Thurston County Budget Crisis Continues

Thurston County must find an additional $2.3M in cuts on top of the acknowledged $4M shortfall.

The Commissioners still aren't taking an active leadership role in making cuts. They have asked their 23 department heads to look at ways they can make cuts. This is the same thing the Commissioners have been doing for the past months with no results. Are they really expecting different results this time?

Since 2005 Thurston County has been spending money on a legal challenge from Futurewise. Thurston County estimates that they have spent $1.5M on this action. Ironically, Sandra Romero (D) is a Futurewise board member who is also running for County Commissioners. Romero says that she is just the person to fix the budget (after helping to derail it).

Thurston County Budget Crisis

Today in the Letters to the Editor in The Olympian, there are two letters that talk about the Thurston County Budget. The first is another blow by Dan Kimball and the judges. They talk about their services are mandated and it's going to be hard to cut them further:

"Our offices represent the major priorities of government: public safety and the rule of law. In responding to ongoing fiscal realities, we've already pared our budgets to minimal feasible levels. Many of our core functions are mandated by constitution, statutes and court rules and cannot be legally eliminated. Much of our financial stress is caused by unfunded mandates, which come without funding for such services."

The other is by Debbie Neely pointing out that the Commissioners are being conspicuously silent.

"Not only did the county commissioners count on revenue that had not materialized, they are conspicuously silent when it comes to accepting responsibility."

I agree, in a time when the commissioners should be rolling up their sleeves and tackling the budget problem, they are retracting and not showing strong leadership. Someone was asleep at the switch. What people aren't talking about is that Sandra Romero and her special-interest group called 'Futurewise' have cost the County $1.5M of the approximate $4M shortfall. Are the Commissioners being conspicuously quiet because they don't want to shed a dark shadow on Sandra Romero's current campaign for County Commissioner? Afterall, Cathy Wolfe, and Sandra Romero worked together back in the day.
Download the letters here.

Romero Already Cost Thurston County $1.5M

Sandra Romero is a board member of a powerful special-interest group called ‘Futurewise’. Her group filed a growth management appeal in 2005 challenging Thurston County’s comprehensive plan and cost the County an estimated 1.5 million dollars defending against this frivolous claim.

The County Commissioners have a duty to administrate the State laws and provide for public safety, heath and roads. The Commission doesn’t need to be sidetracked by having to deal with lawsuits generated by special-interest groups.

In Romero’s own words, “[the] budget is the biggest problem right now, it is the driver of all of our woes ... with almost a 4.5 million dollar shortfall it's going to be very difficult to get out of it.”

Romero’s special-interest group is responsible for over 25% of the current budget crisis, and I’m not willing to send her in to try and fix it. This would be like sending the fox to the hen house.

Please join me in voting for any one of the other three candidates.

Source: anonymous email submission

Sandra Romero (D) Wrong About Sprawl

Sandra Romero Has it wrong when it comes to her view on development sprawl in Thurston County. She wants to scare you by saying, "Sprawl development is endangering the very things that make us unique." She talks about "auto-dependent" development. "Auto-dependent" means you will need to drive your car to places rather than walk. Here ye, Here ye, sell your car, you won't need it if Sandra is Commissioner! Then she says, "Therefore, I will work to bring sanity to our land-use practices." But she doesn't offer a solution. All of this is simply scare tactics. Here is the real way it works. We have something called the Growth Management Act. It makes Counties plan to have higher density development near the cities (like townhomes and condos) and lower density development away from the cities. It is intended to make the Cities more 'city-like' and the rural areas more 'farm-like'. Okay, I can buy that. Thurston County was one of the first Counties to adopt a comprehensive plan that was in compliance with the Growth Management Act. And Thurston County has had a continual program in cooperation with the Thurston Regional Planning Council to keep the comprehensive plan updated. What does this mean? It means that Thurston County is on the leading edge of balancing the need to preserve our environment with the need to provide affordable housing. Sandra, we don't need your scare tactics. Thurston County doesn't need your ideas of bringing sanity to our land-use practices, whatever your plan may be. And one more thing. Sandra Romero and her group Futurewise recently cost Thurston County $1.5 million to fight a frivolous lawsuit that was filed on a land-use action. Is this your idea of bringing sanity to Thurston County? Download Sandra's Sprawl Views

Sandra Romero Credentials

Peggy Bruton, a Sandra Romero supporter echos the beliefs of Romero in her editorial titled "Romero Has Solid Credentials" appearing in The Olympian on July 1st, 2008.

Bruton has it wrong and it is indicative of Romero's ideology of putting the interestes of her special-interest group Futurewise (and Liveable Thurston) ahead of the interests of the people of Thurston County.

First Bruton writes, "In the long term, the county has failed to adopt measures, such as impact fees, to slow development in rural Thurston County and redirect it to urban growth areas." This would be an incorrect use of impact fees, but one that is popular with Romero and her group Futurewise. Impact fees are intended to "To ensure that adequate facilities are available to serve new growth and development." (RCW 8202.050) And that is it. Impact fees are not a mechanism to improve or restrict growth, that is the job of the marketplace and the law of supply and demand.

Secondly, Bruton writes, "Short-term, the county has made serious mistakes, such as wasting taxpayer dollars to challenge the Growth Management Hearings Board decision that the county's growth management plan needs more rural zoning options." This is again the position of Romero and Futurewise, but not the truth. The truth is, that under the Growth Management Act, jusidictions have the ability to plan with defrence. In other words, each local jurisdiction can create a plan that makes sense for them. 1 unit per 5 acres is a rural zoning, and when Thurston County adopted their comprehensive plan, the pople of Thurston County adopted their rural zoning plan to be 1 unit per 5 acres.

It was an out-of-town, Seattle-based group called Futurewise that challenged the Thurston County comprehensive plan, and caused Thurston County to defend, and revise the existing plan where needed. Sandra Romero is a board member of this group and now wants to be a County Commissioner. Isn't this like sending the fox to the henhouse?

There are much better options available for this postition:

Robin Edmondson

Jon Halvorson

Pick one!