Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the State Legislation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

County staff report mid‑session state budget outlook; bills on agritourism, public safety and behavioral health highlighted

3788795 · March 19, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Snohomish County executive staff and lobbyists told the County Council on March 19 the state is mid‑session, revenue forecasts are lower than previously estimated and several bills affecting the county — including measures on agritourism, public safety funding and behavioral health — are moving or stalled.

Snohomish County staff gave the County Council a mid‑session update on state legislation on March 19, outlining a tighter revenue forecast for the 2025–27 biennium and previewing bills the county is tracking, including measures on agritourism, public safety funding and behavioral health services.

Annika Vaughn, senior government affairs analyst in the county executive’s office, opened the briefing and said the county’s lobbying team would review items of local interest.

Lobbyist Josh Wiese summarized the state revenue picture, saying the Economic and Revenue Forecast Council projects revenue growth of about 6.8 percent for the 2025–27 biennium but that the forecast is still roughly $479 million below an earlier projection. “Revenues are projected to increase by 6.8%,” he said, adding the 2027–29 outlook also showed growth but remained below prior estimates. Wiese said the county expects operating and transportation budgets to be released the week after the briefing and capital budgets the following week, but timing could shift.

Why it matters: the Legislature’s budget decisions will affect county programs and grant opportunities, and bills that change local taxing or program authority could alter revenue and service delivery at the county level.

Wiese reviewed several bills the county is monitoring. He said House Bill 1261, which the briefing described as addressing agritourism’s effect on farmland owners and open‑space designation, had a favorable hearing and “is getting a good amount of support.” On public safety funding, Wiese said proposals differ: the House approach (House Bill 2015) would create a statutory grant program and allow a new local option public safety sales tax of up to 1 percent, while the Senate approach (Senate Bill 5775) would not add the grant program but would broaden uses of an existing public safety sales tax and make it councilmanic in some form. Wiese said the governor has proposed roughly $100 million in grants for local hiring, but legislative outcomes were still uncertain pending the budget proposals.

Wiese also reported that a proposal to allow a floating 1 percent property‑tax cap (introduced as House Bill 1334) did not move forward before the cutoff; he said additional bills on that topic could appear later in the session. He said a Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs (WASPC) proposal on indigent defense (identified in the briefing as Senate Bill 5601) did not advance past the cutoff, and that a bill the county worked on with Senator Elias to promote sustainable aviation fuels (a grant program for projects like Paine Field) also failed to move past the cutoff; the presenter noted some confusion about bill numbers during the briefing but confirmed the SAF proposal did not advance.

Aaron, a member of the county’s lobbying team, reviewed behavioral health bills and the county’s priorities. He said changes were made to House Bill 1218 (linked in the briefing to the Trueblood competency‑restoration litigation) that removed penalties for counties and left the bill with incentive elements only: “a carrot, no stick right now,” he said. He also described House Bill 1813 as retaining language to direct the Health Care Authority to have managed‑care organizations flow certain crisis‑service dollars to behavioral health administrative service organizations (BH‑ASOs), a change the county hopes will simplify contracting for crisis services and help local provider recruitment and operations.

Speakers cautioned that many bills carried “strikers” (floor changes) and that language will need review as bills move between chambers. The county’s lobbying team said it will review the upcoming budget releases closely and provide rapid updates on provisions that could significantly affect county behavioral‑health and public‑safety programs.

The council did not take formal action on the state items; staff said they would circulate more detailed budget and bill summaries once the Legislature posts proposed budgets.