Author Archives: ericcampbell

Republican senators question timing, purpose of proposed payments to farm-fuel users

Sen. Perry Dozier

OLYMPIA… The two state senators who farm in eastern Washington say they’re not sure what to make of a proposed offer of money for farm-fuel users who got stuck paying a surcharge on their fuel purchases because of the state’s cap-and-trade law.

The payments, which could amount to no more than pennies per gallon for many farming operations, are offered in the state Senate’s supplemental operating-budget proposal.

Sen. Mark Schoesler

“I don’t know anyone in the agricultural sector who would view this as a solution to the fuel-surcharge issue we’ve been fighting more than a year, since cap-and-trade was fully implemented,” said Sen. Perry Dozier, R-Waitsburg.

“These payments wouldn’t come close to making up for what farm-fuel users have been forced to pay because the executive branch of state government failed to uphold the promise made in the cap-and-trade law – that farm diesel and fuel used by the maritime industry would be exempt from the surcharge this new program would create,” said Sen. Mark Schoesler, R-Ritzville.

Schoesler serves on the Senate Ways and Means Committee, which held a public hearing yesterday on the proposed supplemental operating budget. The budget appropriation doesn’t refer to the payments as rebates or reimbursements, and routes them through the state Department of Licensing – not the Department of Ecology, which is responsible for implementing the cap-and-trade law.

“Are these payments a way for the state to ease its guilty conscience for failing so badly on upholding the promised fuel-surcharge exemption? Does the timing have anything to do with the certification of the initiative to repeal the cap-and-trade law? Are the supporters of cap-and-trade just looking to throw a bone to agriculture? No one who buys farm fuel by the truckload would come up with this,” said Dozier.

Dozier and Schoesler are the sponsors of Senate Bill 5728, introduced in 2023. It would basically force Ecology to develop a process for implementing the promised exemptions. The bill has been ignored, and a task force set up by Ecology during the summer failed to completely resolve industry concerns.

Given that background, the senators were surprised to see a $30 million appropriation, buried on page 564 of the new Senate budget proposal, “solely for payments to support farm fuel users and transporters who have purchased fuel for agricultural purposes that is exempt from the requirements of the Climate Commitment Act… but paid a surcharge or an additional fee.”

The payments would be made by the Department of Licensing to “noncorporate farms” first – a term not defined in the budget bill – depending on annual farm-fuel consumption. The first tier, those using less than 1,000 gallons annually, would receive $600; the second tier, between 1,000 and 4,000 gallons consumed, would get $2,300; and those using 4,000 gallons or more a year would receive $3,400.

“It’s a lame proposal because most farms of any size operate as a corporation,” said Schoesler. “On top of that these tiers make no sense, except they’re consistent with the whole premise of cap-and-trade – or ‘cap-and-tax,’ as it should really be called. This law is about punishing people who use fossil fuel. It’s as though they think there are electric combines down at the farm-equipment dealer.”

Dozier agrees the tiered approach is not realistic. “One tractor pulling a heavy load can go through 25 gallons of fuel an hour. At that rate just one week of 10-hour workdays will blow past the 1,000-gallon threshold.

“It’s not difficult for a farm to go through 30,000 gallons of diesel in a year. Under this proposal, that’s 11 cents per gallon. Adding more tiers based on 10,000-gallon increments would be a slight improvement, but if the intent is to honestly compensate users who have been paying the surcharge, the payments to them should really be gallon for gallon, with no tiers at all.”

The Senate budget proposal also includes $35 million to provide low-income households with energy utility bill assistance. Like the payments proposed for farm-fuel users, those subsidies would be funded with proceeds from the cap-and-trade law, which has enabled state government to rake in about $1.8 billion in the past year from auctioning “carbon allowances.”

“In December the governor proposed using cap-and-trade money to subsidize low-income households. It wasn’t a surprise to also see it in the Senate budget. But this money to pay farm-fuel users feels like something thrown in at the last minute by people who don’t understand agriculture,” said Schoesler.

“This is a pretty responsible budget proposal overall, and I appreciate that Republicans had a fair amount of input about the priorities,” said Dozier, “but it needs some work to be a budget that truly respects the needs of agriculture.”

Senate transportation-budget proposal includes more SR 224/Red Mountain funding

OLYMPIA… The supplemental transportation budget made public by the state Senate this morning includes $2.2 million requested by Sen. Perry Dozier to keep improvements to State Route 224 in the Red Mountain vicinity from stalling again.

Dozier, R-Waitsburg, said a $5 million appropriation he helped secure in the 2023-25 transportation budget was thought to be what the project needed. Then the Washington State Department of Transportation threw up a barrier, saying the work – which comprises vehicle and bicycle lanes, roundabouts and pedestrian areas – couldn’t proceed without more money.

“This project was supposed to be shovel-ready months ago, after that $5 million was approved. I’m not sure why things unraveled the way they did, but instead of arguing with WSDOT it made more sense to see if I could get a second appropriation in this same budget cycle,” said Dozier.

