Government lists priorities for spending

The state has a list of things it shouldn't spend money on — including the Family Policy Council, a computer to handle state employee health insurance and reports on how effective government services are.

The governor's Priorities of Government program has listed services as unwanted before, and they have survived. But the recent reports on what should be funded come as the economy continues to slide, and tax revenue is expected to fall short in the state's next two-year budget by as much as $5.1 billion.

State Auditor Brian Sonntag was displeased to see his performance audits, which voters approved in a 2005 initiative, on one of this year's "Do Not Buy" budget lists. The "Do Not Buy" lists come out every two years and were released last week.

"Wow. It seems like the voters have been clearly sending a different message," he said Tuesday.

Performance audits gauge how effective services are and suggest ways to save money. Targets so far have included state highway congestion, health professional licensing and the Port of Seattle.

A Priorities of Government report recommended against funding the $26.8 million audits. They were ranked 201st out of 248 programs in the government-efficiency category.

"We're looking at a $9 to $1 return on investment. That includes our work in local government, as well as state agencies," Sonntag said. "I don't think this is a time to be cutting back on accountability at any level."

The buying recommendations are only part of Gov. Chris Gregoire's budget-writing plan, stressed Glenn Kuper, spokesman for the Office of Financial Management.

"The key is, it's one tool. It's not the budget itself," Kuper said, noting that the governor also has called for citizen suggestions on saving money.

In the Priorities of Government approach, teams of experts examine sweeping goals of the state, such as ensuring public safety. They rank programs as high-priority, low-priority, "Buy Next" and "Do Not Buy."

In some areas, including natural resources and recreation, nothing ranked as low as "Do Not Buy." But the broad category of state government had 53 activities with that rating, including the performance audits.

In the health category, the report recommended against paying $7.7 million for the Family Policy Council, a program that primarily coordinates other programs aimed at curbing child abuse and illegal drug use.

The same report recommended against paying $89 million for a new computer system to handle public employee health benefits.

The current system is 30 years old and handles $1.5 billion in transactions every year, said Dave Wasser of the Health Care Authority, which oversees it.

Knowing that the budget would be tight, the agency has asked to buy a new system using bonds, which could be repaid through higher fees charged to state agencies, he said.

"It's one of these things where the state has to make a decision, and it's a tough time to make a decision. But do we want a system this old and creaky to be running something this major?"

The budget gap that the state is facing is massive, including a $413 million shortfall by June that brings the total figure to $5 billion. But being on the "Do Not Buy" lists is not a death sentence for programs.

When she faced a smaller budget deficit in 2005, Gregoire singled one office for elimination: the State Film Office, which received $1.2 million in funding.

The Seattle-based office not only survived, but in 2006, the Legislature approved tax breaks for crews filming movies, commercials and television programs in the state. The State Film Office, which has a staff of two, helps crews find locations and explains the incentive program to prospective producers.

"The way it works is, the filmmakers show us information about what they're shooting, and we provide them with a location package," managing director Mary Trimarco said.

This year, the Film Office was ranked 115th out of 167 programs in the economic-vitality category. It was given a low priority — not the best possible, but better than "Do Not Buy."

"I can't speculate about what will happen next, but the incentive program is good. It does enhance Washington's competitiveness," Trimarco said.