Tag Archives: DCYF

NEWSLETTER: Campground closures, the I-5 bridge over the Columbia and more

Dear Friends and Neighbors,

People all over Washington love spending time outdoors during the summer months, and those living in the 20th Legislative District are no different. We launch our boats, grab our fishing poles, and pitch tents at campgrounds around the state.

Unfortunately, our options for where to enjoy the outdoors are shrinking this year. Four state campgrounds are closing for the rest of the year. Seven others will suffer partial closures or reduced services.

In 2025, Democrats cut the budget for the recreation program administered by the Department of Natural Resources. This year, they cut another $580,000 from the maintenance budget for those campgrounds. Combined, the cuts come to nearly $8 million.

The four campgrounds facing closure:

Anderson Lake in Elbe
Rock Lakes in Conconully
Upper Clearwater in Forks
Island Camp in Glenwood (closed to overnight use, but the cabin and day use area will remain open)

Read the full list of closures and cuts

DNR also lost a partnership with the Washington Conservation Corps, which is a program for young adults that provided DNR with the equivalent of 70 staff members.

These cuts would have been unnecessary if the Democrat majority had managed the state budget more responsibly. Instead, they dug a multi-billion hole in the budget through chronic overspending and overreliance on volatile tax schemes.

If you have any questions or comments, email me or call my office at (360) 786-7638.

Sincerely,

John Braun

Delaying light rail offers best hope for new bridge

The following op-ed I cowrote with Sen. Jeff Wilson, R-Longview, appeared in the April 29 issue of The Center Square.

Boston has its “Big Dig,” New York has its Second Avenue Subway, and the states of Washington and Oregon are getting set to play in the same league. Replacing the aging Interstate Bridge between Portland and Vancouver will be the biggest construction project our two states have ever undertaken. We’ve been working on this megaproject for 22 years, and we are closer to breaking ground than ever before.

Yet this latest effort is threatened by the same issue that killed the last big push 13 years ago. Decision-makers continue to see the new bridge as a means to get Portland light rail across the Columbia to Vancouver. They still haven’t figured out how we’ll pay for it.

Our message is simple. We need a safe bridge, and we need a bridge we can afford. We need a bridge that adds vehicle capacity and reduces traffic congestion. The oldest parts of the existing bridge date from 1917, it’s jammed with traffic morning and evening, and it’s at risk to fail in the next big earthquake. But we also need to get our priorities straight.

This is a bridge project, not a light rail project. And the only way this works is if we put light rail on hold until it makes sense for everyone – most importantly, the people of Clark County who would be taxed for light rail operations, and who have voted against it three straight times.

What we are suggesting should be obvious to everyone who has been following the story. What surprises us is that more people aren’t saying it. Everything became clear a few weeks ago when Interstate Bridge Replacement managers finally released an updated cost estimate they had been delaying for months. Projected costs have doubled since 2022 to $14.4 billion, counting everything – new bridge, light rail and five miles of freeway improvements.

We don’t have that kind of money. So IBR managers and the governors of Washington and Oregon are proposing that we build the project in phases. We’ve lined up $5.7 billion from state and federal sources, The bridge alone will cost us $5.68 billion. Still pricey, but within the range of what we can achieve.

But the people driving this project don’t want to stop with that. They want light rail, too. “That train has already left the station,” declared Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson, blithely ignoring the fact that light rail construction will add $3.5 billion we don’t have, and that the voters of Clark County still have not agreed to tax themselves for their share of operations, about $4 million a year.

The questions will take years to resolve. Will we qualify for a billion-dollar federal transit grant? What about the rest of the money? What about the public vote? Will the people of Clark County be insulated from the financial liabilities of the Portland Metro? And will the trains go all the way into Vancouver or will they stop on a viaduct 90 feet above the waterfront with no connection to local transit?

Committing to a multi-billion-dollar expenditure for light rail when questions like these go unanswered risks starving every other highway and bridge project in our two states, or pushing our bond capacity to the limit, or forcing taxpayer bailouts the entire populace will have to bear.

The problem is that this was conceived from the start primarily as a light rail project, with the bridge as a secondary element – what you might call the “rail that wags the dog.” It started in 2004 when Portlanders looked for a way to cross the river and tap the Washington tax base for light rail. They realized they would have a tough job selling Clark County, where residents of outlying communities have little interest in supporting a light rail system they are unlikely to use. But what if they sweetened the deal with a multi-billion-dollar freeway bridge?

