And you thought the county budget situation was bad.



If Senate Democrats’ budget proposal is any indication, the impacts of proposed cuts at the state level will be deep and widespread — felt heavily in education at all levels, in social services, and state employment. What’s more concerning, however, is how cuts by the state will be felt on the local level.



The recently unveiled 2009-2011 budget recommendations would use $3 billion in federal stimulus money, part of Washington’s Rainy Day savings, reallocation of some capital project funds, and a substantial wage freeze for state and public school employees. After all that, they only have to cut an estimated $3.85 billion from various state-funded programs. Under the Senate Dems’ plan, about 7,000 state and public school jobs would be cut, college enrollment would be cut by 10,500, as well as state-run Basic Health funding, and several other state-funded health care programs, including care for state employees. The Basic Health Plan, which serves low-income families, would be cut by $250 million, reducing the number of people covered from 106,000 to 60,000. Funding for public schools would be cut by $1.2 billion.  Ouch.



On the local level, there will be some clear victims, and some not so clear ones, says Bruce Mann, professor in the Department of Economics at the University of Puget Sound. Mann is one half of the team that produces the annual Horizons economic forecast for Pierce County, and is a sort of specialist in evaluating local economies.

Cuts to higher education are likely to have clear impacts on economic recovery, says Mann. Maintaining a skilled and highly-qualified workforce requires colleges to churn out ready-made workers, and once the economy starts rolling again, those workers will be in high demand. Cutting enrollment means that demand will be harder to meet.



Considering those consequences, some might be surprised to read Mann’s next thought — cuts to higher education are tolerable in the short term, as are tuition hikes. It’s a tough choice to have to make, he says, but it’s one we can live with. Colleges have the fall-back of raising tuition to make up for some of the cuts, while K-12 education has no option at all. Mann isn’t a fan of cutting K-12 education, saying that the savings don’t always justify the consequences.



“If you cut there, you can get away with it,” says Mann. “But you have to ask whether it’s penny wise and pound foolish. I’d say we can drive on worse roads for a few years more than we can get away with reducing education.”



Cutting K-12 education, as well as cuts to social services and health care, have a number of often overlooked consequences, says Mann. And most of those consequences end up being paid for on the local level. Put simply, reducing the quality of education, widening holes in government safety nets and killing healthcare for tens of thousands of people forces more and more people into crisis. People who can’t get assistance end up in local shelters or depending on assistance programs that are funded and operated on the local level. Low income families who can’t get health care — there will be 46,000 more of them next year — face deteriorating health. When things get bad enough, those people end up in the emergency room. Hospitals, in turn, eat the costs of care provided when people can’t pay.



“You will end up with more and more people in dire trouble,” says Mann. “When people end up on the streets and needing services, the state doesn’t pay for it. Local governments do. It’s not going to be pretty.”



Mann suggests state officials should consider draining the state’s Rainy Day fund and other surpluses before they consider cutting services that will have broad economic impacts on local communities.



“This is the wrong time to be socking away money,” he says.