The Senate transportation proposal (SB 5947) must be passed by the Senate Transportation Committee, which will have a public hearing on the bill tomorrow and may vote on the plan Friday. The fact that the same appropriation is in the corresponding House proposal bodes well for the money carrying through to the final version of the supplemental transportation budget, Dozier said. It must be negotiated between the two chambers and adopted before legislators adjourn for the year March 7.

E-News: Property-tax threat goes away, but threat to rural health care remains

 

I was happy to welcome members of Teamsters 117, which represents Department of Corrections employees, when they came over from Walla Walla to visit the Capitol earlier this month. In response to the question “Who has been assaulted on the job?” probably half raised their hands. Feedback like this often inspires legislation, and I will be following up with them on this and other concerns in the spring.

Dear Neighbor,

Greetings from the state Capitol!

This week the state Senate wrapped up its work on bills introduced by senators, with the exception of updates to the three state budgets. The “cutoff” for approving Senate bills arrived at the end of Tuesday; we then went back to meeting as committees to take up the House legislation passed over to us (and the House committees are doing the same with Senate legislation).

The six voter initiatives submitted to the Legislature this session continue to get attention one way or the other. I and other Republicans have called for public hearings on these measures, in line with a requirement in our state constitution; the majority Democrats finally made commitments about three this past week. I’d like to know what you think about how the Legislature should handle these, and invite you to take a quick online survey. Details are below.

Dozier bills move to House for consideration

Early this week the state Senate unanimously passed my Senate Bill 6238, to update a property-tax exemption that benefits the widows and widowers of honorably discharged veterans. It was created in 2005 but has not kept pace with similar exemptions since then. SB 6238 was referred to the House Finance Committee for consideration; being a fiscal committee, it has until Feb. 26 to move my bill forward.

Also getting unanimous approval was SB 5801, a bill that has to do with the banking industry. I introduced it at the request of our state’s Uniform Law Commission, and the bill is a good example of just how narrowly focused and non-partisan a piece of legislation can be. That’s probably why it is moving so quickly through the House, with  a public hearing Wednesday and a “yes” vote from the House Committee on Consumer Protection and Business yesterday morning, well ahead of next Wednesday’s deadline for policy committees to act on legislation.

Property-tax proposal pulled due to public pressure

Sometimes it’s more important to keep a bad piece of legislation from becoming law, which is why I’m happy about the demise of SB 5770. It would have opened the door to tripling the growth of local property taxes…without voter approval!

Since 2001, and the passage of Initiative 747, the annual growth rate of property taxes has been limited to 1% annually, unless voters agree to a larger increase. This shouldn’t be a partisan issue, as that cap was confirmed in 2007 by a Democratic-controlled Legislature at the request of a Democratic governor.

Still, a group of Democrats from Puget Sound pushed SB 5770 through the Senate Ways and Means Committee and onto the Senate voting calendar. That’s when the public rose up in protest, and we held a news conference that resulted in a lot of media attention. The prime sponsor of the bill then announced he would stop trying to get it through the Senate, which was the right decision – but the excuses he gave in this news report are concerning.

One is that “supporters need to work on better explaining the needs of cities and counties…and helping the public better understand the mechanics of property taxes.” Having been a county commissioner for eight years, I have a good sense of what local governments need, versus what they might want. Also, to be clear, the 1% cap has never prevented local governments from asking voters for more than 1%. If a majority of voters in King County (where the prime sponsor is from) approve a 10% increase in their property taxes, for whatever purpose, they are free to tax themselves more.

I wonder if the supporters of this property-tax proposal understand the “mechanics” families must go through to contend with all the costs being layered upon them in recent years, through a variety of government policy decisions. A great example is the cap-and-trade law that was passed in 2021 and took full effect in 2023, which has raised the cost of just about everything, starting with gas at the pump and natural-gas heat (which the majority is now trying to ban through HB 1589, which was passed by a Senate committee yesterday). Don’t get me started on what cap-and-trade means for our agricultural sector, and how promises made in the cap-and-trade law aren’t being honored by Governor Inslee’s administration.

The real purpose of SB 5770 is to allow a higher annual increase in the tax rate without going to the voters. That sounds like the opposite of “democracy” to me. Besides, the housing shortage in our region and our state as a whole is challenging enough without allowing tax hikes that would hit not just property owners but also renters.

I was pleased that none of the counties I serve in the 16th District came to me asking for this bill. They realize they can ask their voters to go above the 1% limit, and I appreciate that our area commissioners are living within the means provided by the taxpayers, even if it makes budgeting more challenging.

I’m glad the proposal has been dropped for this year, but unfortunately, we should expect to see it again.

 

Proposed hospital-merger restrictions could be very harmful to rural Washington

With the majority’s proposed property-tax increase off the table, Senate Bill 5241 becomes the worst bill of the session so far – at least from the Senate side.

This bill has the meaningless title of “Concerning material changes to the operations and governance structure of participants in the health care marketplace.” That offers no clue about the true effect SB 5241 would have on our state. An accurate title would be something like “Allows a partisan state official to decide whether a hospital closes.” The trouble is, being that clear would alarm people across our state and keep this misguided proposal from flying under the radar.

