I could be wrong, but the closer it gets to November, the more the voters are likely to pay attention to what the Legislature is doing. The real pay-offs for the special interest groups tend to occur in the smoke-filled rooms when no one is looking. The longer this drags on, the more attention it attracts, the more likely it is to end up with doing only the minimum necessary to plug the holes, and the more likely it is to cause further initiatives to be approved.

From today's Tacoma News Tribune:

Locke's new budget - he submitted his first one in December - would:

* Scrap the Senate Democrats' proposal for a $200-a-year property tax cut for homeowners - worth $300 million a year overall. Instead, Locke would give homeowners and businesses a 6.2 percent cut in their state property taxes, which would amount to $26 on a $150,000 property. In addition, Locke would give a $200-$500 property tax break to low-income senior citizens. Overall, Locke's plan would reduce state tax collections by about $120 million a year.

* Adopt the House Democrats' proposal to plow $115 million a year into new education programs - the equivalent of the net from the state lottery. That also coincides with Locke's desire to spend more on public schools.

* Give House Republicans the additional money they want for state and local highway projects - $321 million in the current budget and as much as $1 billion over five years. Locke would use interest earnings from the state's emergency reserves and other revenues to make payments on 25-year loan to raise half the money for those projects.

Locke said he includes the Senate Democrats' proposals for spending on human services and some education programs.

Snyder said that isn't much of a nod to the Senate because his colleagues simply restored some of the cuts the House would make to foster care and subsidized health-insurance for the poor.

Marty Brown, Locke's budget director, said spending and tax cuts aren't the only considerations.

"The stuff that's off the table matters, too," Brown said. "The Senate hated the tax credits for Sound Transit. Those are gone.

"They hated dedicating the sales tax revenue out of the general fund for transportation. That's out."

House Democrats wanted to give Sound Transit a portion of the state sales tax - $214 million over six years - to help build a light-rail line from Sea-Tac Airport to Northgate. Locke now would give just $15 million in one-time support.

House Republicans also wanted to commit $40 million a year of state sales taxes to state highway and ferry projects.

And Locke's proposal to let local school districts keep part of the state property tax is no longer in the budget, either, Brown said.

On the other hand, committing $115 million from the state real estate tax toward new school funding accomplishes most of what the governor wanted to do.

The House Republicans' budget writer Tom Huff of Gig Harbor said the House is not going to make its staff work through the Easter holiday to meet Locke's timetable for a budget vote Monday.

Even so, Huff added, "I'd be hopeful to be out of here by next weekend."

Snyder said he doesn't know whether Senate Democrats are going to give in on their $300 million property tax cut. Sen. Valoria Loveland (D-Pasco), the Senate's chief budget writer, has said if the Legislature doesn't pass the Senate proposal there will be no property tax cut at all.

Locke said he can't predict whether his more modest property tax cut would be enough to defuse support for initiatives that seek to limit or cut property taxes.

"Initiatives are going to be filed and signatures gathered," Locke said. "I'm not sure there's much that we can do in Olympia to circumvent that or to derail that. So we just have to do what we can, do what we think is proper and best for the people of the state of Washington, and the citizens - using the initiative process - are free to do whatever they want."

- - -

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), April 20, 2000

Answers

""The stuff that's off the table matters, too," Brown said. "The Senate hated the tax credits for Sound Transit. Those are gone. " Gee, I thought the DEMOCRATS ruled in the Senate and people like Patrick were saying that Sound Transit would get all kinds of support from them. If I read the article correctly, they WOULDN'T get their sales tax rebate and MIGHT get a one-time $15 million appropriation (mostly for Sounder) rather than the $200 million or so they were counting on in sales tax relief.

-- Mark Stilson (mark842@hotmail.com), April 20, 2000.

"Gee, I thought the DEMOCRATS ruled in the Senate and people like Patrick were saying that Sound Transit would get all kinds of support from them."

