Tag Archives: parental rights

Here they come: one proposed tax hike, then another, then…

BFST committee

Dear Neighbor,

The results of a recent survey of 600 Washington voters showed up in my inbox earlier this month. Most of the survey questions had to do with state spending, one way or another. That makes sense considering how years of overspending have finally caught up with the majority Democrats, and put state government in a multibillion-dollar hole that has to be solved before legislators can adjourn for the year.

It’s no surprise to me that more than three-fourths of those responding think the Legislature doesn’t need more money to address important priorities, and more than three out of five responding simply don’t trust the Legislature on spending.

poll result

Click here for a full presentation of the survey results.

So what are the Democratic majorities in the Senate and House doing? Well, they’ve stepped up their efforts to raise taxes. It’s the easy way to get out of the budget hole while continuing to add to the size of state government.

In the meantime, Republicans are coming up with ways to reduce spending and solve the budget deficit without tax increases. I invite you to look at some of the cost-saving ideas at our $ave Washington webpage.

Here’s where three of the Democrats’ proposed tax hikes stand as the fifth week of this year’s 15-week legislative session wraps.

  • A new tax on each mile you drive? For many years, Democrats have wanted to impose a mileage tax. Senate Bill 5726, introduced Tuesday, would create a “road usage charge” (RUC for short) starting at 2.6 cents per mile, plus an assessment of 10% on the total RUC a person pays. That’s right — the “assessment” is really a tax on a tax.The supporters of a mileage tax argue Washington’s 49.4-cent per gallon gas tax isn’t generating enough money as it is, with more electric and hybrid vehicles on our state’s roads. But I wonder if they understand, or appreciate, how a mileage tax would hurt rural drivers disproportionately.

    Also, this would be another “regressive” tax — meaning it hits lower-income people harder — from the party that is always complaining about Washington’s tax code being regressive.

    Washington’s constitution guarantees gas-tax money can only go toward highways and bridges. The mileage-tax bill doesn’t (and can’t) guarantee how the 2.6 cents per mile would be used. Also, the 10% assessment could be used only for “multimodal,” meaning transit, rail, and pedestrian/bicycle purposes.SB 5726 will get a public hearing Tuesday afternoon before the Senate Transportation Committee. If you want to testify about the bill or at least make your opinion known, there’s a link at the end of this report that will help.

    The identical House bill (HB 1921) already received a public hearing. From what I’m told, the House majority is pushing harder for this tax than the Senate, but that is not reassuring.

  • Higher property taxes, Part I: Last year the Senate Democrats tried to lift the cap on the annual growth of property-tax rates. They wanted a 3% limit, rather than the 1% Washington voters had approved (which was later confirmed by a Democrat-controlled Legislature).That attempt fizzled after intense opposition from the public and Senate Republicans. But this year the House Democrats are making a run at tripling the property-tax growth rate, with House Bill 1334.

    It’s the same bad idea as before, and my argument against it is also the same. Beyond the fact that this would be another regressive tax increase that makes living in our state harder to afford, cities and counties already have the ability to increase property-tax rates beyond 1%. They try to make it sound like the Legislature is holding them back, but that’s false. All they have to do is get permission from the voters.

    The 1% cap applies only to the annual property-tax increases that get voted on at the council/commission level. This bill would basically let local governments take more without asking first. HB 1334 received a committee hearing Tuesday, and I expect it will continue to move ahead unless, like last year, enough pressure is applied to stop it.

  • Higher property taxes, Part II: There’s a reason a 60% majority vote is required to pass school bond issues. Unlike enrichment levies, school bonds create debt that typically takes decades to pay back. To me — and according to Washington’s constitution, for the past 80 years — such an obligation needs to be supported by more than a simple majority.The Democratic members of the Senate Early Learning and K-12 Committee, on which I serve, voted yesterday to pass legislation that would require only a simple majority to approve bond issues: Senate Bill 5186, and Senate Joint Resolution 8200. I and the other Republican committee members voted no, meaning we want to maintain the taxpayer protection afforded by the long-standing three-fifths approval standard.