The prime sponsor claims this is about preserving access to affordable health care, but as they say, the devil is in the details – she also acknowledges the intent is to ensure hospital mergers and acquisitions specifically don’t restrict access to “end-of-life, reproductive and gender-affirming care.”

Let’s suppose a small rural hospital is at risk of closing, and its only chance to continue operating is to be acquired by a larger hospital with a religious affiliation. SB 5241 would give the attorney general’s office the power to determine – over a 10-year oversight period – if such a transaction would affect access to end-of-life (assisted suicide), reproductive (including abortion) and gender-affirming care, which is defined in detail in the bill. That’s a very long time for a rural community to have a sword hanging over the head of its nearest health-care facility, should a merger be the only way to keep it open.

The version of the bill brought to the floor of the Senate was a 27-page rewrite that was made available for review only that day, while we were in the middle of debating and voting on a long list of other bills. I stood up during the 3-hour debate on SB 5241 and explained, using a recent trip to the Dayton General Hospital emergency department as an example, the danger this approach presents to health-care access in our area. It’s as though the supporters of this bill would rather see hospitals close than to have them remain open under an agreement that somehow involves religious affiliations.

SB 5241 is part of an agenda, which is why Republican amendments meant to protect consumers, involve the secretary of health, etc., were rejected, and why the bill is whizzing through the House – a vote in the House Civil Rights and Judiciary Committee is scheduled Tuesday. Doesn’t it seem odd that a “health care marketplace” bill isn’t coming before a health-care committee in either chamber?

It was my privilege to sponsor Olivia Smasne as a Senate page this past week. She’s a 9th-grader at Prosser High and is the daughter of Brent and Jamie Smasne of Prosser. I know Olivia appreciated being able to see a side of the Senate and the lawmaking process that isn’t shown on the TVW network, and she was here at one of the most important times of any session. Thanks, Olivia!

Democrats agree to committee hearings on only three initiatives, despite constitutional requirement

Article II, Section I of Washington’s constitution is clear about how legislators should treat initiatives submitted to them: “Such initiative measures, whether certified or provisionally certified, shall take precedence over all other measures in the legislature except appropriation bills and shall be either enacted or rejected without change or amendment by the legislature before the end of such regular session.”

That part about “take precedence” means we are supposed to consider the initiatives ahead of every other bill except spending bills (like the budgets).  Yet here we are, two-thirds of the way through the session, and only now is the majority side responding.

Yesterday afternoon the top Democrats in the Senate and House announced there will be joint Senate/House hearings week after next on three initiatives: I-2113 (police pursuits), I-2111 (income-tax ban) and I-2081 (which would create a parental bill of rights concerning , similar to legislation I’ve introduced each of the past three years).

They confirmed there will not be hearings on I-2117, which would repeal the cap-and-trade law that is driving up everyone’s gasoline and natural-gas costs; I-2109, which would repeal the tax on income from capital gains, and I-2124, which would end the mandatory payroll tax tied to the state-run long-term care program.

The chair of the Senate Labor and Commerce Committee announced this past week that she intends to hold a work session on I-2124, but that is not the same as a hearing because the public is not allowed to testify.

I have no question the Democrats’ decision to have any hearings is due to the pressure Republicans have been applying all session long, but still, the bottom line is that they’ll let the people be heard on only half of the six initiatives.

I want to hear from you about all of them, however. Please take a few minutes to click on the link or the QR code and complete my survey!

Take my online survey about the six voter initiatives
submitted to the Legislature this session!

Scan the QR code or click here to begin

***

I am working to make living in our state more affordable, make our communities safer, uphold our paramount duty to provide for schools, and hold state government accountable. I’ll work with anyone who shares those goals and wants to find solutions.

Please reach out to my office with your thoughts, ideas and concerns on matters of importance to you. If you don’t already, also consider following me on Facebook. I am here to serve and look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Perry Dozier
State Senator
16th Legislative District

Property-tax bill is ‘dead,’ 16th District senator says it never should have been filed

OLYMPIA…Sen. Perry Dozier, R-Waitsburg, offered this comment after learning majority Democrats in the Senate are dropping their proposal to allow local governments to raise property taxes by up to 3% annually without a vote of the people.

Dozier was among the Senate Republicans and members of the public who opposed the proposal at a news conference Thursday; today the Democratic senator who is prime sponsor of Senate Bill 5770 told The Washington State Standard that the bill is now “dead” for this session. Thirteen of the Democrats on the Senate Ways and Means Committee had approved the bill Monday, and it was placed on the Senate voting calendar Wednesday.

“The housing shortage in our region and our state as a whole is challenging enough without allowing tax hikes that would hit not just property owners but also renters. Putting this bill down was the right move, although if the majority respected the will of the voters it never would have been introduced in the first place.

 

“I was pleased that none of the counties I serve in the 16th District came to me asking for this bill. They realize they can ask their voters to go above the 1% limit, and I appreciate that our area commissioners are living within the means provided by the taxpayers, even if it makes budgeting more challenging.”

