Seattle City Council has passed two bills intended to change the way City Hall will budget in the years to come. Both bills involve the council seeking greater control over budgeting, and both were passed unanimously last month.

Mayor Jenny Durkan strongly opposed the bills, but chose not to veto them, knowing council could ignore it. Instead, Durkan returned the bills without his signature last week, allowing them to become laws while warning that they could cause problems down the line.

The first invoice Create a special fund to withhold income from the council’s new “JumpStart” tax on high wages at large companies, and establish special rules on how the money can be spent.

The bill will ensure the dollars are spent according to a plan the council adopted for the tax last year, council member Teresa Mosqueda said.

For 2021, the council has earmarked money to provide COVID-19 relief and close COVID-19 budget gaps. For 2022 and beyond, the council pledged the dollars would be used for affordable housing, business assistance, community development and environmental justice programs.

Staff estimated the tax would raise more than $ 200 million this year, which has helped Durkan and the council balance the city’s 2021 budget, avoiding pandemic-related cuts and adding investments for communities of color.

But it was difficult to know exactly where the revenue went, as it was mixed into the general city fund, with income from other sources.

This confusion exacerbated the conflict between Durkan and the council.

Under the new bill, the proceeds from JumpStart will go into their own funds, starting in 2022, and the money is to be spent for the uses initially assigned by the board, with one exception.

The bill says that some dollars may continue to bolster the general fund until other sources of income return to pre-pandemic levels; up to $ 117 million could support the general fund next year, according to a memo.

In a letter last week, Durkan suggested that the JumpStart money might be needed for other uses and argued that the council bill would tie the hands of City Hall. It would make more sense to sort out spending options during the 2022 budget talks set to begin next month, she said, noting that cases of COVID-19 variants now threaten Seattle’s economic recovery.

The bill “purports to control budget decisions in the years to come, when our budget history demonstrates the importance of flexibility and the obligation of each elected official to make budget decisions for any year based on priorities,” demands, emergencies and revenues for that year, “Durkan wrote.

New office for revenue forecasting

The second bill will create a new Office of Economic Forecasting and Revenue.

Currently, analysts at the Seattle Budget Office and Department of Finance use economic indicators to forecast how much revenue the city is likely to raise. They present their forecasts to the mayor and then to the municipal council. Forecasting matters because state law states that cities must adopt balanced budgets.

The work will be performed by existing analysts and new hires, at an additional cost of approximately $ 500,000 per year. The bill’s sponsor, council chairwoman Lorena González, said the new system will make forecasting more transparent and put the council on an equal footing with the mayor.

Under the council bill, a committee composed of two representatives of the council and two representatives of the mayor will appoint a director for the new office. The office will submit quarterly forecasts to the committee for approval, in public.

State and county use similar processes, she said. The county system, in which the county executive and county council share control of a forecasting committee, was established by a charter amendment that voters approved in 2008. The amendment was necessary because the default county charter setting is that the county executive controls new offices.

Seattle City Council Insight website argued that González’s bill also requires voter approval. The Seattle Charter states that the mayor “shall direct and control all of the city’s subordinate officers, except to the extent that such administration, direction and control is entrusted by this charter to another officer or board of directors.”

The council chairman disagreed, saying the city’s charter jointly grants legislative powers, including budgetary powers, to the mayor and council. González cited his review of a legal analysis by the city attorney’s office, without sharing that analysis.

Durkan severely criticized the bill in a letter last week, stating that it requires an amendment to the charter approved by the voters and an amendment to state law which says the city budget manager has to assemble income estimates.

“The council chose to cut corners and do neither,” she wrote, stressing that the mayor and council would retain power, under the bill, to deviate from the forecast of the forecasting office.

“In other words, the legislation spends large sums of money to create a new office which likely violates state and city laws and provides in legislation that key office work can be ignored,” Durkan wrote. .

She added, “It’s a waste of resources at a time when we have so many critical needs. It shows contempt for the people’s right to vote on any charter change. “

In a statement Wednesday in response to Durkan’s letter, González reiterated that she believed the bill was legal under the charter and state law. Independent offices, commissions and councils of mayors have existed by ordinance for decades, she added.