Duvall council reviews options for ballot measures, levy timing and budget gaps

Lede: City staff presented a briefing Jan. 21 on revenue options and ballot timing to help the Duvall City Council weigh whether to place measures before voters, laying out differences among single-year levy lifts, multi-year levies and sales-tax initiatives and key filing deadlines for 2025 ballots.

Nut graf: The presentation reviewed legal and procedural constraints (for example, special elections limit which measures can appear), timing windows and the practical differences between temporary and permanent levy-lid lifts. Council members voiced concern about a looming “fiscal cliff” if existing levies expire, debated which ballot (primary or general) to target for cost reasons and asked staff for detailed dollar-level budget gap analyses to inform any ballot drafting.

Body: City staff summarized guidance from the Municipal Research and Services Center (MRSC) and the Association of Washington Cities and described three basic vote opportunities in 2025: special elections in April (limited to certain measures including single-year levy-lid lifts but excluding sales-tax initiatives), the Aug. primary and the Nov. general (both of which accept sales-tax and multi-year levies). Staff identified filing deadlines discussed in the presentation: Feb. 21 for an April special-election resolution to reach the county auditor; May 2 for an Aug. primary filing; and the standard deadlines for the Nov. general.

The staff presentation explained that a “single-year” levy-lid lift is a one-time bump that can be temporary or permanent and can be structured to carry forward for up to a set duration (single-year temporary lifts can be set for multiple years despite the name), whereas multi-year levies (typically up to six years) require the ballot language to specify the uses of funds and have additional restrictions. Staff said the packet included past park and police initiative data and an MRSC modeling tool to show comparative outcomes.

Council members stressed the stakes. Several members said that without a levy or other added revenue, the city faces significant cuts to services and facilities — including maintenance of ball fields or staffing levels — and urged frank prioritization of services in advance of any ballot measure. One council member noted that Duvall currently fully funds a school resource officer (SRO) position located at the local high school, and asked whether other jurisdictions cost-share such positions; staff agreed to prepare a comparative analysis of how other jurisdictions split SRO costs (staff estimated Duvall’s share of the district population at approximately 30–35 percent in earlier research cited by a council member).

Council members also discussed engaging a consultant to advise on political strategy and measure design; staff said the 2025 budget anticipates a consultant if council requests one and that several consultants specialize in ballot strategy. A staff member also noted that multiple jurisdictions use a staged approach — trying one measure and then adjusting for a later ballot if the first fails — and cited examples where cities moved from a failed levy to a targeted sales-tax measure on a later ballot.

Ending: Council asked staff to prepare additional materials for future meetings: (1) a more specific dollar-level projection of the city’s budget gaps and service impacts over the relevant time horizon, (2) a sample analysis of how nearby jurisdictions split costs for SROs and (3) a scope and budget estimate for potential consultants. Several council members urged communicating the potential service cuts to the community as part of any engagement strategy.