E-News — People to Legislature: Consider six policy changes…this session

 

Chief Rocky Eastman headed the delegation from Walla Walla Fire District #4 that came by this past week. If you expect to be anywhere near the state Capitol between now and the March 7 end of this year’s session, I hope you will contact my office and arrange to stop in!

Dear Neighbor,

Greetings from the state Capitol!

Every session, one of our opening-day tasks is to agree on deadlines for taking action on legislation. Considering nearly 540 bills have been introduced in the Senate alone for 2024, not counting legislation that is still eligible from this past year, this “cutoff” calendar does much to help committee and caucus leaders decide which measures continue on the path to becoming law, and which are put aside.

In my experience, the bills that survive our deadlines tend to fall into three categories: simple bills that make reasonable changes; bills that have potential but need more of the refining that is done through the amendment process; and bills that the majority side wants, which happen to also be majority-sponsored measures much more often than not.

We are nearly at the first cutoff for this year’s legislative session, which is for Senate policy committees to decide the fate of Senate bills referred to them. This is formally known as “executive action,” which I’ll explain below, as it has come up in recent questions and comments from constituents.

Next week brings the cutoff for the two Senate fiscal committees. One is the Ways and Means committee, which handles legislation affecting the operating and capital budgets. Transportation is the second. SB 6238, my bipartisan bill to close a loophole in the state’s list of property-tax exemptions, received a public hearing in Ways and Means this past week; now we just need a vote (although it’s possible this bill could end up being in the package of bills labeled “necessary to implement the budget,” which exempts it from the usual deadlines). My measure specifically concerns a property-tax exemption that was created in 2005 to benefit the widows and widowers of honorably discharged veterans, yet has not kept pace with similar exemptions since then.

A web page showing the legislation I am sponsoring is here. You may choose between bills I’m prime-sponsoring and those for which I am a co-sponsor. For more on my session priorities and legislation, and a shout-out to some former legislators from our 16th Legislative District, read my recent interview in Shift.

Farmworkers rally against ag-overtime law;
labor committee schedules another hearing on reform bill

This past week farmworkers descended on the Capitol to protest the ag-overtime law adopted in 2021 (see photo), basically saying it’s not working for them the way the supporters claimed.

If you want to get legislators’ attention, there’s nothing like holding a rally on the front steps of the Legislative Building and also going inside the Capitol Rotunda. I have no doubt that these very visible demonstrations had an effect on the majority side of the aisle, because the bipartisan ag-overtime reform bill introduced last year (SB 5476) suddenly was scheduled for a public hearing tomorrow before the Senate Labor and Commerce Committee.

This is a nice turn of events, on the surface, but I have to point out how the same committee held a public hearing on SB 5476 this past February, during the 2023 session, then let the bill die. I’m not seeing a committee vote scheduled for the bill this time around, so all sides in our agricultural sector will have to keep their expectations real. That said, if SB 5476 is allowed to die again, the majority has some explaining to do – especially to the farmworker community. I don’t think it could make its concerns any clearer.

For some of the news coverage of the rally, click here and here.

 

Voters to Legislature: Consider
these six policy changes… this session

Under our state constitution, the state’s legislative authority is “vested” in the Senate and House of Representatives. However, Article II, Section 1 continues with this: “the people reserve to themselves the power to propose bills, laws, and to enact or reject the same at the polls, independent of the legislature.”

This power is exercised through the initiative – either an initiative to the people, which if certified goes straight to the ballot, or an initiative to the Legislature. If certified, an initiative to the Legislature does just what the name implies. It comes to us as legislation which may be enacted, just like any other bill. If an initiative is not enacted, it must go to the ballot alone or to the ballot accompanied by an alternative from legislators, in which case the voters get to choose one.

Our constitution also makes it clear that the Legislature isn’t supposed to just sit on these measures and do nothing: Article II, Section 1 includes a sentence about how initiatives are to “take precedence over all other measures in the legislature except appropriation bills.”

A record six initiatives to the Legislature – twice the previous high, set all the way back in 1972 – have been certified to us by the secretary of state.

