CAPR 2024 Legislative Wrap Up! Hard Fought Wins!

March 4, 2024

by Cindy Alia

With only 3 days left in the 2024 legislative session it is thankfully time for a legislative wrap up to inform about the bills CAPR members, friends, and supporters fought for and fought against.  Always, CAPR is grateful for the swift actions our members will take to make sure legislators are well informed about the suitability of proposed bills.  All told, for the 2023-2024 biennium, there were 3,931 bills proposed from which the house introduced 2,014, and the senate introduced 1,917.  Of that iniquitous outpouring of legislative babble, at this writing, 609 bills have passed both houses and have been signed by both the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate.  Senate Bill 5950, Operating Budget is in conference regarding differences between the House and Senate.  

WIN! Three of the six initiatives the people signed and the Secretary of State certified were heard by the legislature.  initiatives 2018 Parental Notification, 2111 No State Income Tax, and 2113 Reasonable Police Pursuit were heard by the legislature, have passed the Senate, and have passed the House!  This means the initiatives have passed both houses and will become law 90 days after March 7.  Initiatives cannot be effected by the governor and so will simply become law.  Because the legislature passed the initiatives they may amend them in the following session with a simple majority, unlike if the citizens vote the initiatives into law, where the legislature must wait two years to amend and can only do so with a 2/3 majority.  Therefore, these initiatives which have just become law must be jealously guarded to avoid changing the intent and the will of the people.  Ever vigilant! 

You can see who voted on the initiatives and who voted nay on the pages linked above by clicking on view roll calls in the initiative history section of each initiative.   

You can keep track of the initiatives at the Lets Go Washington website throughout this busy political year to find out what is happening with the six initiatives, including 2117 Stop the Hidden Gas Tax, 2124 Opt out of State-Run Long Term Care Coverage Act, and 2109 Repeal the Capital Gains Tax, the remaining three historic initiatives put forth by the people.  We are appreciative and grateful for the effort behind this historic set of initiatives demonstrating the will of the people as expressed by the more than required signatures by a great measure.  


CAPR Bills of Concern were for the most part defeated, and we are again grateful for CAPR members, friends, and supporters for the thousands of calls, emails, bill comments, and testimony provided to the legislature that defeated these bills:

WIN! 1045 Creating the evergreen basic income pilot program.  This bill would have established the Evergreen Basic Income Pilot Program (pilot program), providing 24 monthly payments to up to 7,500 qualifying participants in an amount equal to 100 percent of the fair market rent for a two-bedroom dwelling unit in the county in which a participant resides.  The bill was quickly scuttled and short-lived because it is a bridge too far for most people recognizing there is a limit to other peoples' ability to continuously provide monies for others while still being able to manage their own basic means in these current inflationary times in this inflationary state.  State enforced largess in the form of forced charity has not proven to be a path to success in solving housing problems.  These bill sponsors in the House do not respect and recognize the reality of the property rights earners of income have in that income. Earned income is not the pocket book of the state, but rather the property of the earner.  BerryPetersonRyuSimmonsGoodmanBatemanReedRamelPolletStreetSennDoglioMacriMenaWylieGregersonOrmsby  The bill did not pass.

WIN! 1333 Establishing the domestic violent extremism commission.  This devisive and harmful bill is based in the bubble created in the mind of Bob Ferguson, current State Attorney General, and want to be Governor.  This bill censors thought and behavior, labels it, and then targets those who dare think or behave in ways that particular organizations disagree with or do not approve of.  This bill would do nothing to heal the divisions created in this state and nation, and would create dangerous lines to cross.  We will not be well served by following the lead of dividers and haters.  This is the United States, we should be united not divided.  At the state level, citizens are more likely to work to love and respect one another without the interference of pushers of ill will.  Government is ill equipped in this bill to accomplish any good will in this state.  The bill did not pass and should always be something we are alert to deny.  These House sponsors of the bill do not understand and agree with this.  RamosBergBerryDuerrLeavittTaylorMenaPetersonRamelRyuSennSimmonsStreetReedLekanoffDoglioCortesPolletCallanFosseMacriStonier

Most likely a loss! 1589 Supporting Washington's clean energy economy and transitioning to a clean, affordable, and reliable energy future.  This is a special interest bill designed to enhance the monopoly that exists for Puget Sound Energy.  The goal of the bill is to ban the use of natural gas and force the single energy use of electric.  Some believe the goal of the bill is also to create a scenario where rate payers will cover the costs of unrealistic state-mandated carbon-reduction goals and the "Climate Commitment Act".  The bottom line of this bill is it will, if passed, have a huge impact on the bottom line of rate payers with huge increased costs for electricity and retro fitting of homes and businesses.  The bill passed the house with little difficulty last session and was held over for this session.  These are the bill sponsors: DoglioFitzgibbonBerryAlvaradoBatemanRamelPetersonLekanoffHackneyMacriKloba  Perhaps a second job will be needed to cover the increased costs for many Washingtonians.  The bill is on the concurrence calendar and did not pass today, however the house has until March 7th to do so.  Might be worth calling your house representatives and speaking out to avoid the concurrence vote and passage into law.  Or call 800 562 2000 and leave a message for your representatives!

