Gov. Jay Inslee is an effective salesman, enthusiastically and gregariously promoting Washington and his vision for the state.
So it is no surprise that Inslee made a compelling case for his proposed state budget Thursday during a remote meeting with The Columbian’s Editorial Board.
“I’m not selling it,” the governor said. “It’s what the voters want to purchase. This is a reality-based budget. It would be nice if we could sprinkle pixie dust and solve these problems.”
Reality, however, can come with an eye-opening price tag. Inslee has proposed a $70 billion operating budget for the 2023-25 biennium, which would mark an 18 percent increase over the current two-year budget.
Inflation accounts for much of that increase, and a robust economy that has generated strong revenue through business taxes and sales taxes gives state government plenty of leeway in how to spend the people’s money. As Inslee points out, his proposal does not call for any tax increases but takes advantage of growing revenue.
And still, there is a fanciful aspect to the plan. As one method for addressing homelessness throughout the state, Inslee has recommended that the Legislature and then the voters approve a $4 billion bonding authority. The last time voters were asked to approve a bonding authority beyond the legal debt limit, in 2010, they rejected the plan with 54 percent of the vote.
And the governor acknowledges that legislators might have their own ideas for how to address the issues facing the state.
That is inherent in a quirky process for developing the budget. Each December, the governor presents a proposal to the Legislature, which is little more than a suggestion. Lawmakers will be tasked with developing a two-year operating budget during next year’s 105-day session.
Inslee hopes that budget reflects his three priorities for the next two years: State-supported housing construction to alleviate the homeless crisis; improved mental crisis care by bolstering Western State Hospital and creating regional care centers; and continuing progress toward a clean-energy economy.
In speaking about homelessness, he echoes the thoughts of many Washington residents: “It is my belief that it is distressing to everyone to see this degradation that is going on in every urban area in the state, people living in squalor. That’s not acceptable in the state of Washington.”
Inslee says that while Washington’s population has increased by approximately 1 million over the past decade, the number of housing units has grown by 300,000. “The private sector isn’t handling it,” he said, adding that he supports changes to zoning laws to enable private construction.
There should — and will — be robust discussion about the state’s role in deciding when and where housing is constructed. Inslee last year presented a bold plan for promoting housing units, but the Legislature balked.
Now, he notes, the proposal has been scaled back with an emphasis on housing near “high-capacity transit corridors.” That model has been effective in Portland, generating growth and revitalizing areas near light-rail lines, yet the city still has a pressing — and depressing — homeless problem.
That points out the difficulties of an issue that is triggered by being a desirable state — attracting newcomers and retaining natives — and is exacerbated by substance abuse and mental health issues.
Getting lawmakers and voters to buy Inslee’s approach to the problem will require a compelling sales pitch.