  • I-2109 would repeal the state tax on income from capital gains. When this came before the Senate for a vote during the 2021 session, I and other Republicans proposed putting the measure before the voters later that year. The majority side said no. We now know from public-records disclosures that supporters of the tax knew its constitutionality would be challenged and saw that lawsuit as a way for the state Supreme Court to open the door to a full-blown income tax, like Oregon has. That strategy failed but for some reason the justices did accept the nonsensical argument that this is not an income tax but rather an “excise” tax. As our Senate Republican budget leader put it in this statement, I-2109’s certification puts it on a path to a public vote… one way or another.
  • I-2111 would ban any local or state government in our state from imposing an income tax (Washington voters have in one form or another rejected 11 other attempts to impose an income tax, but I know legislators who have yet to get the message). Like I-2109, this measure has been referred to our Ways and Means Committee. The Senate and House Republican leaders issued this statement about their support for the initiative.
  • I-2124 targets the mandatory payroll tax that supports the state-run WA Cares long-term care program. It would not end the program but instead allow workers to opt out, which isn’t possible now. In the Senate, I-2124 has been referred to the Labor and Commerce committee.
  • I-2113 would end another mistake made by the majority in 2021 – the criminal-friendly restrictions put on vehicular pursuits by law enforcement. I realize pursuits can be risky, but I also know our officers are trained to minimize that risk. It’s no wonder auto thefts and other property crimes have jumped in our state since criminals learned they would no longer be pursued. I-2117 has been referred to our Law and Justice committee.
  • I-2117 would basically repeal the cap-and-trade law that has made gas in Washington far more expensive than in Oregon and Idaho. In doing so it would also settle the fuel-surcharge issue hurting our agricultural and maritime sectors, which neither the majority nor the Inslee administration has done. If cap-and-trade (officially, the “Climate Commitment Act”) goes away, then there’s no more promise of fairness for the state Department of Ecology to break. This has been referred to the Environment, Energy and Technology committee.
  • I-2081 would essentially create a bill of rights for parents who want more information about what their children are doing at school. It’s similar to but more detailed than the parental-rights proposal I’ve offered every session since becoming senator. As this initiative has been referred to the Senate committee on education, on which I serve, I have asked the chair to have a public hearing on the measure. Click here for the details.

As these initiatives will help lower the cost of living, make Washington safer and make our school system better, I intend to support them. That will either happen in the Senate or at the November general election.

What voting ‘without recommendation’ really means

A lot of rules govern our handling of legislation, and some of the words that go along with the process aren’t as clear as they could be. I was reminded of that recently in relation to a bill that has roots in our part of the state.

The Senate State Government and Elections Committee is one of my committees. On day two of this session the chair had us take public testimony on SB 5824, which has to do with changing the chapter of state law about public library districts.

SB 5824 stems from the effort this past year to dissolve the Columbia County Rural Library District, which became a ballot measure that ended up being blocked by a court from the November ballot. The bill was introduced by the committee chair, a senator from Olympia, at the request of the secretary of state, who is Washington’s chief elections officer.

It’s important to note the committee chair sets the agenda for her or his committee, meaning which bills receive hearings, which are brought up for votes, and when that happens. The chair scheduled SB 5824 for “executive action” three days after the public hearing.

When a committee takes executive action on a bill, members may choose between a “do pass” or “do not pass” recommendation or a third option, which is to vote “without recommendation” – essentially, a neutral vote that doesn’t hinder the bill’s progress.

After the hearing on SB 5824, I had questions about the scope of the change it would make, plus this: Legislation passed in 1947 made it so a rural county library district could be established or dissolved through a petition signed by 10% of the voters within that district. In the form in which it came before our committee, SB 5824 would have replaced 10% with 35% but only for the dissolution of such a district. Does it seem consistent or fair to you that dissolving a taxing district should be more than three times as difficult than creating one?

If a law needs to be clarified or updated, I am willing to listen. In this case I just wasn’t going to recommend for or against the bill’s passage by the full Senate without knowing more.

Because I could not get answers ahead of the committee vote, I chose to refer the bill “without recommendation.” While that was reported accurately here in the Walla Walla Union-Bulletin, some people inaccurately concluded I had opposed the bill. Once I explained how we vote in committee, and why I voted as I did on SB 5824, they understood.

When SB 5824 came before the full Senate this past week, the Republican leader on the state-government committee offered an amendment that would set the threshold for dissolving a library district at 25% — still far above what the law now requires but a compromise from 35%. The amendment was accepted, and the bill passed unanimously.

If you have a question about any vote I cast, by all means call or write. I want my constituents to have the facts.

The first student I sponsored as a Senate page this session was Alex Plourd, an 8th-grader at Highlands Middle School in Kennewick. Alex is the daughter of Brenden and Shauna Plourd of Kennewick. She did a wonderful job this past week, and was here when the Senate passed some important legislation!

***

I am working to make living in our state more affordable, make our communities safer, uphold our paramount duty to provide for schools, and hold state government accountable. I’ll work with anyone who shares those goals and wants to find solutions.

Please reach out to my office with your thoughts, ideas and concerns on matters of importance to you. If you don’t already, also consider following me on Facebook. I am here to serve and look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

 

 

 

Perry Dozier
State Senator
16th Legislative District

 

 

Dozier asks for committee hearing on parental-rights initiative

OLYMPIA… Under Washington’s constitution, initiatives to the Legislature are to have precedence over all other measures before lawmakers except spending bills. Sen. Perry Dozier today added an exclamation mark to that requirement by formally asking the chair of the Senate’s K-12 education committee to hold a hearing on Initiative 2081 “as soon as possible.”

I-2081, certified to the Legislature this past week by the secretary of state, would establish a wide-ranging parents’ bill of rights. Dozier, R-Waitsburg, is prime sponsor of Senate Bill 5024, a parental-rights bill that received a hearing before the same committee in 2023. After I-2081 was submitted for certification with more than 454,000 voter signatures, prior to the start of the 2024 legislative session, he decided against advocating for a committee vote on his measure this year.