    Because dropping to simple-majority approval would require a change in the state constitution, SJR 8200 would have to be passed with a two-thirds vote in the Senate and in the House, then a majority of voters would have to agree at the next general election.

    I know the supporters of bond issues are disappointed when those measures fail, but let’s not blame the 60% approval requirement. If a school district makes a persuasive argument to the voters, and the bond issue is the right size at the right price, shouldn’t 60% support be attainable?

media Feb 11

Each week, if there’s a long enough break between committee meetings and floor sessions, Republican lawmakers make themselves available to news reporters who are covering the 2025 session. I took part in this week’s meeting, commenting on tax-related questions as a member of the Senate Ways and Means committee — and was prepared to field questions about parental rights, being the originator of the Senate’s parental-rights bill and a member of the Senate Early Learning and K-12 Committee. To learn what reporters are asking about, and hear our responses, click here.

***

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.

My priorities (shared by Senate Republicans) are:

Here’s how to:

Please reach out to my office with your thoughts, ideas and concerns on matters of importance to you. I am here to serve and look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

dozier signature

Perry Dozier
State Senator
16th Legislative District

Protecting children from fentanyl exposure… will the third try work?

Feb. 7, 2025

Dear Neighbor,

In each of the past two years, the state Senate has tried to make it a crime for an adult to expose a child to fentanyl. Both times, the House refused to allow its members to vote on our bill — which is unconscionable, considering how many children and even infants in our state have been badly injured because of this terrible drug in recent years.

My report below explains how we’re making another try for this life-saving policy. It also follows up on the partisan attack on Washington’s new parental-rights law, and ends with a light-hearted update about “The Evergreen State” (that’ll make sense when you watch).

video update

Click here or on the image to view my report.

***

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. I am here to serve and look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

dozier signature

Perry Dozier
State Senator
16th Legislative District

EMAIL: Perry.Dozier@leg.wa.gov
OLYMPIA PHONE: (360) 786-7630
OLYMPIA OFFICE: 342 Irving R. Newhouse Building
MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 40416, Olympia, WA 98504

Video Report: State’s new parental-rights law is already a target

Click here or on the image for my second report from the 2025 legislative session. It looks at a pair of salmon-related bills I’ve introduced, and a very disappointing effort by some on the majority side to undermine Washington’s new parental-rights law, less than a year after they helped create it by passing Initiative 2081.

Dozier helps pass historic initiative to reinforce parental rights concerning school information

OLYMPIA… Three years after he first introduced legislation to create a “parents’ bill of rights,” 16th District Sen. Perry Dozier today saw his goal achieved with the Legislature’s passage of Initiative 2081.

“This is a momentous day for the parents across our state who want to engage with their child’s school but have found it challenging to do so, especially when it comes to having certain questions or concerns addressed,” said Dozier, R-Waitsburg, who serves on the Senate Early Learning and K-12 Education Committee.

“Parents shouldn’t have to wade through state laws and rules to figure out what their rights are when it comes to knowing what is being taught at their child’s school, or how the school responds to the health questions of students. In this day and age they should be able to pull up a website and quickly get answers.

“This initiative covers even more ground than the policy I’ve proposed each of the past few years, and I’m happy to see it become law.”

The parental-rights measure was passed by a 49-0 vote in the state Senate and a 82-15 vote in the House of Representatives. It is one of three initiatives to the Legislature, submitted by Washington voters earlier this year, to win legislative approval today. Lawmakers have never enacted three initiatives in any year since Washington’s initiative process was created in 1912.

“Our public schools should want to be as transparent as possible. They should want to make it simple and convenient for parents to get the information they seek, because that can make the difference between a parent who is engaged versus a parent who gets frustrated and starts looking for alternatives for educating their children,” said Dozier.

