Post navigation

Prev: (11/24/19) | Next: (11/24/19)

Capitol Hill’s leaders in Olympia look ahead to 2020: capital gains, carbon tax, behavioral health, rent control ban, and the ‘Tim Eyman disaster’

Frank Chopp, Jamie Pedersen, and Nicole Macri

(Image: @43rdDems)

Coming into the 2019 legislative session in January after the midterms, Washington Democrats held hefty majorities in both chambers in Olympia, allowing them to pass progressive legislation that had been on the backburner for years with close margins or Republican control of the state Senate.

And Democrats passed a suite of legislation, including expanded higher education funding, increased renter protections, and a public option. But, despite the advantage, they still fell short on other policy goals, like clean fuel standards, banning high capacity magazines for firearms, and comprehensive sexual health education in the state’s schools.

So when the 43rd District legislative delegation — which includes Capitol Hill, First Hill, and other parts of the city — came to Seattle Central College Tuesday night to preview their priorities for the 2020 session, one of the lawmakers’ biggest pleas was to expand that Democratic majority through other parts of the state to make passing progressive legislation simpler.

The environment, gun safety, behavioral health, and housing, were some of the top issues for the delegation, made up of Sen. Jamie Pedersen, Rep. Nicole Macri, and Rep. Frank Chopp, who Pedersen called “speaker emeritus” given his extensive time serving as the top lawmaker in the House that came to an end in 2019.

 

PLEASE HELP KEEP CHS PAYWALL-FREE!
Subscribe to CHS to help us pay writers and photographers to cover the neighborhood. CHS is a pay what you can community news site with no required sign-in or paywall. Become a subscriber to help us cover the neighborhood for as little as $5 a month.

 

 

Macri conceded that this year’s legislative wins on climate change for Democrats, which included phasing out the use of fossil fuels in power generation and new energy standards for big buildings, were long overdue.

“The efforts that we made in 2019 were making up for lost time, but by comparison they were tremendous,” she said. “But we have a lot more to do: The crisis is urgent.”

Gov. Jay Inslee’s clean-fuels measure stalled in the state Senate this year and Macri, who thinks this is an optimistic time for climate action in Washington, said passing it in next year’s short, 60-day session would be a “heavy lift.”

Given this shorter timeline for passing legislation that occurs every even year, Pedersen said “we’re not gonna get everything done this year.” Pedersen chairs the Washington Senate Democratic campaign arm and noted that since Democrats are not necessarily united on environmental issues, a bigger majority would be helpful for major policy change.

He also noted that there has been “some significant talk” about the possibility of a revised carbon tax that could come up when the legislative session begins in early January.

Pedersen, who chairs his chamber’s Law and Justice Committee, added that he’s “cautiously optimistic” on banning capacity magazines in firearms. This proposal, which defined a high capacity magazine as one with over 15 rounds of ammunition, made little progress in the Legislature last year.

On gun safety, Pedersen, who along with Macri is a member of the Legislature’s LGBTQ caucus, emphasized more the possibility of creating a single point of contact system for doing background checks in Washington. This would mean no longer needing to do checks with individual sheriff’s offices, he noted.

“Not only feasible, but it’s advisable” said Pedersen, summarizing a report he received Tuesday on the issue.

Pedersen also stressed a capital gains tax, which some have argued is an unconstitutional income tax, as the next step toward a more progressive tax structure in Washington, which boasts the most regressive system in the country. He said the Legislature is getting closer to having the numbers for that, but hopes after the 2020 elections, it could pass more easily.

Chopp, meanwhile, prioritized behavioral health, one of the policy areas where there is often bipartisan agreement, as a big issue to work on next year.

“People are dying on the streets,” Chopp said. “That is a shame on this society that we let that happen so we’ve just gotta rededicate ourselves to fixing that.”

He noted one possible move to link up health care with nonprofits and public agencies to move people who are homeless into supportive housing. Chopp also said he will be working on a vast expansion in early learning, which he called “the best investment we can make in our future,” through more free childcare from birth to five-years-old.

Last year, a bill to mandate comprehensive sexual health education in all of Washington’s public schools, which one questioner brought up to applause from some of the local Democrats, passed the Senate along party lines before dying in the house. Chopp said that in 2020 “it will come up and it will pass.”

Rent control has also been an explosive issue at the local level with newly-reelected Seattle City Council member Kshama Sawant pushing legislation to install the practice in Seattle once the state lifts its longtime ban. Macri, Pedersen, and Chopp all voiced support for lifting the ban, but Pedersen, who was at Sawant challenger Egan Orion’s election night party earlier this month, argued that “there aren’t the votes in the current Legislature to move that bill.”

Last week’s meeting came in a busy year for the 43rd District Democrat group. Over the summer, the shifting makeup of the community organization made history by making Sawant the first non-Democratic candidate to win the group’s endorsement. The group has also shifted the location of its meetings from north of the Montlake Cut in the University District to Seattle Central, a location closer to the younger voters and the renter-dominated population of Capitol Hill’s core.

