The Washington Supreme Court heard arguments today on the constitutionality of I-1183, the voter-approved initiative that gets the state out of the liquor business. The Costco-backed initiative allows stores larger than 10,000 square feet to sell liquor starting June 1st.

Opponents of the initiative sued the state, arguing that the measure included more than one subject and was misleading to voters. They appealed to the Supreme Court after a judge in Cowlitz County upheld the initiative in March.

At the heart of their argument is an article in the state Constitution which says that legislative bills and initiatives can’t include more than one subject, and that subject has to be clearly stated in the title of the bill.

Michael Subit, an attorney representing Washington Association for Substance Abuse and Violence Prevention, argued in court Thursday that the measure violated the single-subject rule by including a $10 million earmark for public safety.

(more…)

The state is set to bring in $30.75 million from auctioning the rights to apply for a spirits retail liquor license at 167 state-run stores, the Washington State Liquor Control Board said Monday. The state auctioned off the rights as part of Initiative 1183, which voters approved last year to privatize the liquor business in Washington.

Winning bidders get to apply for a liquor license at the existing state-run stores, which are exempt from the new law’s rule that says that liquor stores must be at least 10,000 square feet.

Online bidding for the liquor rights ended at 6:35 p.m. on Friday, with 121 successful bidders. The highest winning bid was for $750,100 for a liquor store in Tacoma. In total, the event drew 551 bidders casting more than 14,000 bids.

The bidders still need to secure a lease with the landlord because the state does not own the individual properties. If they can’t get a lease, they can sell the rights or apply for a liquor license at a different location within a mile of the existing store. The state’s new privatization law goes into effect June 1st.

Tags: intiative 1183, liquor

A Cowlitz County judge reversed his previous ruling on a voter-approved liquor privatization initiative, allowing for implementation to continue.  Earlier this month, Superior Court Judge Stephen Warning ruled the initiative had two subjects, rendering it unconstitutional.  On Monday, he changed his mind.

“While nobody likes to say that they are wrong, and I think judges least of all, I think I was previously,” said Warning.

Watch his entire ruling below.  Then, on Wednesday, tune into The Impact for my interview with the director of the Washington State Liquor Control Board, who updates us on progress toward implementing I-1183, even as this Cowlitz County case is appealed to the State Supreme Court.

You can watch The Impact Wednesday nights at 7 p.m. on TVW.

Tags: Initiative 1183, liquor privatization, The Impact

A joint House and Senate committee held a work session Thursday on Initiative 502, which would license, regulate and tax marijuana sales in Washington state. The initiative has collected enough signatures to go before voters in November, unless the Legislature enacts it first.

John McKay, a law professor and former U.S. Attorney, testified in favor of the initiative, saying Washington state needs a “new way to approach a failed policy.” The criminal enforcement of marijuana drives an “enormous flow of money to dangerous drug cartels, gangs and thugs,” said McKay, noting that billions of dollars worth of marijuana is trafficked down I-5 each year.

Retired FBI officer Charles Mandigo said drug dealers can still be arrested and prosecuted under the initiative. If marijuana is sold in stores and not by gangs, it would stem the violence associated with drug turf wars, he said.

Speaking in opposition, Thurston County Sheriff John Snaza said more than 17 million Americans smoke marijuana, and the initiative doesn’t consider the impact on children or their families. “It puts people in an altered state,” he said. “I respect their ability to make that decision as adults. But how are we going to regulate the effect of marijuana on the children around them?”

Snaza said he believes the projected revenue that the state would earn from selling marijuana is “overly inflated.”

Following the hearing, the Yes on I-502 campaign held a press conference discussing their approach to the November election. You can watch the full half-hour video here.

Tags: Initiative 502, marijuana

A measure that would legalize, tax and regulate marijuana in Washington state has enough certified signatures to go to the Legislature for consideration, Secretary of State Sam Reed announced today.

Initiative 502 would allow people over the age of 21 to buy marijuana at stores regulated by the state Liquor Control Board. People could buy up to an ounce at a time, and it would also set a new standard for driving while under the influence of marijuana. You can read the full text here.

Sponsors of the marijuana measure submitted 354,608 signatures — far more than what’s required for a statewide proposition. Lawmakers can pass the measure, or reject it and let it go to the November ballot for voters to decide.

Earlier today, the Senate heard a bill that aims to give cities and counties more control over how they can regulate medical marijuana.

Tags: legalization, marijuana, Secretary of State, tax

This week, I spoke with Sen. Dan Swecker about a Constitutional amendment he’s sponsoring for the regular session that would put an end to unfunded initiatives. What do Republicans and Democrats think? And how would this affect professional initiative writer, Tim Eyman? Here’s what Swecker had to say.

Q: First, tell me a little about your idea and how this came about.

Swecker: Actually, it’s kind of come from frustrations we’ve felt over the last four or five years as we’ve had to cut the budget. The biggest examples are initiatives 728 and 732 that provided for smaller class sizes and cost of living increases for teachers. The cost of those is just monumental – probably hundreds of millions of dollars every year and in an environment where you’re already having to cut programs in order to balance the budget. The idea of pouring more money into one part of one program just doesn’t seem appropriate. I also just don’t think that people have any understanding of whether or not an initiative is going to cost something or whether or not taxes would have to be raised. 

This bill would do two things. First, the state would do a fiscal impact analysis then the bill has the maker of the initiative indicate what the revenue source would be that would pay for the program. There was a recent issue of Initiative 1163 to provide training for home care workers and the ranges of cost were from $40 million to $80 million. We’re in a position where we’re already cutting programs for the most vulnerable and disabled parts of our population, things like Basic Healthcare. So it seems crazy to take more money out of htose programs to pay for training. So I just decided that it’s important that people take on the same responsibility that I have as a legislator.