“More than 454,000 Washington voters signed the petitions for I-2081, which was second only to the initiative to repeal the hidden gas tax represented by the cap-and-trade law,” he added. “I have to believe many of them are parents who look back on how the pandemic affected students and see I-2081 as a step toward being more involved going forward.”

Because the initiatives do not go to the governor for consideration like other legislation, the laws created by I-2081, I-2111 and I-2113 will take effect 90 days after the legislative session ends this Thursday.

The income-tax ban was passed 38-11 in the Senate and 76-21 in the House. The pursuit reform received a 36-13 vote in the Senate and passed 77-20 in the House.

Leaders of the Democrat majorities in the two legislative chambers say three more initiatives submitted to the Legislature will not receive any attention this session, despite each receiving well over 400,000 voter signatures: I-2117, to repeal the cap-and-trade law (officially, the “Climate Commitment Act”); I-2109, to repeal the state tax on income from capital gains; and I-2124, to let workers opt out of what is now a mandatory payroll tax for the state-run long-term care act.

If lawmakers adjourn on schedule Thursday without enacting those measures, as expected, Washington’s constitution requires them to automatically go on the November statewide general-election ballot.

E-News: Hearings scheduled on initiatives next week; this week went to budgets

with Sen. L. Wilson

With Sen. Lynda Wilson of Vancouver in the Senate chamber. The supplemental operating budget passed today by the state Senate reflects some of my input, which I worked through her as Senate Republican budget leader and her counterparts on the majority side. Keep reading for details.

Dear Neighbor,

Greetings from the state Capitol! I have important news about voter initiatives that couldn’t wait… for reasons that will become apparent.

This past weekend I reported to you how our Democrat colleagues had finally committed to holding public hearings for three of the six initiatives submitted to us by the people. Now we have a schedule for those hearings, and opportunities for you to participate.

The three measures to be considered are Initiative 2111 (total ban on income taxes in our state), Initiative 2113 (restore the ability of police to conduct vehicle pursuits) and Initiative 2081 (parental rights regarding their children’s education).

I-2081 builds on the parents’ bill of rights legislation I have sponsored since 2021. It will come before the Senate Early Learning and K-12 Education Committee, on which I serve, and I am working with others on the committee to make sure the hearing covers the most important aspects during the one hour (!) allotted.

Unfortunately, the majority is still refusing to hold hearings on the initiatives to repeal laws that are about taking money and giving it to the state: I-2117, I-2109 and I-2124. Washington’s constitution does not say to give precedence to half the initiatives and ignore the rest. The people are the sponsors of these initiatives, and they deserve to be heard on all six!

To support the initiatives next week sign in as PRO, using the links below. Be sure the button next to the initiative number under “select agenda item” is checked, to display your options — which include submitting written testimony or testifying “live” in person or remotely:

For more detail about the six initiatives click here. I want to hear from you about all of them. Please take a few minutes to click on the link or the QR code and complete my survey!
survey QR code

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

Scan the QR code or click here to begin

initiative box

Local projects supported in budgets adopted, proposed this week

State government runs on a two-year budget cycle, with new budgets developed and adopted in odd-numbered years. This is why we alternate between 105-day sessions and 60-day sessions; in this year’s “short” session we are reopening the budgets approved in 2023 to make adjustments that are intended to carry through the remainder of the budget cycle (until June 2025). Those changes are captured in “supplemental” budgets.

This week the Senate adopted supplemental versions of the 2023-25 operating budget and capital budget. A high-level summary of the supplemental operating budget is here; before the final vote I worked with the budget leaders from both parties to make two adjustments of interest to our area.

One adds a $501,000 appropriation to help with the cleanup of gasoline contamination in downtown Walla Walla; the second creates a fourth tier in an agricultural-fuel reimbursement I discovered in the budget after it became public Monday. For those who purchase 10,000 gallons or more of farm diesel annually, the payment would go to $4,500, up from $3,400 (which remains the third-tier payment).

