Even After Proposed Budget Cuts a Tax Increase Looms

In an article by the Daily Record, legislators expressed concern that the Governor’s budget won’t be supported. Representative Bill Hinkle stated his fear that “there will be a very strong effort” to not back the Governor, by members of by her own party. Retaining certain programs the Governor would do away with, reversing spending cuts and tax increases are all likely actions from State legislators in the Majority Party.

Statements made by Speaker of the House, Frank Chopp, seem to support Hinkle’s assertion. Chopp has stated opposition to proposed spending cuts and said, "If we don't handle this situation correctly, a lot of people could die," Chopp said. "So it's important that we look at the budget not just as a financial document, but as a moral document as well."

Senate legislators are not besotted with the Governor’s budget either. Majority Leader, Lisa Brown, stated "cutting programs used primarily by low income people is one of the most de-stimulating actions a public sector can take."

However, Brown has said she is going to offer a state stimulus package that would better optimize the expected federal stimulus package. Although the details of her stimulus package are not known, Brown stated that it was important the State “complement federal stimulus investments in infrastructure” and that the State needs to reexamine how the Capitol Budget, which pays for school construction, is defined based on the needs of the economy.

Still, with little support from her party, the Governor’s budget it is not likely to turn out as she proposed. Without the budget cuts the Governor recommended, and a continually increasing projected debt, tax increases are not off the table. A tax on services, which would directly impact architects, along with several other targeted taxes remains an untapped source of funds for legislators who don’t want to make the cuts the Governor intended.

Legislature Convenes but Doesn’t Promise a Viaduct Decision

With the legislature now in session there are hopes that a decision will be made about the Alaskan Way Viaduct. In late December, siting a “continued overwhelming response and input on replacement options” Governor Gregoire and Mayor Nickels postponed making a final choice. But, the Governor and the Mayor did promise that final recommendations would be given to the legislature in January.

Money may be the largest factor regarding what the legislature will do about the viaduct and may once again stall progress.

Many believe the reason behind the December postponement of a viaduct selection was because of new attention on an old idea: the deep-bored tunnel. The tunnel received re-consideration when it was estimated to be much less expensive than originally thought.

The claim of cost effectiveness hasn’t been proven and now the cost of all eight concepts for the Viaduct are being re-examined.

Unfortunately the reassessment of the costs may make no difference. The Legislature earmarked $2.8 billion for a replacement project, funded by gas taxes and federal bridge grants. Of that $1.1 billion has been budgeted for a Sodo interchange, Battery Street Tunnel safety improvements and other work when the waterfront section is torn down.

That leaves around $1.7 billion for the remaining replacement project. So far no option, even the deep-bored tunnel, has been found to be that inexpensive.

With a budget gap that could reach an amazing $7 billion, legislators are fixated on not adding expenses with new legislation. And, even with signficant focus on the budget and Viaduct, it's still a 105-day session; there are plenty of other ideas cooking and legislators plates are already full.

January has arrived but a decision about the Viaduct may be as far away as ever.

back to top

AIA|WA Already at Work Preventing New & Unnecessary Liability Laws

The AIA Washington Council is already working to stop architects from facing new liability laws. It may only be the first day of the 2009 legislative session but a bill is currently awaiting a number that will be introduced by Representative Brendon Williams.

Williams’ bill mirrors legislation attempted last year, Senate Bill 6385,which would allow construction professionals to be sued by home buyers and even subsequent purchasers of homes that had no contract with the construction professional.

In the past Washington courts drew a line in between tort and contract damages in construction cases, reasoning that parties should bear the responsibility to review their contracts and ascertain the various risks. However, Williams’ bill ignores the courts, paints home buyers as a group without recourse and opens the construction industry to frivolous lawsuits.

Williams’ bill also ignores other means of dealing with consumer complaints.

During the summer a sunrise review committee within the Department of Licensing found that problems William’s bill claims to fix could also be changed with the creation of an ombudsman in the Attorney General’s Office. An ombudsman could serve as an arbitrator for legitimate claims, those that appear to favor the contractor, or involve inadequate consumer education without opening the entire industry up to frivolous lawsuits.

With a building industry that has been in decline, architects, contractors and other home builders can’t afford to deal with costly new regulations. The threat of unchecked lawsuits against architects and contractors could dramatically dampen new construction in Washington and harm the economy. The Speaker of the House, Frank Chopp, has stopped past efforts regarding new regulations on home builders because of the possibility that it could damage the economy.

In rough financial times it is even more important that legislation like that which is proposed by Williams’ not pass as it is written. The AIA Washington Council is already taking meetings to discuss with legislators and aims to influence legislation that is thoughtfully drafted to protect all the parties involved with the creation and purchase of a home.

back to top