“As you well know, I am a strong advocate for parental rights in our state,” he wrote to the committee chair, Sen. Lisa Wellman, D-Mercer Island. “After three years of running my parental rights bill, I chose to step back and allow the citizens of our state speak to this issue.

“With over 400,000 signatures signed onto Initiative 2081, I believe they have done just that.”

It is standard for lawmakers to formally request hearings on bills they introduce. Dozier, who serves on the education committee, said he took it upon himself to request a hearing on I-2081 because the measure is more detailed than his legislation, and a public hearing would allow for an informative and objective comparison.

“The constitutional language that puts priority on initiatives should be enough to get I-2081 a hearing,” he explained. “Also, this initiative also stands out from the others before us in that it would not repeal an unpopular tax or an unworkable public-safety policy. Instead, it is broadly about a more open approach to operating our public schools, and helping parents gain access to important information that is either inconvenient or seems impossible to get.

“I appreciated the hearing on my bill a year ago, in the spirit of connecting parents and schools in a more productive way, and to me I-2081 is worth some of the committee’s time as well. Hopefully the chair will grant my request.”

 

From Article II, Section I of the Washington Constitution: “Such initiative measures, whether certified or provisionally certified, shall take precedence over all other measures in the legislature except appropriation bills and shall be either enacted or rejected without change or amendment by the legislature before the end of such regular session.”

 

E-News: Session begins… and so has talk of tax increases

Dear Neighbors,

Greetings from the state Capitol!

Our 2024 session began at noon a week ago with a combination of ceremony and housekeeping. Although it’s my fourth session as your 16th District state senator, I can’t imagine that the opening-day traditions will ever get old — and as a member of leadership I’m more involved in those traditions than most.

The long drive to the Capitol from our 16th District was made easier by the knowledge that I would again, in contrast to the two pandemic-restricted sessions, be able to have face-to-face interaction with constituents, other lawmakers and stakeholders. The transportation investments secured in 2023 (Wallula-Walla Walla and West Richland-Red Mountain) are a prime example of how better decisions come from working together.

Because this year’s session is limited to 60 days, the deadlines for acting on legislation will come up quickly. Our top priority from now until we adjourn March 7 is to look at mid-course adjustments to the trio of two-year budgets – operating, capital, transportation) adopted during last year’s longer (105-day) session.

I wish I could say the ag-overtime issue will get sorted out this session. The law enacted in 2021 (one of many controversial moves made that year, when the public was shut out of the Capitol) has created a tough situation for the agricultural sector, and farmworkers also have concerns about the policy. For an update click here. As one of only a few farmers serving in the Senate, I’m doing all I can to help other legislators understand the finer points of the issue.

Beyond my work on ag – which includes filing SB 5813, part of the Senate Republican “Cultivate Washington” agenda – my focus this session will broadly be on public safety, affordability and a mix of education and children’s issues. A tax-exemption bill I introduced this week would make living in Washington a little more affordable for the widows and widowers of veterans; keep reading for that.

A web page showing the legislation I am sponsoring is here. You may choose between bills I’m prime-sponsoring and those for which I am a co-sponsor.

Tax alert: Proposals would allow larger increases… or easier passage
Just before the end of the 2023 session the majority Democrats introduced SB 5770, which would allow a tripling of the allowable growth rate for property taxes. It would end the voter-endorsed, bipartisan 1% cap that has controlled the growth of property taxes since 2007.

We figured the bill was simply being put on the table until 2024. Sure enough, it is scheduled for a public hearing in the Senate Ways and Means Committee this Thursday. That meeting starts at 4 p.m. Visit this page for instructions on how to register your opposition, submit written testimony, or testify in person or by Zoom. If you know others who might also want to be heard, please pass along this information along.

When SB 5770 surfaced, the sales pitch was that raising property taxes would allow investments in public safety and education. I would rather see consideration for SB 6090, a bipartisan bill I’m co-sponsoring. It’s a better way to help rebuild the public-safety infrastructure in our communities. And as a member of the Senate Early Learning and K-12 Committee, I object to the idea that a new tax increase is needed to support our state’s paramount duty: providing for education. Take care of education from existing revenue and prioritize other funding requests accordingly.

The price tag of SB 5770 could hit $12 BILLION. Washingtonians are paying more than enough taxes already. Their legislators must do better.

Then there’s Senate Joint Resolution 8207, which would significantly lower the threshold for passing school-district bond issues. My office began receiving dozens of emails about this even before the session began, and I’m sure other senators on both sides of the aisle did as well.

Even so, the bill flew through our Senate education committee this past week – as in public hearing Wednesday, committee vote Thursday. I couldn’t support it, and here’s the reason.

School bonds represent long-term debt, which is why Washington’s constitution requires two things to pass a bond issue: a specific level of voter turnout, and support from three-fifths (a 60% “supermajority”) of those voting on the bond issue. Those requirements ensure there is solid support across a community for what is often a multimillion-dollar obligation.

