to curtail ever-increasing taxes on the state level. This has left counties (and cities) to panic over how to craft their own budgets to maintain the level of service mandated by the state for those programs they're now stuck with, because the state funding they were getting for other programs are now cut shorter. Counties (and cities) end up with budget deficits, or having to either increase taxes or cut funding to programs that aren't mandated by the state.

The underlying problem does not lie with the voter who is fed up with increasing state taxes, though. The problem lies with the state legislature, and it's approach to fiscal policy. There is no mechanism in place to gauge the effectiveness of a state mandated program, so if a program is not producing adequate results, it's still in place, and the municipalities are still stuck with funding them. Nothing in place to let the counties (and cities) of the state off the hook when the legislature's "good intentions" don't pan out.

A modicum of fault must lie with the voters of the state, however, and it's merely a matter of civics education. Voters, by and large, aren't aware of how the state sticks it to the municipalities - voters merely see increased statewide taxes and react. To the average voter, the pilot programs the state start sound great, because those programs are geared toward the "everyman". At no point, however, does the state tell the voting populace that at some point, funding for said programs will be mandated to the counties (and cities), and as such, they will have to pay more in local taxes.

To you, the Washington State voter, I ask that you do three things the next time an election comes about:

1. New state-created programs are permanent, because there is no mechanism to quash them if they do not produce results, and you (through increased local taxes) will continue to pay for those programs.
2. Keep in mind the increase in local taxes, and remember why they are increasing - you can thank those in Olympia for passing the buck to your local politicians, who are doing their level-best to try to deal with an increasing fiscal problem.
3. Our elected legislators should treat fiscal policy in the same manner they would at home, or for their business.

If you are concerned about the fiscal responsibility of unfunded mandates in your county, contact your legislators and ask them what they will do to change the state's fiscal policy, and if you aren't satisfied with their answer, elect someone who'll do a better job at managing the state's revenue.