Balducci accuses King County Council of wasting money, sparking fiery response
King County Councilmember Claudia Balducci is publicly accusing the council of wasting more than $300,000 on election flyers and miscellaneous purposes at a time when the county is simultaneously talking about millions in budget cuts.
The accusation has rankled her colleagues and prompted a strong reaction from her main opponent in the race for King County Executive, Girmay Zahilay, who has accused Balducci of executing a “desperate political stunt.”
The dispute began on April 1 following an apparently routine gathering of the Employment and Administration Committee. During this session, the council’s employees talked about allocating $35,000 to every district representative. However, the recording from this meeting isn’t posted on the county’s official site. As chairperson of both the committee and the Council, Zahilay was at the center of these discussions.
On April 18, Council COO Janine Weihe emailed prominent council staff members, indicating she had “wonderful news” for them. She mentioned they would receive an extra “$35,000 line item added to your budget,” adding reassuringly that these funds could be utilized without any limitations.
Balducci said she was incensed as she had not asked for the money and said some councilmembers were seeking it for election mailers or flyers in a campaign cycle.
I asked why you are giving us this extra money? We were told that some offices wanted to do additional mailers to their districts and didn’t have enough money,” said Balducci in an interview. “I find this very unusual and very concerning, because we have rules and ethical standards about when we do mailers, when people are up for election, and it appears that this funding was specifically to fund council members’ offices who are running for election.
She offered up emails demonstrating that just a few days later, she sent an email to Zahilay and the senior team stating, “Representing District 6, we don’t require additional funding since we’re operating well within our budget limits. We suggest reallocating these funds towards more beneficial uses.”
I mean, this funding could potentially cover salaries for one or two employees working on crucial initiatives,” she stated during a KOMO News interview. “However, we’re looking at cuts to prosecutors handling major cases and reducing programs designed to stop crimes before they happen.
When asked whether she believed it was a waste of money, Balducci didn’t pause, “I do, I do.”
However, these claims have irritated several individuals within the King County Council offices, leading them to attempt to minimize the matter throughout Friday. KOMO News contacted each council member seeking clarification regarding their utilization of the $35,000.
Reagan Dunn, Sarah Perry, Jorge Baron, Rod Dembowski, and Zahilay replied promptly. However, Teresa Mosqueda, Desean Quinn, and Pete Von Reichbauer did not respond.
Zahilay refused to participate in an on-camera interview and appeared visibly distressed when contacted via telephone. He provided the subsequent statement to KOMO News:
This is merely a hopeless political maneuver by Councilmember Balducci.
The $35,000 shift in district office budgets was merely an internal redistribution—transferring resources from one underutilized administrative fund to another, entirely contained within the legislature’s pre-approved financial plan. No additional money from taxpayers was introduced.
The modification was suggested by impartial staff members, received unanimous approval from the complete Employment Administration Committee, and aimed at assisting council offices with handling increasing operational expenses. I neither requested nor modified this funding; others initiated and directed these actions. Nonetheless, Councilmember Balducci is targeting me solely for the purpose of gaining easy political advantages.
She lagging behind in raising funds, securing endorsements, and gaining grassroots backing in her bid for County Executive. Instead of presenting a constructive plan, she’s resorting to unfounded accusations. It’s important for citizens to stay vigilant: even though she pledged a positive campaign, her provocative tactics are likely to intensify as her campaign faces difficulties.
“I will keep concentrating on what lies ahead, rather than dwelling on attacks or considering other contenders. While I hope Councilmember Balducci takes the same approach, I’m not going to wait with bated breath.”
.”
Dunn stated that his office does not require additional funds.
In his email, he stated:
“We never knew about it as it was happening, and did not request any adjustment to our budget, and it was an EAC issue. I do not serve on that committee.
Last year, we gave back $41,338 from our 2023-24 budget to taxpayers, and we have given back money every year that I know of for the last ten years anyway. In short, we don’t expect to need that money for my office.”
Perry’s Chief of Staff, Libby Hollingshead, wrote, “Councilmember Perry’s office didn’t request this additional money, and our spending has and remains within our original budget allocation.”
Dembowski’s response was more nuanced. His Chief of Staff, Kristina Logsdon, wrote, “We are operating under a one-year budget cycle which provides for less flexibility than our typical two-year approach. District 1 appreciates Council administrative staff and the EAC exploring options to continue flexibility into this budget cycle.”
And Baron, who sits on the EAC, wrote a lengthy message to KOMO News outlining why the money was approved to transfer to district offices.
“To answer your question, our office (District 4) did not request an increase to our budgeted district allocation for 2025,” he wrote.
“What emerged (out of the meeting) was the option to internally re-allocate money that was budgeted for areas of council operations, which were expected to come in under budget, to the offices that requested additional resources. To pre-emptively address the concern that some offices were provided this flexibility while others were not, the ultimate decision was made to provide an increased allocation to every district office budget. While this may not have been expressly stated, my expectation was that this flexibility, if used, would be applied only to the extent necessary to address the challenges arising from the original concern. I also want to note that this EAC decision did not increase the overall council budget, but was solely a re-allocation of internal expense authority from one area expected to be underspent to another, where, for at least some offices, costs were now expected to be higher than originally anticipated.”
Nevertheless, Balducci contends that the funds might have been transferred for different reasons and criticizes the absence of transparency given the substantial amount of money involved.
The inquiries from KOMO News prompted a response from Stephanie Cirkovich, the Chief of Staff for the King County Council, who stated that the council staff put forward the proposal rather than any single member.
At the April 1st gathering focused on discussing council operations, county staff suggested shifting resources within their financial plan from general administrative spending toward individual district budgets across the nine divisions. These adjustments involve moving money between different categories inside the same budget framework; however, every dollar involved has previously been designated for use by the lawmaking body next year as part of the comprehensive yearly allocation for legislators. The idea came up when team members noticed potential unforeseen costs looming over district offices in 2025—a fiscal period structured annually instead of every two years—and was initiated internally without input directly from elected representatives. My expectation is that we’ll finish the current cycle below our projected expenditure levels.
When Balducci was questioned about whether she aimed to outdo Zahilay in the race for the Executive position, she responded, “Before commenting publicly, I attempted to address this matter internally first. I requested that (Zahilay) reflect upon how inappropriate and unethical this appeared, but received no reply. Given its apparent impropriety, I believed it crucial to speak up since such issues rarely come under scrutiny, particularly not at the county level.”
Balducci stated, “We must maintain vigilance regarding that trust and openly communicate our actions, but this simply did not measure up to those standards for me.”
She went on, “I genuinely hope we could be discussing practically anything else right now.”