While I appreciate the majority’s support for my amendment, this approach still does not — as I stated publicly this week — truly reimburse those stuck paying a surcharge on farm fuel due to the state’s cap-and-trade law. The best solution is to do away with cap-and-trade completely, which is the purpose of Initiative 2117. It will save money for anyone who buys any kind of motor fuel or uses natural gas for any purpose, residential or commercial.

The capital budget adopted by the Senate appropriates another $6.6 million toward projects in our 16th Legislative District. I’m happy that includes another $1.5 million for the Columbia Valley Center for Recovery (it’s still listed as Three Rivers Behavioral Health Center, as the name changed after the underlying budget was adopted in 2023). Even better, in its way, is the $300,000 for a trio of local projects: resurfacing and revitalizing the public swimming pool in Prescott, funding a childcare center for Waitsburg and support for the Prosser Clubhouse, run by the Boys and Girls Clubs of Benton and Franklin counties.

From here, the leaders for the operating and capital budgets from the Senate and House will get together and hammer out the differences between their respective spending plans, then come back with a compromise for another vote.

I also have an important appropriation in the Senate’s proposed supplemental transportation budget, for the State Route 224/Red Mountain project in the Benton County part of our district. Click here for my news release on it, from earlier this week. That budget will come up for a vote from the full Senate this next week, then it will go through the same compromise process.

***

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,

dozier signature

Perry Dozier
State Senator
16th Legislative District

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

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

 

 

Session passes midway point; long-awaited drug-possession bill clears Senate

March 4, 2023

This is what a “meeting” often looks like when we’re working full-time on the floor of the Senate chamber, as has been the case all this week. Between debates and votes on bills you try to grab a moment to talk, as I was doing here with Sen. Mark Schoesler of Ritzville, left, and Sen. Curtis King of Yakima.

Dear Neighbor,

Greetings from Olympia! Thursday was day 53 of a session scheduled for 105 days, meaning legislators are just past the midway point.

The state Senate is several days into what is probably best described as the third stage of our work.

My previous report explained how policy and budget committees winnow the number of bills in play. This new stage goes through Wednesday and has the full 49-member Senate considering bills that received the necessary committee endorsements and were placed on our voting calendar by another committee, called Rules.

Members of the Rules Committee are not obliged to put every available bill on the voting calendar, nor is the Senate obliged to bring every bill on the calendar to a vote. That means the bills we do vote on have cleared either three or four hurdles already.

Once a bill is passed by the Senate, it begins the process all over again in the House of Representatives. As I’ve mentioned before, it can be difficult to make laws – and more often than not that is a good thing.

I’m happy to report one of my prime-sponsored bills won unanimous approval yesterday afternoon: Senate Bill 5025, which would require the digitization of all records of those serving sentences in our state correctional institutions.

You can imagine how much time and trouble it would save to have all those paper-based medical records converted to electronic form, for easier management. Before the vote I related to my fellow senators a story about how having medical records in paper form once complicated an emergency medical situation involving a Washington State Penitentiary inmate — all the paper weighed so much that it became impossible to take the full record on a medical helicopter flight! That bill now moves to the House of Representatives, and the process outlined above.

Here are a few examples of other bills that moved through the Senate just this week. They help illustrate the importance and range of the decisions being made.

 

Fixing the state’s
lax drug-possession law

One of my video reports from the Capitol offered an update on how legislators need to deal with the drug epidemic in our state. Important progress on that has just been made.

I was among the bipartisan majority of senators that passed Senate Bill 5536 late last night (11 p.m.!). It’s very similar to a bill I sponsored in that it would make possession and use of hard drugs a gross misdemeanor. It also would do a lot to restore the legal leverage that can compel people to seek and complete substance-use treatment.

During my first session as your senator the state Supreme Court came out with a ruling in State v. Blake, a case out of Spokane involving a woman who was arrested for methamphetamine possession. Her defense was that she didn’t know the drug was in the borrowed blue jeans she was wearing. The case was appealed to the high court, which on Feb. 25, 2021, agreed and found Washington’s felony drug-possession law to be unconstitutional.