That got our attention. The bridge part made sense. Unfortunately, advocates of what was then called the Columbia River Crossing were unable to find a way to make light rail financially feasible. Senate Republicans tried negotiating, but the governor’s office told us to take it or leave it. We said no, the deal collapsed, and here we are 13 years later with a new proposal that looks like the old one. Just think. If not for light rail, we could have had a new bridge by now.

How can we break this logjam?

Let’s focus on things we know we can accomplish, like building a bridge. Light rail is a separate question. We can make the bridge “light rail ready,” but who says the trains need to roll from Day One?
Before we build light rail, the people of Clark County need to vote. Somehow decision-makers keep forgetting this. The people who will be taxed for light rail need to say yes, and their rights must be respected.
Let’s keep our promises. If we’re going to sell this project as a way to reduce congestion, let’s do more than just talk. The current plan adds no capacity. We’ll still have three traffic lanes each way. The bridge will be wide enough for an additional lane in each direction. Let’s build it that way from the start.

The engineering involved in this project is easy compared to the political challenges. Until the people of Clark County say yes to light rail, let’s not force it on them. A project this big, this complex and this costly should never be railroaded.

Better oversight of DCYF needed to protect Washington’s kids

In the latest episode of my Elephant in the Dome podcast, I discuss the urgent need for oversight at the Department of Children, Youth, and Families (DCYF).

The unanticipated impact of the “Keeping Families Together Act” has been severe. In some cases, children who should have been removed from their parents’ or relatives’ care are suffering critical injuries and even death.

While other states are handling similar agency failures through bipartisan investigation, Republicans were unsuccessful in getting the Democrat majority here in Washington to pass legislation to address this.

However, we succeeded in defeating legislation that would have made the situation worse.

One member of the House of Representatives sponsored a bill this year that would have removed the oversight duties of the DCYF Oversight Board. Thankfully, this bill did not pass. It would have been a terrible mistake.

Washington is facing $500 million in annual tort claims, largely driven by DCYF. Not only is this a staggering financial cost. It also represents the heartbreaking human toll this policy is having on vulnerable children in state care.

Republicans and Democrats in Washington must partner to hold DCYF accountable and to change the law to better protect children in state care.

NEWSLETTER: Exposed — Democrat motivations on the income tax and fraud at DCYF

Daycare fraud concerns should be a priority

Dear Friends and Neighbors,

Since news came to light months ago about the rampant daycare fraud in Minnesota, I have been concerned about the possibility of similar fraud here in Washington.

As the legislative session got underway, I shared these concerns publicly. Democrat leaders in Olympia dismissed them as unfounded; the Speaker of the House went so far as to say such concerns were an insult to legitimate daycare owners in Washington. I said that anyone operating legitimately should want fraud to be uncovered and addressed so their own businesses don’t suffer guilt by association. Moreover, any money we lose because of fraud means fewer dollars for people who need those services.

I was right to be concerned.

A recent audit uncovered $37 million in questionable payments from federal tax dollars to daycare providers in Washington.

An article in the Washington State Standard reported, “The $37 million the audit identified is made up of $27.2 million in federal Child Care and Development Fund grants and $9.9 million from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF, program.”

This means that $1 of every $5 (or 20% of the total amount) DCYF paid out was an overpayment.

LISTEN TO MY PODCAST ABOUT FRAUD AT DCYF

While some were overpaid, others overbilled the state. While this doesn’t necessarily prove fraud in the system, it does prove that the DCYF lacks proper documentation to back up its spending and/or isn’t complying with federal requirements.

DCYF has not referred the audit findings to the Office of Fraud and Accountability for review. According to the Washington State Standard, DCYF says the cases of questionable payments did not “rise to the level of suspected fraud or intentional deception.”

I disagree.

If the fault for overpayments lies with DCYF, that indicates gross incompetence and mismanagement. DCYF claims they don’t have enough staff to adequately review hundreds of thousands of payments. That should be remedied.

But, if some daycare providers are overbilling the state and can’t provide documentation to justify their numbers, that indicates fraud and should be further investigated for “intentional deception.”

Every dollar the state spends comes from hardworking taxpayers, and while agencies such as DCYF waste 20% of their payouts on overpayments, the Democrat majority continues to raise taxes and claim that they need more and more revenue.