For two of the legislators representing the district, it will soon be time to start thinking about winning constituent votes. Chopp and Macri’s seats come up next year while Pedersen will face reelection in 2022. In 2012, Chopp defeated Sawant in her challenge to his seat in Olympia but not without a spirited fight from the Socialist Alternative member.

Instead of focusing on rent control at last week’s session with the 43rd Dems, Macri, one of the leading voices in the Legislature on renters’ rights, moved the conversation to a more attainable goal: banning no-cause evictions. She wants to make it so landlords can’t remove tenants without a legitimate business reason.

All of this said, Pedersen noted that Initiative 976, which he termed the “Tim Eyman disaster,” will take up much of the Legislature’s time this session given the transportation funding issues it raises and possible rulings from the courts on the voter-approved ballot measure.

 

PLEASE HELP KEEP CHS PAYWALL-FREE!
Subscribe to CHS to help us pay writers and photographers to cover the neighborhood. CHS is a pay what you can community news site with no required sign-in or paywall. Become a subscriber to help us cover the neighborhood for as little as $5 a month.

 

 
Subscribe and support CHS Contributors -- $1/$5/$10 per month

8 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
HTS3
HTS3
4 years ago

Hello there, Representatives. While you consider trying to overturn our State’s ban on rent control, I ask that you think beyond the superficial “Gee, rents are skyrocketing, let’s cap any increases.” It sounds good. It’s popular with voters, particularly those who rent. And hey, Oregon just enacted it, let’s do that, too. Screw those landlords. Well, let’s take a little deeper look. I’m a homeowner, not a landlord, so I don’t have skin in this game. But my property taxes have doubled in 4 years. Landlords tax bills have also likely doubled in that time. Yet, if you limit rent increases to a number less than the increasing overhead costs of property taxes and energy and things, property owners will have no reason to improve or even maintain their property beyond minimum levels. And where is the incentive to build more, badly needed units? Yes, Oregon has now allowed rent control. But that State’s tax philosophy is very different. With an income tax, they rely on that more than property taxes. So the economics of a rent control are different. Our politicians seem very willing to vote for anything that sounds good on the surface. They’d actually have to understand, and then communicate a stand on an issue that was more complicated—like this one. Please don’t try to be voted most popular. Let’s go for thoughtful and smart.

Old Fogies
Old Fogies
4 years ago
Reply to  HTS3

So with what you’re saying the Landlords will have to dip into their margin to cough up the extra Tax bill dollars? Big whoop…I feel for you and your higher tax bill, maybe you should have considered those costs when you bought your property tho?

HTS3
HTS3
4 years ago
Reply to  Old Fogies

Like I said, I’m not a landlord, only an observer. Speaking of “dipping into your margin,” how would you feel if you based your family budget on certain predictable facts, and then someone introduced a change in your income that doubled your expenses? So this would be sort of like doubling your rent. Oh, I get it. It’s okay to double the costs of something for someone other than you. Got it. Cool.

Old Fogies
Old Fogies
4 years ago
Reply to  Old Fogies

Since I am not making money on a rental unit I do not have any margin. I was speaking about how landlords rent their units at a profit, so that profit margin will just be less as the tax bill increases and rent stay steady. As for me, if my rent doubled, I would move :). Might be a good idea for you as well, taxes are a consideration, and should always be one. Your tax bill has gone up more than 4 times and you no longer can afford it? Sounds like you’ve just been priced out of your home…Might be time to move….

Old Fogies
Old Fogies
4 years ago
Reply to  Old Fogies

Another thought would be to refinance your home and use that money to pay your tax bill. (as I’m sure it is worth more today than what you paid for it 4 years ago)

HTS3
HTS3
4 years ago
Reply to  Old Fogies

Yes, landlords have a profit. But if they are limited as to what they can charge for rent, that profit evaporates as their expenses go up. So then this may force them to sell to bigger developers that convert the property to something other than apartments, or they stop maintaining the property. Both bad things for renters. I’m just asking our representatives to not automatically go down the rent control path. I’ve searched a lot of articles both for, and against rent control. It seems like it’s at least as likely to hurt the inventory of affordable apartments as it is to stabilize rents. I lived in New York under rent control, and it was a joke. It just created another economy of under the table rentals and sublets.

MarciaX
MarciaX
4 years ago
Reply to  HTS3

There’s absolutely no reason rent regulations can’t be tailored to take property tax and other cost increases into account. What we need to stop is landlords who are already making high profits arbitrarily raising rents by hundreds of dollars every single year simply because the market will bear it.

For someone who’s “not a landlord” you certainly express a remarkably high level of passion in opposition to this idea.

Young know nothings
Young know nothings
4 years ago

@old fogies. Young know nothings.