Seattle City Wire

As we head into a busy year of city and county elections, top of mind for me is how local governments and their leaders can rebuild trust with voters and make progress on the most-pressing issues.

Voters will be casting their ballots for candidates in August and November, but they will also be asked to consider approving a number of levies around King County this year and next. These levies fund the delivery of important services in our community, like parks and libraries.

In April, voters will consider King County Executive Dow Constantine’s proposal to fund behavioral health investments. After going through a member-led evaluation process, the Chamber’s Executive Committee enthusiastically voted to endorse this measure, adding us to a growing list of supporters!

As a Chamber, we’ve weighed in on many tax levies over the years, and we – and our members – have supported the majority. Funded by a nine-year property tax levy, we are supporting this proposal because it will:

• Fund five new regional Crisis Care Centers – facilities that will serve as emergency rooms for anyone in crisis, including individuals experiencing homelessness
• Preserve behavioral health residential treatment beds – adding to the woefully low number of beds available today
• Grow the behavioral health workforce pipeline – ensuring that no one is left without care because of inadequate staffing at a facility

This levy is an example of local government responding to a clear community need and using data, a thoughtful policy approach, and an inclusive process to solve the problem. I participated in stakeholder discussions on behalf of the Chamber because behavioral health is an issue about which I’ve heard members express consistent concern, and it’s one that connects to the top two concerns of local voters: homelessness and public safety.

Behavioral health is also an area where federal and state disinvestment has led to major gaps. In putting this measure together, King County prioritized the elements of behavioral health services where we have foundational needs, and where the County is equipped to make a difference – building more places for people to go, including where family members can bring a person experiencing a behavioral health crisis; preserving places for people to recover; and supporting a skilled workforce in this field. And, the County’s leadership in developing a proposal for voters does not erase the need for federal and state action and investment.

We encourage you to join us in supporting this levy and voting yes on this important suite of investments.

There will also be other levies coming up this year, and we’ll evaluate each of them just as we have done with this one. The Chamber has a responsibility in these civic conversations, and that is especially important in times of economic uncertainty.

With multiple levies coming to our ballots in the next two years, here’s my perspective.

• First, officials and proponents need to do good research on voter appetites – both on the substance of the measure and the funding mechanism.
• Second, taxes, including voter-approved levies, are not inherently good or inherently bad based on their size or tax source - they function to fund the things we need for a strong quality of life and must be tied to outcomes.
• And third, our local governments need to actively build trust with their constituents by delivering on what they say they will, and by demonstrating they are responsible stewards of the resources they already have through planning, policy and prioritization.

We’ll be holding the upcoming levy renewals to a similar standard, just like what we’re doing on the City of Seattle’s Revenue Stabilization Work Group. We are committed to asking tough questions in service of a more thoughtful civic dialogue and a sustainable approach to the local resources we need for a high quality of life.

The bottom line is that we need our local governments to be transparent about how their choices align with our collective priorities, and whether they generate the outcomes that we want and need.

I know that this is hard work – in my past roles in government, I have added to programs that were getting results and created new programs that looked promising. I have also made the call to dissolve not only programs, but entire departments and projects because they weren’t getting outcomes or because it was more important, or more effective, to make other kinds of investments. This is also necessary work to rebuild trust with voters.

Our most recent Index found that 57% of Seattle voters don’t believe that they are getting good value for the level of taxes they pay. When I see that number, I don’t see an anti-tax electorate – but I do see an imperative for our local government leaders to focus on delivering the basics well, and to be responsive to emerging issues. 

When it comes to the city’s budget, we need to ensure there is a clear prioritization of resources and that the spending is producing results. And when proposals do go to the voters, those proposals need to draw clear lines to visible progress and sustained outcomes – not just more spending— which is why we must critically evaluate any new ideas that come before the City of Seattle’s Revenue Stabilization Work Group and fundamentally reform the City’s unsustainable budgeting practices.

This is a core part of governing well – and you can expect that we’ll continue to carry this message throughout 2023.

Original source can be found here.