Republicans often say that Washington doesn’t have a revenue problem — it has a spending problem. If Democrats took audit findings such as these more seriously, there would be room in existing revenue to fund the state’s priorities without demanding another dime from you.

I’ll continue to follow this situation closely and work toward greater accountability at DCYF and in other state agencies.

READ MY RECENT COLUMN ON THE DCYF AUDIT

If you have any questions or comments, email me or call my office at (360) 786-7638.

Sincerely,

John Braun

Emails show true motive for the income tax

For years, Republicans have asserted that Democrats would eventually pass a state income tax, knowing it is unconstitutional, with the intention of triggering legal challenges that would eventually force the Washington State Supreme Court to reconsider its 1933 decision that determined income is property.

We knew their hope was that the increasingly liberal Court would overturn more than 90 years of legal precedent and rule that income is not property, which would make a graduated income tax – like the one Democrats passed this past legislative session — legal in Washington.

This was recently confirmed in an article appearing in the Center Square, which quotes reports emails between the Senate majority leader and the Attorney General’s office, which were found through a public records request.

As you recall, Democrats passed that income tax after branding it a “Millionaires’ Tax” and claiming it only affects people who make more than $1 million a year. Democrats actually voted two years ago to ban an income tax at both the state and local level. When confronted with this, the Senate majority leader called the vote a “pie crust promise,” which he said was easily made and easily broken.

During the legislative session, Republicans worked hard to shine a spotlight on the details of that income tax proposal. These include:

Hurts small businesses
Contains a marriage penalty
Can be expanded easily – both in rate and in who it applies to
Will cause job providers and others to move out of state

It also contains a clause that prevents the public from overturning the tax through referendum. The Center Square article reveals that the initial draft of the bill did not include this clause — it was added at the suggestion of Solicitor General Noah Purcell.

Democrats held hearings on the income tax in both the House and Senate. Senate Republicans lead a grassroots effort calling on people to sign in to oppose the bill. More than 118,000 people signed in against it. The actual testimony heard in committee was 2 to 1 opposed.

After the hearings, when asked about the groundswell of opposition to the bill, Democrat leadership said, “We don’t pay attention to people who sign in, but not to testify” and “They’re not helping us make decisions.”

Republicans, however, fought hard to educate the public about the bill – to see the big picture about how the tax will affect Washington’s economy. We are already seeing companies such as Starbucks and wealthy individuals leaving Washington – taking with them jobs and the revenue source the tax depends on.

We will continue to fight against a state income tax next year, as we expect Democrats to attempt to broaden it.

“An income tax on anyone in Washington will become an income tax on everyone in Washington.”

– Rep. Drew Stokesbary
31st District

Survey says affordability is
still the top concern

The results are in for the short online survey I included in a previous e-newsletter and a recent mailer sent out to my constituents.

The biggest takeaway is that 88% of those who responded do NOT support a state income tax if it applies to them.

In fact, more than 90% think the Legislature should send major tax proposals, such as the new state income tax, to voters for approval. Less than 7% disagreed.

Approximately 92% of people in our district think state government should live within existing revenue and stop raising taxes for new programs.

Also, affordability is still the biggest challenge facing communities and families. Of those surveyed, less than 2% are not concerned about the rising cost of living in Washington. In contrast, 80% are “very concerned” or “extremely concerned.”

Other highlights:

40% think preventing new taxes and tax increases should be the Legislature’s top priority in 2027
22% think the top priority should be reducing government spending
More than 75% think Washington is currently headed in the right direction
74.19% believe the Legislature should prioritize stronger laws to support law enforcement and reduce crime

When asked what they believe is the biggest factor driving up the cost of housing in Washington, answers showed:

Government regulation (34.43%)
Taxes and fees (22.95%)
Population growth (21.31%)
High interest rates (8.2%)
Other (13.11%)

When asked what the biggest challenge our communities face right now, the most frequent responses said the high cost of living, taxes, decaying infrastructure and increasing the number of police officers while also prosecuting more criminals.

When asked what the biggest challenge their families are facing, the most common answers were affordability (especially rent, energy, healthcare and childcare), property taxes, government overregulation, and the quality of education their children are getting.

Thank you for a successful town hall

Thank you to everyone who participated in the 20th Legislative District virtual town hall hosted online by Rep. Peter Abbarno, Rep. Ed Orcutt and me on April 13.

People asked many great questions. Not surprisingly, the new income tax and the cost of living in Washington were top concerns.

John Braun