Title of spending-increase bill confusing, Zarelli says

Photo The Daily News

Tuesday, February 21, 2006 6:36 AM PST

By Don Jenkins

OLYMPIA --- Ridgefield Republican Joe Zarelli scored a procedural victory Monday in his wonkish but slightly edgy debate with Senate Democrats over how to characterize increases in the state budget.

The Senate's presiding officer, Lt. Gov. Brad Owen, agreed with Zarelli that the title of Democrat-sponsored Senate Bill 6896 didn't spell out that it would raise the state's spending limit.

The ruling won't stop the bill, but it will require Democrats to offer a more expansive description at the top of the measure.

"I don't think people were clear on what we were doing here," said Zarelli, the Senate GOP budget leader. "What the bill does is amend Initiative 601, so it's got to be in the title."

Approved by voters in 1993, I-601 limits budget increases to inflation and population growth.

Criticized for not providing a realistic reflection of the demand for government services, I-601 has been amended numerous times by Democrats and Republicans.

This year, Senate Democrats, who are in the majority, say they must lift the I-601 spending lid to include $700 million in the current budget to spend on health programs, school construction, pensions and debt payments beginning in 2007.

Funneling the money into dedicated accounts will ensure the money is there for those purposes later, said Sen. Mark Doumit, D-Cathlamet.

"Bottom line is we're trying to prepare for the next biennium. I think we're doing a decent job, regardless of the criticism," said Doumit, vice chairman of the Ways and Means Committee. "Putting money into reserves shouldn't be considered spending."

But Zarelli argues that the bill inflates the expenditure limit, allowing for more spending now and in the future.

Zarelli objected that the bill's title --- "An act related to providing for state funding stabilization" --- didn't spell out the bill's effect.

Zarelli on Friday suggested a title that began, "An act related to gaming the people's spending limit ..."

Democrats rejected the tongue-in-cheek offering. "It was a little insulting," Doumit said.

Said Zarelli: "Yeah, I had a little fun with the amendment, but it was more realistic."

Zarelli then asked Owen to rule whether the real title adequately summed up the legislation.

Owen, a Democrat, said Monday that the title was incomplete because it didn't indicate the bill contains "policy changes to the state expenditure limit."

Owen said he wasn't criticizing the measure and that he didn't want to get in the habit of ruling on titles. But in this case, he instructed Senate Democrats to come up with a title that told the reader what the bill was about.

"The title provides a shorthand method for a reader to quickly discern the issues and law being affected," Owen ruled.

Doumit said Senate staff drafted the title. "We weren't trying to hide anything," he said.

The staff quickly prepared a new title that states the bill calls for an "adjustment to the state expenditure limit."

The bill may return to the Senate floor this week.