SJR 8207 would drop the 60% requirement to a simple majority (50% + one vote) AND do away with the voter-turnout requirement. Under those rules, if only 100 people vote on a school bond and 51 of them vote yes, every taxpayer in the district would be forced to pay the new bond-driven tax levy for 30 years. Does that seem equitable? Or is it equitable that SJR 8207 would apply only to school bond issues, while other taxing districts would need to stick with the higher threshold for approval? To me the answer is “no” to both questions.

Dozier bill would increase tax exemption
Today I introduced a bill to close a loophole in the state’s list of property-tax exemptions. SB 6238 specifically concerns a property-tax exemption that was created in 2005 to benefit the widows and widowers of honorably discharged veterans, yet has not kept pace with similar exemptions since then.

It would raise the income eligibility for this targeted exemption to equal the standards already in place for the program that offers property-tax relief to senior citizens and disabled veterans in our state. My bill also would double the relevant income thresholds, which fairly approximates the level of inflation seen in the past 20 years.

This won’t make a noticeable dent in the state budget but it will offer equity and fairness to a select and deserving group of Washington residents who have been left behind. I will work to get this into law so it can take effect for 2025!

It was my pleasure this past week to join Senate Republican Leader John Braun and Senate Republican Caucus Chair Judy Warnick for a meeting with Mr. Makoto Iyori, who recently became Consul General of Japan in Seattle. During our conversation he showed a keen interest in agriculture and tourism – two things I know something about as a farmer and member of the Washington Tourism Marketing Authority. I’m hoping to arrange for him to visit our 16th District later this year!

Teens, apply to serve as a page for the Senate
One of the most enjoyable parts of being a senator is sponsoring students as Senate pages during the legislative session. These teens serve for one week, receiving an unmatched civics education while meeting others their age (14-16 years old) from around the state – and receiving a paycheck as well! Each senator is allowed to sponsor a certain number of pages, and I still have slots open.

Click here to learn more about the Senate page program, including how to apply; this video shows what it’s like. If you know teens who would be interested, they may also contact Myra Hernandez, Civic Education Director (Myra.Hernandez@leg.wa.gov​ or SenatePageProgram@leg.wa.gov) or my office.

***

I am working to make living in our state more affordable, make our communities safer, uphold our paramount duty to provide for schools, and hold state government accountable. I’ll work with anyone who shares those goals and wants to find solutions.

Please reach out to my office with your thoughts, ideas and concerns on matters of importance to you. If you don’t already, also consider following me on Facebook. I am here to serve and look forward to hearing from you.

Perry Dozier
State Senator
16th Legislative District

E-News: Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

I’ll keep this brief, knowing what a busy time of year it can be.

The next legislative session begins two weeks from Christmas Day. If you have any ideas for legislation, please get them to me using the contact information in this message.

I’ve “prefiled” two bills for the 2024 session. One is SB 5813, my “agricultural literacy” bill, which stems from the Cultivate Washington agenda I and other Republican senators unveiled in November (a link to the news conference is here, and more information is on our Cultivate Washington webpage).

The idea of this bill is to instill in our junior/senior high students a basic knowledge of growing things and of the importance of agriculture as well as the opportunities available for young people in the field of agriculture. In my view, it will help perpetuate our agricultural sector if more people understand that most of the food they see in the grocery store comes from farms, and how those crops and livestock wouldn’t exist without people to tend and raise them.

As the lead Republican on the Senate committee that addresses banking issues, I’m also prime sponsor of SB 5801, which has to do with “special deposit accounts” at banks. If you work for a financial institution or have another reason to be curious about what the bill would do, let me know and I’ll be happy to get you an explanation. Otherwise, this is one of those policy changes that has a very specific purpose and simply isn’t going to affect most folks.

These bills will be considered as formally filed on the opening day of the session, at which time other lawmakers may sign on as co-sponsors.

If you didn’t receive this in your mailbox recently (or just want to see it on your screen instead) click here – it’s my preview of the 2024 legislative session.

***

I am working to make living in our state more affordable, make our communities safer, uphold our paramount duty to provide for schools, and hold state government accountable. I’ll work with anyone who shares those goals and wants to find solutions.

Please reach out to my office with your thoughts, ideas and concerns on matters of importance to you. If you don’t already, also consider following me on Facebook. I am here to serve and look forward to hearing from you.

Have a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

Sincerely,

Perry Dozier
State Senator
16th Legislative District

Update from Olympia: Our pro-agriculture agenda, and more on carbon-law situation

Dear Neighbor,

Greetings from the state Capitol!

Even though the “interim” period between legislative sessions won’t officially be over until January 8, when the 2024 session begins, it unofficially ended for me with the Thanksgiving holiday (I hope yours was a happy one). Between an all-day Senate Republican meeting on Tuesday and the Senate’s “Assembly Days” in Olympia yesterday and the day before, more of this week went to legislative business than not.

I’m Republican leader on the Senate Business, Financial Services, Gaming and Trade Committee, which met yesterday to talk about home equity agreements, lending rules, the “creative economy,” state contracting and more.

As of Monday we can begin filing legislation. I haven’t decided whether to put any bills in the hopper during the prefiling period, but if I do, my Senate colleagues will have until the session’s first day to decide whether they want to sign on as co-sponsors. I’ll also have time to look at what others have filed and decide whether I will eventually want to add my name to the sponsor list. Either way, the bills I introduced during our 2023 session are also still in play for 2024. That list can be seen here.