The bill was hard fought on partisan lines in the Senate with many amendments proffered and denied.  All republican Senators voted no on the bill, and in the end only two democrat Senators, each of whom are running for state-wide office at the close of session, they being Senator Van de Wege, and Senator Mullet.

The bill has problems with the drafting as it was pointed out by Senator Short who after all amendments were denied except for one proffered by democrat Senator Nguyen, called a point of order because the bill referred to existing statute without spelling out in the bill exactly how those statutes would be amended.  That is unconstitutional and also in violation of senate rules in bill construction.  The bill was then put on pause, this is how it looked on February 29th:

Committee amendment(s) adopted as amended. (Senator Nguyen)

Rules suspended. Placed on Third Reading.  

Rules suspended.  (Senator Short pointing out unconstitutionality of the bill)

Returned to second reading for amendment.  Held on calendar. (At the request of Senator Pederson, granted by the President of the Senate)

The following day, March 1, the Senate resumed action on the bill, removed their previous amendment and replaced it with a new amendment to fix the bill's inadequacies.  The bill then was voted on and passed. This appears highly irregular, and inappropriately unprofessional, one would expect a senator to at least ensure a bill is complete, and comports to code, constitution, and rule before it is brought to the floor.  This is the result of legislators in the rush to do the bidding of so many special interests with so many bills.  There ought to be a law.

Currently the bill has been returned to the house as is required when the senate (opposite house) amends a bill.  The house must agree with the amendments made by the senate.  It is on the house floor calendar for concurrence and so it is expected there is no opposition to the senate amendments and will pass if it is heard on the floor for this final vote.  The legislature has until March 7 to pass bills and then must sine die, and blessedly go home.  

Loss! 1872 Establishing accountability requirements for homeless housing grant programs. 

Sponsored by these outstanding representatives: GrahamWalshVolzChristianCoutureBarkisRobertsonJacobsenSandlinCaldierGriffey

An excellent and much needed bill did not make it out of committee only getting a first reading and referred to Appropriations where it was ignored.  Therefore we never had a chance to champion this bill which would have saved a lot of taxpayer money by establishing a common sense set of expectations for those grantees and sub-grantees receiving homeless housing and assistance grants and would be subject to written goals and targets as well as annual plans.  Additionally, performance audits would be conducted by the state auditor.  Sadly, accountability is out of fashion in the legislature.  Hopefully the good sponsors of the bill will persist in getting this much needed bill passed.  Seems a good step in the direction of "solving homelessness", this bill.

WIN! 2114 Improving housing stability for tenants subject to the residential landlord-tenant act and the manufactured/mobile home landlord-tenant act by limiting rent and fee increases, requiring notice of rent and fee increases, limiting fees and deposits, establishing a landlord resource center and associated services, authorizing tenant lease termination, creating parity between lease types, and providing for attorney general enforcement.

This bill title is a very long way of saying establishing rent control, fee control, and micromanagement of every landlord in Washington State!  All while reducing the responsibilities and duties of tenants.  There were thousands of calls, emails, and testimony opposing the harm this bill would have engendered.  This opposition caused a reaction among the partisans causing a pull back of this goal, and the bill died.  

2114 Would have led to landlords facing the choice of not being able to afford to provide housing because rents will be capped.  The bill limits rent and fee increases to 7 percent during any 12-month period and prohibits rent and fee increases during the first 12 months of a tenancy for tenants subject to the Residential Landlord-Tenant Act and the Manufactured/Mobile Home Landlord-Tenant Act, regardless of the length of their lease, with certain exemptions. 

It also required unrealistic time frames for rent and fee increase notice requirements; tenant lease termination provisions; limits on move-in fees, security deposits, and late fees; and requirements for parity between month-to-month and longer-term rental agreements.

Remedies and enforcement mechanisms, including Attorney General enforcement of certain provisions in the bill under the Consumer Protection Act and a private cause of action for damages against landlords who violate certain provisions of the bill would discourage property owners from being landlords for fear of both lost rents and exhorbitant legal costs.  New landlords will certainly be hesitant to enter into such an unsure market and find a different path forward with their properties.

 Here are the bill sponsors:


WIN! 2474 Concerning compliance with siting requirements for transitional housing, permanent supportive housing, indoor emergency shelters, and indoor emergency housing.

The bill would have restricted final zoning decision authority by local elected officials for transitional housing and hands over the authority of county councils and citizens to unelected bureaucrats in the Department of Commerce.  Why have counties and their citizens gone through years of pain with the growth management act and continual updates just to have it discarded in part by the legislature?  If it is good for the goose, it should also be good for the gander, picking and choosing favored programs and eliminating GMA mandated control over implementation decisions and decisons of counties is not what was considered part of the GMA.  The bill did not pass.

The bill goes so far as to strong arm counties with threats of withholding state funds if a city fails to issue a project permit or modify its zoning ordinance and development regulations.  This is not local control, obviously.  The sponsors of the bill have gone far beyond what the ideal of local zoning authority so far enshrined in the growth management act.  Here are the sponsors of this bill: are you seeing a pattern?