Gee Mark, I guess you have yet ANOTHER misunderstanding that I can point out. I don't believe that I ever said the Senate was going to give Sound Transit all it wanted. The Senate has been rather clear in its position of wanting to provide additional funding, but deciding that existing funding gaps needed to be addressed first. If you'd care to point out where I said the State Senate would be rushing to provide Sound Transit additional funding in THIS budget year I'd certainly appreciate it.

Besides that, there is a BIG difference between providing funding and providing tax credits. If I'm not mistaken, credits lowers the 601 spending limit. With a lower spending limit, there is less money in the future that the state can spend. This of course places transportation needs against education needs. It also reduces the possibility that the state will provide additional Sound Transit funding in the future. In the end, the Senate denial of the tax credits may very well mean more funding than the $200 million Sound Transit asked for.

-- Patrick (patrick1142@yahoo.com), April 20, 2000.

"I don't believe that I ever said the Senate was going to give Sound Transit all it wanted. The Senate has been rather clear in its position of wanting to provide additional funding, but deciding that existing funding gaps needed to be addressed first. If you'd care to point out where I said the State Senate would be rushing to provide Sound Transit additional funding in THIS budget year I'd certainly appreciate it. " Zowie's right, your responses (?) are getting lamer and lamer. What is on the board is a one-time $15 million with no credits and NOTHING in the out-years. You were the one that indicated the feds were just falling all over themselves to come up with money for the Northgate extension and that the state legislature would essentially fix all the transit shortfalls. I hope you don't invest in the stock market. You'd be up to your ears in buggy whip futures. You don't seem to be very good at predicting things, and then "forget" your previous predictions.

-- (mark842@hotmail.com), April 20, 2000.

How's the Legislature doing? Well it depends on what you want our government to do for you. This past session seemed typical of past legislatures; with a lot of posturing, pandering, and positioning, and; and, the usual dose of rhetoric and doom-and-gloom predictions from those most affected by 695. This all comes as no surprise. The coming State Supreme Court ruling; two more "KO the government tax-and-spend" initiatives have the liberals, moderates, and special-interest groups running to refill their Valium prescriptions. Met Guv. Locke, recently, and briefly discussed 695 and the fallout. He sounded engaging and focused; but, I know better. He, (like Slick Willy), says one thing in a one-on-one situation; then goes off and more often reverses direction in public. My advise to all is to stay focused on the goal of victory with the Initiatives, and defeat as many Democrats as possible before they can further inflict more tax and regulatory pain upon us!!

-- Grassroots (grassroots3@earthlink.net), April 25, 2000.

Well Patrick, looks like the deal is about to be made. Lets see how our predictions came out:

Other highlights of the budget deal include: No property tax cut. Unable to compromise between the Senate's $200 per-home-tax cut and smaller House version, budget writers decided to forgo the tax cut altogether.

THIS WOULD APPEAR TO GIVE ADDED SUPPORT TO A VARIETY OF MEASURES AIMED AT PROPERTY TAX RELIEF. WHATS MORE, IF ANY OF THESE INITIATIVES MAKES THE BALLOT, THAT PRETTY MUCH GUARANTEES THAT THE CANDIDATES WILL HAVE TO MAKE A STAND ON THEM, ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.

Ongoing funding for road construction and ferries. About $35 million a year in interest from the state's emergency reserve, or "rainy day" fund, would go to road construction, enough to finance more than $400 million in projects with long term bonds. Another $20 million a year will go to help ferries, also hard hit by I-695.

LETS SEE, PRIOR TO 695 THE FERRIES GOT ABOUT $204 MILLION PER BIENNIUM FROM THE MVET, OR ABOUT $102 MILLION A YEAR (http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/fasc/keyfacts/keyfacts.pdf). AFTERWARDS THEY GOT ABOUT $23 MILLION A YEAR, SO ADDING ANOTHER $20 MILLION WILL GET THEM BACK TO ABOUT 40% OF THEIR ANNUAL FUNDING FOR THIS YEAR. THEN THEY GET TO FIGHT THE BATTLE ALL OVER AGAIN NEXT YEAR.

