Proposition 5
(Annual Budget Estimates)
Ballot Title
Shall the Seattle City Charter be amended to eliminate provisions concerning annual estimates of City expenses and revenues, which provisions have been made superfluous by State law; and shall Section 22 of Article IV of said charter be deleted accordingly?
Voter-Pamphlet Explanation
The Charter as it Exists Now
Article 4, Section 22 of the Charter sets out detailed budgeting requirements, including provisions regarding annual estimates of City expenses and revenues. Specifically, the section requires the following:
(1) On or before July 10 of each year, each City department head must submit to the City Council Finance Committee an annual estimate of operating expenses for the following year.
(2) The City Comptroller must submit the amount required "to meet the interest, redemption and sinking funds for all outstanding bonded debts, an estimate of the amount of revenue likely to accrue from all sources, other than taxation, and the condition of each fund in the treasury."
(3) In determining the budget and tax levy for any year, the City Council must base its revenue estimates primarily on the collection experience of the 12 months ending the previous June 30; the Council is not to estimate revenue from any source in excess of the amount collected during that time unless it is "clearly established" that those "excess amounts will in fact be realized." The City Council also is to include estimates of revenue only from sources "previously established by law."
(4) The City Council is to include in each year's budget "an item equal in amount to the aggregate of all taxes levied for the second fiscal year prior to the budget year, which are delinquent and outstanding on the last preceding September 1."
However, state law (chapter 35.32A of the Revised Code of Washington) now lays out a process, schedule and organizational structure for annual budgeting in cities such as Seattle with over 300,000 population. This state law, which covers the same subject area as does Article 4, Section 22, makes these Charter provisions superfluous. In addition, the elective office of City Comptroller, mentioned as part of the budgeting process in Article 4, Section 22, was abolished by a 1991 Charter amendment.
City officials have followed state law provisions concerning budgeting for many years.
The Effect of the Proposition If Adopted
The City Charter would be amended to delete the text of Section 22 of Article 4. City officials would continue to follow state law provisions concerning budgeting.