WIN! 5770 Providing state and local property tax reform.  This was a huge win!  With thousands of calls and more than 9000 signing in for testimony, written testimony, and comments, this bill was soundly defeated in this legislative session where legislators were hyper sensitive to the longevity of their careers!  With two sponsors pulling out of their sponsorship of the bill after hearing the outrage of citizens, the bill foundered and died.  This is not the reform people of all walks of life have in mind!  

Senator Randall was enthusiastic in her sponsorship until she recognized she would pay at the polls.  Then not only backed out but had her name removed from the list of sponsors.  Other sponsors backed off but left their names on the bill.  Here they are: PedersenVan De WegeRobinsonDhingraNguyenWellmanKeiserValdezSaldaƱaHuntSalomonClevelandWilson, C.StanfordLovickHasegawaTrudeauLiias  your usual suspects.

Laughably, the prime sponsor, Senator Pederson, of the bill thought he was gracefully backing out of the bill by stating it is just too soon for the bill, he needed to spend more time educating people about taxes!  This is in part what staff wrote for the original bill, which did not improve over time: 

One Percent Property Tax Revenue Limit. For purposes of the revenue growth limit for state and local property taxes, the limit factor of 101 percent is replaced with a limit factor of 100 percent plus inflation and any banked inflation balance, with a cap of 103 percent. Inflation is defined as the annual percentage increase in the consumer price index for all urban consumers in the western region for all items as provided for the most recent 12- month period by the United States Department of Labor by July 25th of the year before the taxes are payable. The term banked inflation balance means the accumulated inflation from prior years in excess of 3 percent. 

Whats to learn Senator Pederson?  How can you teach people to enjoy the triple taxes effect on their home ownership or the portion of their income which would go to taxes already rapidly increasing?  How many with fixed incomes would become homeless, can we learn to appreciate that goal?  

The state has got to get over the habit of dipping into the hard earned dollars of everyday people and learn how to scale back on spending.  While we all face inflationary costs, fees, and taxation, the state has likewise seen huge increases in money or "revenue" collected for the state.  There is no shortage of funds for the state.  Just a shortage of the will to say no to any entity or idea.  

Again thank you CAPR members for objecting in most strenuous terms to this insane lack of empathy and forsight displayed by the legislature!  You all along with thousands of others put your feet down on this bill!  Excellent!  

LOSS 5892 Concerning diseased elk.  This bill was lost not to the reaction of the public, but to lack of attention and the bill process by the powers that be in the legislature. It was ignored and did not progress. The bill would have provided for the humane action of individuals encountering elk inflicted with Hoof disease, known scientifically as treponeme-associated hoof disease  Directs the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife to implement a three-year pilot program authorizing private individuals to humanely euthanize diseased elk.  

The bill would have eliminated the suffering of many animals as this disease spreads across the west and in Washington state.  This highly transmitable disease is not curable and results in severe crippling to the point an animal can no longer walk in search of food and water.  Eventually the animal simply suffers through starvation.  Eliminating the animals would eliminate their suffering and would slow the spread to other animals who would become infected through soils traversed by affected animals.  The legislature should have taken advantage of people willing to do this, as quite obviously it is a task beyond the ability of the state to accomplish.  Truly, there is no reason for this suffering to continue to be a state sanctioned policy.

LOSS! 5982 Updating the definition of "vaccine" in RCW 70.290.010 to include all federal food and drug administration-approved immunizations recommended by the centers for disease control and prevention.  In their unflagging wisdom, these legislators have usurped their own authority and have given it to federal agencies!  Rather than take responsibility for determining what a vaccination is, the sponsors of this bill have decided they can become blameless if they simply do not take responsibility for their authority.

"The definition of "vaccine" is changed to "an immunization approved by the Federal Food and Drug Administration as safe and effective and recommended by the advisory committee on immunization practices of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for administration to children under the age of 19 years."  

It is fortunate the sponsors do not also think it expedient to usurp our personal authority to the extent they have done their own.  Seems actionable to me.  Here are the sponsors:ClevelandRobinsonKeiserDhingraVan De WegeConwayFrameKudererLiiasMulletNoblesSalomonTrudeauValdezWellman

The bill passed both houses with and emergency clause, invalidating it for referendum.  March 7, this is the law.

WIN! 8207 Amending the Constitution to allow a majority of voters voting to authorize school district bonds.

Once again wishing to interfere with what citizens have long since established in law, the sponsors of this bill sought to exercise a reduction in the 60 percent super majority to pass school bonds, an important safeguard that requires a substantial rather than a simple level of agreement before school officials can impose long-term debt on the community.  

There was substantial objection to this bill which would undermine the safeguarding of decision making for voters and communities and ultimately lead to long term tax increases.  Ironic as it seems the bill itself would have required a super majority of voters to be passed and included in the constitution.  

The bill did not progress and did not pass.

CAPR expresses it appreciation for our members who never fail to stand for their rights when the legislature is in session!  Thank you for your emails, calls, and testimony!  





March 5, 2024