$80 million in one-time money to help transit districts adjust to the losses for Initiative 695. That represents about one-fourth the money lost to transit from the elimination of the motor vehicle excise tax.

THAT KIND OF SPEAKS FOR ITSELF, DOESNT IT?

A $15 million "down payment" for Sound Transit's plans to extend light rail to Northgate.

$15 MILLION OF A $450 MILLION COST. A LITTLE OVER 3%. WELL, THATLL PAY 40% OF THE SALES TAX ON THE PROJECT, IF THEY COME UP WITH THE OTHER $435 MILLION.

About $135 million for local governments and public health districts, about half the money lost to Initiative 695.

THAT KIND OF SPEAKS FOR ITSELF TOO.

The "5 percent solution." The changes the I-601 emergency reserve requirement from 5 percent of the biennial budget to 5 percent of the annual budget. That cuts the requirement in half, from about $1 billion to about $500 million. Under I-601, any surplus above the reserve requirement goes to help finance school construction. The emergency reserve is already above $500 million, but well short of $1 billion.

THIS OF COURSE MAKES IT HIGHLY UNLIKELY THAT THE LEGISLATURE CAN COME UP WITH THESE SORTS OF BAIL-OUTS IN THE FUTURE.

-- Mark Stilson (mark842@hotmail.com), April 26, 2000.

And a little more of the same:

Lawmakers agree on funding for cities, counties, agencies Joseph Turner; Last fall, Gov. Gary Locke and most legislators warned that the state would not ride to the rescue of local governments if voters passed Initiative 695 and abolished the state car tax. But after I-695, the governor and lawmakers had little choice. And the budget the Legislature is expected to approve later this week will replace roughly one-third to one-half of what cities, counties, transit agencies and health departments lost. The House and Senate agree to give counties 53 percent of what they lost, replace 37 percent of what cities lost and replenish 90 percent of what health departments lost. Under the deal, no one city will lose more than 7.5 percent of its total operating budget. Overall, that's about $135 million a year, which Locke and the Legislature say they plan to make a permanent part of the state budget. Transit agencies didn't fare as well. The state will give them a one-time payment of $80 million - roughly one-third of what they're losing in one year. After that, they're on their own - which in many cases may mean that transit districts will be asking voters to approve local tax increases. Lawmakers will give the transit agencies permission to ask voters to raise their local sales tax to as much as 0.9 percent. "The $80 million extends the diving board a little bit," said Dan Snow, executive director of the Washington State Transit Association, which represents 24 public bus systems. "You'll be seeing more cuts when that money runs out. "It prolongs the inevitable for a little while, unless ... we identify a long-term, stable funding base for transit," he said. Many transit agencies already are talking about whether - or more often, when - to have an election on a tax increase.

Transit agencies Agency/loss/restored Pierce / $22,909,891 / $8,423,900 Metro (King) / $98,155,447 / $35,973,300 Intercity (Thurston) / $7,600,000 / $2,763,000 Kitsap / $8,076,673 / $2,936,100 Source: Senate Ways and Means Committee; Senate Transportation Committee; House Appropriations Committee; Gov. Gary Locke's revised budget proposal.

So Metro has to make up $63 million this year, with no guarantee that they will get more in the out-years.

-- Mark Stilson (mark842@hotmail.com), April 26, 2000.

Metro get $63 million out of $80 million?? That's 79% of the total. Does the Metro area have 79% of the state's population???

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), April 26, 2000.

to zowie: I think Metro got 36 million out of 80 million. That would correspond to 45% of the state population. Sounds about right to me.

-- Matthew M. Warren (mattinsky@msn.com), April 26, 2000.

OOOPPS! Right you are! Subtracted wrong. So sorry, disregard.

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), April 26, 2000.