Flood warning on county taxes

A tax on King County property owners is a smart regional approach ensuring winter rains don't turn into damaging floods, but the proposed increase is too large and places an ill-timed wallop on taxpayers and local jurisdictions.

The county's shift from separate zones addressing flooding with little coordination to a single flood-control district is the best approach to addressing a backlog of maintenance and repairs. The county has an aging system of 500 levees and hardened embankments. But a property-tax increase to raise $300 million requires more time and deliberation.

As the weather grows cooler and wetter, a sense of urgency understandably drives this issue. With unsettling swiftness, the County Council created a flood agency, developed a weighty project list and now proposes an increase of 10 cents per $1,000 of assessed valuation for 2008.

The flood levy doesn't require voter approval, only a majority vote of council members. But council members should consider taxpayers who face an unsettling array of tax increases on the November ballot.

Another reason for more deliberation comes from the collective outcry of local officials, including those representing Bellevue, Federal Way, Maple Valley, Shoreline and Seattle.

They are not debating a regional approach to flood planning and maintenance. Nor is this page. One doesn't have to live in the flood plains of Carnation or Issaquah to support improving county flood-control efforts.

Six major river systems flow through the county: the Snoqualmie, Skykomish, Sammamish, Cedar, Green and White rivers as well as their tributaries and smaller streams. The county has done what it can in the area of flood control, hence a special commendation from the Federal Emergency Management Agency that could lower flood-insurance rates for homeowners in unincorporated areas.

But considerably more work needs to be a done. A 10-year property-tax levy may be an appropriate way to finance the work and spread the burden. But issues of regional equity should not be ignored to get there.

For example, Shoreline residents would be paying to buy property in Tukwila for a levee. Should residents living in proximity to the levee kick in more?

Questions of proportionality resonate particularly among local governments such as Bellevue, which has spent $30 million over the past decade-and-a-half on flood control. Bellevue would be asked to ante up for other areas of the region, yet its own projects wouldn't be scheduled under the county plan until 2017.

The council legally can impose this tax but it ought not roll over the local governments. This is an opportunity to develop a regional approach to flooding that is regional in more than financing, but also in voices heard around the table.