March 1 - Special Hot List on House & Senate Budgets

We want to work with you during the final budget discussions to direct scarce resources to top priorities. This is the most comprehensive and up-to-date analysis of the environmental budget priority and our request for what should be in the final budget in order to meet the baseline level of funding necessary to protect core environmental programs and maintain healthy communities.

The Senate budget restores many of the environmental priority items but offsets them with reductions in other programs. The Senate’s general fund reductions for natural resource programs are $11 million deeper than in the Governor’s “all cuts” budget. The Senate uses more MTCA and other dedicated fund sources to offset the general fund reductions, which will result in less cleanup of toxic sites across the state.

The House budget does not restore the majority of the environmental priority items and the budget for natural resource programs was cut by over $4 million more than in the Governor’s “all cuts” budget. However, the House is commended for not shifting money from MTCA to the general fund.

For clarity sake, we’ve divided our comments by budget (Operating, Capital, and Transportation).

SUPPLEMENTAL OPERATING BUDGET

HOUSE: PROS

We strongly support the following components of the House Supplemental Operating Budget proposal:

• Maintaining the $81 million of critical Model Toxics Control Funds.
• Assumption of revenue from Water application fees (HB 2591) and increase of Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) fees (HB 3037) to reduce these programs’ reliance on general fund dollars.

HOUSE: CONS

We oppose the following components of the House Supplemental Operating Budget proposal:

• Lack of funding for core environmental protections identified as top priorities for restoration by the Environmental Priorities Coalition’s 2010 budget priority (see below list of core environmental programs).
• The budget for the natural resource agencies is $4 million lower than the Governor’s all cuts budget. Basic environmental programs are only 1% of the budget but are critical to our quality of life here in Washington. These additional cuts to the programs that provide clean water, clean air and protect wildlife should be restored.
• Reduction of $625,000 to the Growth Management Division in Department of Commerce. These funds are the foundation for an agreement on the GMA delay bill (SB 6611) and without this base level of support the environmental community will not support SB 6611.
• Inclusion of $56,000 funding the Spirit Lake fishery which is opposed by state and federal agencies protecting the Mt St Helens Monument.

SENATE: PROS

We support the following components of the Senate Supplemental Operating Budget proposal:

• Inclusion of several of the core environmental protection programs identified as top priorities for restoration by the Environmental Priorities Coalition (listed below).
• Assumption of revenue from Water application fees (SB 6267) and increase of Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) fees (SB 6448) to reduce these programs’ reliance on general fund dollars. We urge you to enact these bills into law.
• Ending a tax break for TransAlta’s Centralia coal plant.

SENATE: CONS

We oppose the following components of the Senate Supplemental Operating Budget proposal:

• The general fund support for natural resource agencies is $11 million lower than the Governor’s “all cuts” budget and shifts several program to MTCA and other dedicated funds. The dedicated funds have already by obligated to other uses such as cleanup of toxic sites across the state.
• The transfer of $96 million from the Model Toxics Control Account to the General Fund, $15 million more than was taken out in the Governor’s budget.
• The $10.5 million cut to State Parks, Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, and Dept. of Natural Resources to compensate for not consolidating the three agencies into the Dept of Natural Resources.
• Reduction of $1,000,000 to the Growth Management Division in Department of Commerce. These funds are the foundation for an agreement on the GMA delay bill (SB 6611) and without this base level of support the environmental community will not support SB 6611.
• We urge you to include $150 million from the Clean Water Act of 2010 (SB 6851) in the Senate revenue proposal. This Act is assumed in the House Capital and Transportation budgets
• Rollback of renewable tax credits. The clean energy tax credit is a key tool in developing the renewable energy sector in our state.

LIST OF CORE ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS

The following core environmental program reductions were made in the House or Senate budgets. We urge these cuts to be restored:

SUPPLEMENTAL CAPITAL BUDGET

HOUSE: PROS

We strongly support the following components of your Supplemental Capital Budget proposal:

• Inclusion of $54 million from Clean Water Act of 2010 (Working for Clean Water), HB 3181.
• Inclusion of $200 million appropriation for the JOBS Act of 2010 (HB 2561/SB 6547).

HOUSE: CONS

We ask that you restore this item as you make your final budget decisions:

• Restore Puget Sound Partnership Action Agenda and the Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Plan implementation funds, Puget Sound Partnership: $10,000,000

SUPPLEMENTAL TRANSPORTATION BUDGET

HOUSE: PROS

• We strongly support the House action to restore and redirect the $14 million back to regional mobility grants.

SENATE: CONS

• We urge the Senate to amend to House funding in budget negotiations and redirect $14 million back to regional mobility grants. State Transportation budget dedicates less than 1% of its funding to transit. The Senate transportation budget takes away much of the remaining state funding in the regional mobility grant program for transit at a time when transit agencies around the state are facing 20-50% cuts in service due to a drop-off in sales tax revenue.