Here are some other updates since my September report to you.

Agriculture needs our support; ‘Cultivate Washington’ would deliver

Between labor costs, fuel costs, uncertainties about water availability, the state’s management of predators, and more, it’s no wonder agricultural operations in our state are closing at a rate we’ve never seen.

Republicans serve the legislative districts where most of Washington’s farmers, growers and ranchers do business, so it’s appropriate that a group of Senate Republicans recently stepped forward with an agenda for supporting agriculture in our state. We call it “Cultivate Washington,” and spent 40 minutes sharing it with well over a dozen news reporters back on November 14. A link to the news conference is here, and more information is on our Cultivate Washington webpage.

Legislators can do much to improve the business climate for Washington agriculture. We look forward to advocating for our agenda during the 2024 legislative session.

New issues with cap-and-trade law confirm need for reforms

In October I alerted the news media about a letter I’d sent to the director of the state Department of Ecology, expressing my concern about a lack of transparency in the cap-and-trade program her agency administers. You and I deserve to know who is buying the carbon-emission “allowances” the state is selling at ever-increasing prices, and in my view the Climate Commitment Act (the cap-and-trade law’s formal name) requires Ecology to disclose that information in a way that isn’t happening. My concern is detailed here in what I sent to the press; it contains a link to the letter.

Word of my interaction with Ecology traveled down the Columbia to Goldendale and Delmer Eldred, host of “The Klickitat Voice” podcast. He invited me on for a discussion about the Climate Commitment Act that lasted most of a half-hour and also covered the CCA fuel-surcharge issue that is hurting Washington’s agricultural sector. I invite you to listen to it here.

The Ecology director’s response to my letter was not encouraging but also not unexpected. I haven’t decided what my next move will be, but there’s still time to decide, as this is not the only reform the Climate Commitment Act needs.

In the meantime, Ecology’s director also wants to pursue linking Washington’s carbon policies to those of California and the Canadian province of Québec, claiming it will create a “successful, stable carbon market” – but I’m not hearing her explain how that will ease the pain on Washington drivers’ wallets.

My interest in reforming the Climate Commitment Act is shared in this recent newspaper editorial that also mentions a citizen initiative filed to repeal the law. The initiative will come before the Legislature if enough signatures are verified.

I don’t endorse all of the newspaper’s reform ideas but I do look forward to being able to debate the CCA in a way we could not in 2021, when the public was literally barred from the Capitol and legislators were forced to meet remotely. It also will be a more informed debate, because we know from the past year what the carbon law means at the pump and in the marketplace. That’s a big change from three years ago, when the discussion was mostly limited to speculation about what the law would mean.

K-12: Let’s discuss transparency and responsibilities

Speaking of debates, I encourage you to read this opinion piece from Sen. Brad Hawkins, Republican leader on our Senate Early Learning and K-12 Education Committee. In responding to a newspaper editorial about school funding, he thoughtfully lays out the need to have a conversation about how “education” is defined. His argument includes this observation:

“Frankly, it is becoming increasingly difficult to differentiate where school responsibilities end and where family and community responsibilities begin. This approach only prompts philosophical debate and encourages more parents to pull their children from public schools, which they have been doing in high numbers.”

Enrollment in Washington’s public K-12 schools is down 42,000 students from the pre-pandemic level. While that can likely be attributed to the shortcomings of remote instruction or, as Senator Hawkins notes, the frustrating blurring of responsibilities, it doesn’t help if schools are less than transparent about how and what children are being taught.

Teens, apply now to serve as a page for the Senate

The term “page” isn’t heard much these days outside of parliamentary systems… or libraries. It may be an old-fashioned term for someone who serves as a courier or messenger – but then again, our Legislature’s page programs do date to 1891, just two years after statehood.

One of the most enjoyable parts of being a senator is sponsoring students as Senate pages during the legislative session. These teens serve for one week, receiving an unmatched civics education while meeting others their age (14-16 years old) from around the state – and receiving a paycheck as well! Each senator is allowed to sponsor a certain number of pages; I will have the privilege of sponsoring up to six students during the 2024 session, which begins January 8 and ends March 7.

Click here to learn more about the Senate page program, including how to apply; this video shows what it’s like. If you know teens who would be interested, they may also contact Myra Hernandez, Civic Education Director (Myra.Hernandez@leg.wa.gov​ or SenatePageProgram@leg.wa.gov) or my office.

Because I always seem to learn something from them, I visit as much as possible with the students I sponsor as Senate pages — even during breaks in our work in the Senate chamber.

***

I am working to make living in our state more affordable, make our communities safer, uphold our paramount duty to provide for schools, and hold state government accountable. I’ll work with anyone who shares those goals and wants to find solutions.

Please reach out to my office with your thoughts, ideas and concerns on matters of importance to you. If you don’t already, also consider following me on Facebook. I am here to serve and look forward to hearing from you.

Perry Dozier
State Senator
16th Legislative District