The first Blake bill passed by the Senate in 2021 was similar to what we approved last night. Unfortunately, that approach got watered down severely during negotiations between the Senate and House. What was signed by the governor that year effectively decriminalized the possession and use of drugs like heroin and methamphetamine. It required first- and second-time offenders to be referred to treatment services instead of jail. Subsequent offenses could be charged only as a misdemeanor.

The legislation passed last night is actually better than the first Blake bill I supported two years ago. Charging drug possession as a gross misdemeanor is the same, but this carries the added leverage of a minimum sentence and is more detailed about how treatment services would be provided. The priority now is to avoid a repeat of 2021, and make sure this improved policy proposal doesn’t get weakened before it reaches the governor.

Democratic majority is off-target
with ‘firearm duty’ bill

Almost every morning while I’m in Olympia it seems the television channels carry news of another shooting the night before, somewhere in the central Puget Sound area. Even worse, many of these shootings end someone’s life.

Common sense tells us the guns used in these crimes aren’t being purchased directly by the criminals from retailers. If we want to reduce this kind of crime, we should be taking action on bills that would increase the penalty for stealing a gun (SB 5049) and increase the penalty for using a gun to commit a crime (SB 5745). I am a co-sponsor of both.

Instead, it seems the Senate’s majority Democrats want to look the other way. On Thursday they passed SB 5078, a bill requested by both Governor Inslee and Attorney General Bob Ferguson. The governor and AG have given the legislation a real mouthful of a name: “The Firearm Industry Responsibility & Gun Violence Victims’ Access to Justice Act.”

The people in our state who manufacture, import, market and (legally) sell firearms in our state are not the problem. Those who steal guns are the problem, those who sell stolen guns on the underground market are the problem — and, of course, those who point a gun at another human being and pull the trigger for a reason other than self-defense are the problem.

Prior to the vote, a Republican colleague noted how if someone breaks your window with a hammer, the person who swung the hammer should be held accountable – not the hardware store that sold it or the company that made it. But the majority stuck to its position and passed the bill. It has shown no interest in either of the bills I’m sponsoring to go directly after the person who commits the crime.

If SB 5078 becomes law, it will be challenged in court on constitutional grounds, and the state of Washington will likely lose. But in the meantime, it would probably put in limbo the more than 3,000 federally licensed firearm dealers in Washington… plus sellers at gun shows and swap meets… and others engaged in the manufacture, importation, or marketing of firearms. Besides, why should taxpayers have to pick up the tab to defend the state against a bill that clearly looks unconstitutional from the start?

New attack on parental rights moves forward

Back on Feb. 1, when my Parents’ Bill of Rights bill (SB 5024) came up for a public hearing in our Senate K-12 committee, more than 70% of the people who signed in to offer their opinion agreed with the point of my legislation: School districts can and should do more to involve parents.

I thought that was a pretty one-sided response. But it didn’t hold a candle to Senate Bill 5599, which would go in the opposite direction by eliminating an important parental right. When it received a hearing before the Senate Human Services Committee on Feb. 6, more than 4,700 people registered their opinion on the bill – and 98% were opposed.

If a teen runs away from home and ends up at a licensed youth shelter, the parents are supposed to get a notification call within 72 hours, preferably sooner. At least then the parents know their child is alive as opposed to being in a hospital or morgue or just plain missing. Since 2010 there has been one exception to the parental-notification rule, and it’s reasonable: if a child shows signs of parental abuse or harm, the parents don’t get notified, but the state Department of Children, Youth and Families does.

SB 5599 would create a new exception to the parental-notification requirement, and it’s got a definite slant: All children would have to do is show up at a shelter, claim they are seeking what the bill calls “protected health services,” and just like that – the “cone of silence” comes down around the child. No call to the parents is required.