Q: So, because not everyone might be totally familiar with how initiatives work: Once voters pass an initiative under current law — even if it requires a lot of funding — the Legislature basically can’t change it for two years.

Swecker: Right, it takes a two-thirds majority to touch it for the first two years.

I mean, everybody loves education and loves teachers and wants smaller class sizes, so it sounds like a really good vote. But when you take a look at the fiscal implications, it could be really horrendous. (more…)

Tags: initiatives, Q&A, Sen. Dan Swecker

This week’s Q&A is with Sen. Joe Zarelli. I spoke with him about SJR 8206, a Constitutional Amendment that will bolster the Rainy Day Fund by requiring the state to put “extraordinary revenue growth” in the bank.

Q: First, tell me what this would do in your own words.

Zarelli: Well, it builds upon what we put out a couple of years back establishing the Rainy Day Fund. For me, it’s one of those long-term lessons learned from the current revenue scenario we’re in, where we saw revenue grow way outside a typical scenario (earlier in the decade).  What this does is this sets up a process in the future where if this ever happens again, we’d be required to capture a percent of extraordinary revenues and move it to the Rainy Day Fund. That does two things: First, it makes us save some of that money and second, we don’t spend it — so it has a double effect of making the budget more sustainable over time.

Q: You mentioned that it saves money in two ways — the second being that you don’t create new programs with extraordinary revenue. Can you say more about that?

Zarelli: Well, the biggest problem is that when you have a spike in revenue that you know isn’t going to continue and then you spend that spike, it creates a bow wave — you have no way to support that spending. When revenue comes back down to its historical growth pattern and then spending is way out of balance, that creates problems like we’re in now. The idea is to harmonize the spending pattern so it stays consistent with what is long-term growth instead of the ebbs and flows.

Q: There hasn’t been much opposition to this Constitutional amendment. Does that reflect bipartisan support across the state?

Zarelli: Well, there are some of those in the social services arena who think that we can’t commit to saving money, we have to spend it because there’s a huge need. There is a small group, but my message to them is that it does us no good if we commit to spending that we then have to withdraw from. (more…)

Tags: Budget, budget stabilization, Q&A, Rainy Day Fund, revenue, SJR 8206, taxes, Zarelli

Last week, I spoke to Tim Eyman about his latest initiative and how it would affect tolling across the state. This week, I spoke with Doug MacDonald, former secretary of transportation. He retired in 2007, just after the Tacoma Narrows Bridge opened. He’s an opponent of the initiative. Here’s what he had to say.

Q: First, what does this initiative do from your perspective?
MacDonald: Well, the worst part of the initiative is that it’s going to stop a whole lot of progress that’s been made on roadway improvements. I’m not sure that Tim Eyman, when he drafted this initiative, understood what some of its effects would be. But the kind of bomb that it dropped that’s most significant is on the 520 bridge project, because that’s structured to be financed by tolls to pay back bonds that would pay for some of its cost. That’s a good thing because it means that costs get paid in part by the users and not fall on taxpayers across the state. That’s a plan that’s been very attractive.

But the initiative says that tolls have to be set by the Legislature, which is absolutely not consistent with tolls being used to pay back that kind of a bond. And the confirmation of that isn’t coming from people like me, it’s coming from our state treasurer, Jim McIntire. McIntire has analyzed all this and he has put out a statement, reflected in the OFM fiscal analysis, that says that investors won’t buy bonds at as favorable a rate if there’s the political uncertainty of having tolls being set by the Legislature. (more…)

Tags: Doug MacDonald, funding, initiative 1125, Q&A, taxes, Tim Eyman, tolls, transportation

Last week, I spoke with Nora Gibson about the pros of Initiative 1163, which would require more training for home care workers. This week, I spoke to Julie Ferguson, who is an opponent. Ferguson is a board member of the Washington Private Duty Association, which represents home care businesses. She’s also an administrator and part-owner of a private duty home care agency, Advanced Health Care.

Q: From your perspective, what does this initiative do?

Ferguson: Well, this initiative is troublesome. Initiative 1163 is special interest training program benefiting only the SEIU with absolutely no funding mechanism. My colleagues and I work with seniors every day, we care for thousands of seniors, we employ thousands of caregivers and this expensive union-sponsored initiative is not necessary. The costs will be passed on through higher taxes and small businesses like mine will be forced to raise their rates to compensate for non-funded training.

The Legislature didn’t fund the predecessor, Initiative 1029, for three years because there’s simply no money in the budget. Earlier this year, SEIU filed several initiatives that did similar things — all the others had a funding component except for 1163. For some reason, they chose that one to focus their signature gathering efforts on. I don’t know where they think the money will come from.

Q: Can you say more about this initiative being a mechanism for unions?

Ferguson: It’s funded, written and has been completely designed by one labor union, just the SEIU. It benefits them and the people that work for them but it’s hugely, hugely expensive. We’re looking at $55 million. The money just isn’t here. To us, when the state’s facing the biggest financial deficit since the Great Depression, how can we justify a union training program? (more…)

Tags: home healthcare, Initiative 1163, Q&A

At the end of session, House Democrats voted on a bill to close tax loopholes to fund education. The bill got the majority of votes, but because it didn’t get a two-thirds supermajority, the bill failed. That raised plenty of speculation that the vote was the foundation of a lawsuit challenging the legality of Tim Eyman’s Initiative 1053, which requires any tax increase — even the closure of a tax exemption — to pass with a two-thirds vote of the House and Senate or a vote of the public.

Today, we learned that 12 House Democrats, along with education advocates and one former Supreme Court justice, are going ahead with that lawsuit. (Check out the link for more on the case and a copy of the legal complaint.)

Tags: Eyman, House, taxes, two-thirds requirement