Sales tax plan awaits voters

Proponents and opponents of a sales tax increase for emergency communications agree that Spokane County needs to restore Crime Check and build a new digital radio network.

They just disagree on how to pay for it.

Former County Commissioners John Roskelley, a Democrat, and Kate McCaslin, a Republican, found common ground in a voters’ pamphlet statement against the proposed 0.1 percent sales tax increase. They contend existing revenue should instead be used, and argue that the proposed tax would collect too much money.

Sheriff Ozzie Knezovich and other emergency service providers say local governments have nowhere near enough spare cash to pay the multimillion-dollar Crime Check and radio system costs. What’s more, the cost of maintaining a new radio system, as well as projected budget shortfalls in 911 dispatching, will soak up any excess from the proposed tax, proponents say.

Voters, who will decide Nov. 6 whether the proposed tax is approved or rejected, may need faith and philosophy as well as financial data to decide whether they see a boon or a boondoggle.

Where McCaslin and Roskelley see an unending “blank check for big-spending politicians,” Knezovich sees “a sustainable revenue source” for needs that never go away. Financial projections are loose enough to be interpreted either way.

What’s agreed is that police and fire agencies throughout the county need a new radio network to replace the 50-year-old system.

There really isn’t much choice, assuming the Federal Communications Commission persists in forcing local emergency service providers to convert to narrow-band radio technology to free up channels for other uses.

Agencies failing to comply by 2012 would have their current bandwidth cut in half. New technology would allow authorities to transmit data as well as voice, so computers in police cars and fire trucks could receive photographs and maps in the field, among other possibilities.

If a witness photographs a criminal suspect with a cell phone, for instance, law officers could see the photo almost immediately. An officer could cruise through a parking lot with a camera system that scans license plates and identifies stolen cars. Firefighters could call up blueprints of burning buildings or consult digital maps for tricky rural addresses.

Police and firefighters could be switched onto the same radio channel when they work together.

“We want interoperability, but the reality is we want to make sure the system works for the daily needs of the public, and we can’t assure that,” said Fire District 4 Chief Ed Lewis, speaking as president of the Inland Empire Fire Chiefs Association. Lewis said his firefighters sometimes have to use truck-to-truck “tactical” radio channels to relay a message until it reaches a truck with a radio capable of contacting a network transmission tower.

Crime reports have declined

Roskelley said he and McCaslin don’t dispute the value of restoring Crime Check, the nonemergency crime hotline that was a Spokane institution for decades. Crime Check operators took crime reports and requests for service around the clock until January 2005, when the city of Spokane quit paying its share of the cost during a budget crunch.

Crime Check was replaced by the Spokane Crime Reporting Center, which takes reports – but not the requests for nonemergency service that Crime Check handled.

Even with recently expanded hours, the Crime Reporting Center is closed when most crime occurs. The center takes calls from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. on weekdays and from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Saturdays; it’s closed on Sundays.

The result is that crime reports fell from 47,693 in 2004 to 23,950 last year. The number of calls fell from approximately 285,000 to 65,778.

“You have to have accurate crime statistics so you can target your hot spots,” Knezovich said. “I don’t have that anymore.”

Assuming Spokane city and county, and Spokane Valley continue their combined $729,794 contribution to the Crime Reporting Center’s cost, $1.3 million a year more is needed to restore Crime Check, Knezovich said.

Pad or no pad?

McCaslin and Roskelley say the new tax would generate $7.5 million to $8 million a year.

County budget figures support their contention. Annual revenue from an identical 0.1 percent countywide sales tax has been rising every year for more than a decade. Last year the tax generated $7.6 million, and this year it is projected to bring in $8.2 million, according to analysts.

Out of that would come annual payments estimated by a bond attorney at $3.15 million a year for the proposed radio system, plus the annual Crime Check cost of $1.3 million.

That leaves at least $3 million a year in tax revenue.

“They have no plan for that,” Roskelley said. “What are they going to do with the rest of it? They’re just pumping up their general fund.”

Knezovich has three answers for that criticism.

One is that an undetermined amount of money will be needed to maintain the new computerized radio system.

Another is that an unspecified amount might be used for car and portable radios and other communications equipment that isn’t included in the network construction cost.

The third is that rising 911 emergency dispatching costs and declining revenue will start soaking up the surplus in 2010.

“At this point, based on our projections, that’s a real good possibility,” said Lorlee Mizell, director of the 911 center.

However, the size of the projected deficit depends on whether the Legislature allows continued erosion of 911 tax support as more people route telephone calls over their broadband Internet connections. The 911 center’s database and telephone trunk lines are paid by a statewide tax on conventional and cellular telephone service, but Internet callers don’t pay the tax.

By 2012, the last year for which Mizell has projections, the 911 deficit will be $1.5 million if the Legislature does nothing and $828,000 if Internet calls are taxed.

That would leave at least $1.5 million from the proposed sales tax to pad general fund budgets or to prevent the next communications crisis, depending on one’s point of view.

Intent of earlier tax ‘ignored’

Voters in September 2004 approved a 0.1 percent sales tax that former Sheriff Mark Sterk wanted to use for a new radio system. He had to abandon that idea when the cities of Spokane and Spokane Valley declined to share their portions.

“Both jurisdictions needed funds, and this was a windfall, even though the original intent was being ignored,” Roskelley said.

But Knezovich points out that the 2004 ballot title adopted by Roskelley, McCaslin and Commissioner Phil Harris specified only that the tax was to be used “for criminal justice and public safety purposes” – not communications.

At the time, Roskelley objected in general to increasing the sale tax, a position he still holds on grounds that the tax stifles business and “harms those least able to pay for it.” Commissioners added a sunset clause at Roskelley’s suggestion, but he still opposes seeking the increase.

Knezovich believes it’s futile to suggest solving a multimillion-dollar communications problem with that 2004 tax or a now-permanent 0.1 percent criminal justice sales tax that voters approved in November 1990.

All the money has been allocated to things residents probably don’t want to give up, he said.

For example, the tax approved in 2004 pays for 16 jail workers, two juvenile corrections and probation officers, five public defense attorneys and assistants, and 10 prosecuting attorneys and assistants. “Can you imagine the impact on the criminal justice system if the voters don’t renew that tax (in 2009)?” Knezovich asked. “What are we going to do? That’s the danger of not thinking these are systems that need to be maintained.”

Roskelley and McCaslin suggest cities and the county use their real estate excise tax to help pay for a new communications system, but the county’s chief executive officer, Marshall Farnell, said the county’s portion is largely tied up with other projects. Those include construction of two water parks and fairground improvements.