Before the vote on this bill, which happened Wednesday night (which meant it couldn’t make the evening news) Senate Republican Leader John Braun did a great job of explaining why this bill is not only anti-parent but also not pro-child. Click here to view his remarks and here for a statement he issued afterward. Either will give you a fuller sense of the problems with this proposal, and why it needs to be sidelined rather than become law.

The state Senate has been approving a wide range of bills all week – and while some are supported only by majority Democrats, most have received bipartisan votes. An example of a bill that brought Republicans and Democrats together is SB 5569, which I am co-sponsoring. It would help kidney disease centers to offer more dialysis stations, and before it received a unanimous vote I explained to my fellow senators how access to dialysis several years ago is why my 86-year-old mother is still able to go out and work in her garden!

Co-sponsored bills still in play

No legislator has a corner on good ideas, so I am happy to look at legislation proposed by other senators and decide whether to co-sponsor or “sign on” to it.

Here are just a few of the bills I am co-sponsoring that have either been passed by the Senate or are still in a position to move forward by March 8.

Land stewardship – SB 5353 would give the rest of Washington’s 39 counties an opportunity to participate in the state’s Voluntary Stewardship Program – an alternative approach for protecting critical areas on lands where agricultural uses exist. I know about the stewardship program firsthand, as Walla Walla County was one of the 27 counties that signed up when the first opportunity was presented in 2012. It has produced great results in our area.

Besides opening up the program to the 12 counties that didn’t sign up the first time around, SB 5353 would also allow any counties joining the program to access funding for riparian projects. The unanimous vote from the Senate for this bill Thursday is great news to agriculture groups and tribes, after a bipartisan riparian-buffer bill many had supported failed to make it past the committee stage in the House.

Irrigation-district elections – Washington has many special-purpose taxing districts nowadays, but it all started with irrigation districts. Our state has around 100 irrigation districts that construct, operate, and maintain the infrastructure that supplies water for Washington agriculture. A fraud case involving an irrigation district in King County exposed how the election procedures for irrigation districts are out of date.

SB 5709 was approved unanimously this past Tuesday; it would allow for mail-in ballots to modernize ballot security and make some important changes to how one becomes a candidate to the board of directors.

School-maintenance money – For the third straight year, I’m sponsoring legislation that would help school districts in Washington address their building-maintenance needs.

Senate Bill 5403 was approved by the Senate yesterday. It would allow school districts to voluntarily create a “depreciation subfund” that can receive a transfer of up to 2 percent of a school district’s general fund each fiscal year.

Sometimes it can be better for a school district to pay cash for a building repair or to set aside money for emergencies when they arise. This bipartisan bill would provide such a path for school districts to handle building- or facility-maintenance needs.

 

 

Participating in YOUR state government

Now that we are back in person, there are many events, hearings and activities happening on the Capitol Campus. Additionally, we will continue to offer virtual options which may be more convenient. To help you navigate the legislative website and external resources, I have provided the following frequently used links to make your participation in the legislative process a little easier:

Watch legislative hearings, floor sessions and press conferences – https://www.tvw.org/

Testify in a committee – https://leg.wa.gov/legislature/Pages/Testify.aspx

Provide remote testimony – https://leg.wa.gov/House/Committees/Pages/RemoteTestimony-RegisterToTestify.aspx

Comment on a bill – https://app.leg.wa.gov/pbc/

Visit my website – https://perrydozier.src.wastateleg.org/

Senate Page Program. If you know a teen (between the ages of 14-16) interested in spending a week in Olympia learning about our state government, have them apply here – https://leg.wa.gov/Senate/Administration/PageProgram/Pages/default.aspx 

 

Please remember I am here to serve you. Although we may not always be able to meet face to face, I encourage you to reach out to my office and to share your thoughts, ideas and concerns on matters of importance to you. Please, if you don’t already, follow me on Facebook. I look forward to hearing from you.

Perry Dozier

State Senator

16th Legislative District

.