NOTICE: Formatting and page numbering in this document may be different
from that in the original published version.
FORTIETH DAY
------------
MORNING SESSION
------------
Senate Chamber, Olympia, Friday, February 21, 1997
The Senate was called to order at 10:00 a.m. by President Owen. The Secretary called the roll and announced to the President that all Senators were present.
The Sergeant at Arms Color Guard, consisting of Pages Krista Goff and Ryan West, presented the Colors. Reverend Anthony Obey, pastor of the New Life Baptist Church of Olympia, offered the prayer.
MOTION
On motion of Senator Johnson, the reading of the Journal of the previous day was dispensed with and it was approved.
REPORTS OF STANDING COMMITTEES
February 20, 1997
SB 5061 Prime Sponsor, Senator Hale: Reforming regulatory activities. Reported by Committee on Government Operations
MAJORITY Recommendation: That Substitute Senate Bill No. 5061 be substituted therefor, and the substitute bill do pass and be referred to Committee on Ways and Means. Signed by Senators McCaslin, Chair; Hale, Vice Chair; Anderson, Haugen, Horn and Patterson.
MINORITY Recommendation: Do not pass. Signed by Senator Swanson.
Referred to Committee on Ways and Means.
February 20, 1997
SB 5077 Prime Sponsor, Senator Morton: Requiring integrated pest management. Reported by Committee on Agriculture and Environment
MAJORITY Recommendation: That Substitute Senate Bill No. 5077 be substituted therefor, and the substitute bill do pass and be referred to Committee on Ways and Means. Signed by Senators Morton, Chair; Newhouse, Oke and Rasmussen.
MINORITY Recommendation: Do not pass substitute. Signed by Senators Fraser and McAuliffe.
Referred to Committee on Ways and Means.
February 19, 1997
SB 5123 Prime Sponsor, Senator Kohl: Protecting victims from sexually aggressive youth. Reported by Committee on Human Services and Corrections
MAJORITY Recommendation: That Substitute Senate Bill No. 5123 be substituted therefor, and the substitute bill do pass and be referred to Committee on Ways and Means. Signed by Senators Long, Chair; Zarelli, Vice Chair; Franklin, Hargrove, Kohl and Schow.
Referred to Committee on Ways and Means.
February 19, 1997
SB 5124 Prime Sponsor, Senator Kohl: Imposing an additional assessment for persons entering diversion agreements in regard to prostitution offenses. Reported by Committee on Human Services and Corrections
MAJORITY Recommendation: That Substitute Senate Bill No. 5124 be substituted therefor, and the substitute bill do pass. Signed by Senators Long, Chair; Zarelli, Vice Chair; Franklin, Hargrove, Kohl, Schow and Stevens.
Passed to Committee on Rules for second reading.
February 20, 1997
SB 5158 Prime Sponsor, Senator Kohl: Providing economic incentives for employer-sponsored child-care benefits. Reported by Committee on Human Services and Corrections
MAJORITY Recommendation: That Substitute Senate Bill No. 5158 be substituted therefor, and the substitute bill do pass and be referred to Committee on Ways and Means. Signed by Senators Long, Chair; Zarelli, Vice Chair; Franklin, Hargrove and Kohl.
Referred to Committee on Ways and Means.
February 19, 1997
SB 5190 Prime Sponsor, Senator Goings: Limiting health care for inmates sentenced to death. Reported by Committee on Human Services and Corrections
MAJORITY Recommendation: That Substitute Senate Bill No. 5190 be substituted therefor, and the substitute bill do pass. Signed by Senators Long, Chair; Zarelli, Vice Chair; Franklin, Hargrove, Schow and Stevens.
Passed to Committee on Rules for second reading.
February 20, 1997
SB 5271 Prime Sponsor, Senator Horn: Allowing an elected official to prepare and send guest editorials or columns that include arguments for or against ballot propositions if the editorial or column is requested by a newspaper. Reported by Committee on Government Operations
MAJORITY Recommendation: Do pass. Signed by Senators McCaslin, Chair; Hale, Vice Chair; Anderson, Haugen and Horn.
MINORITY Recommendation: Do not pass. Signed by Senators Patterson and Swanson.
Passed to Committee on Rules for second reading.
February 20, 1997
SB 5287 Prime Sponsor, Senator Horn: Repealing Title 45 RCW concerning townships. Reported by Committee on Government Operations
MAJORITY Recommendation: Do pass. Signed by Senators McCaslin, Chair; Hale, Vice Chair; Haugen, Horn and Patterson.
Passed to Committee on Rules for second reading.
February 20, 1997
SB 5337 Prime Sponsor, Senator Stevens: Extending less than county-wide port districts. Reported by Committee on Government Operations
MAJORITY Recommendation: That Substitute Senate Bill No. 5337 be substituted therefor, and the substitue bill do pass. Signed by Senators McCaslin, Chair; Hale, Vice Chair; Haugen, Horn and Swanson.
MINORITY Recommendation: Do not pass. Signed by Senator Patterson.
Passed to Committee on Rules for second reading.
February 20, 1997
SB 5364 Prime Sponsor, Senator Snyder: Authorizing counties to designate an unclassified position for their 911 emergency communications systems. Reported by Committee on Government Operations
MAJORITY Recommendation: Do pass. Signed by Senators McCaslin, Chair; Hale, Vice Chair; Anderson, Haugen, Horn, Patterson and Swanson.
Passed to Committee on Rules for second reading.
February 20, 1997
SB 5401 Prime Sponsor, Senator Sellar: Setting compensation for public utility district commissioners. Reported by Committee on Government Operations
MAJORITY Recommendation: That Substitute Senate Bill No. 5401 be substituted therefor, and the substitute bill do pass. Signed by Senators McCaslin, Chair; Hale, Vice Chair; Anderson, Haugen, Horn, Patterson and Swanson.
Passed to Committee on Rules for second reading.
February 20, 1997
SB 5427 Prime Sponsor, Senator Swecker: Exempting from taxation remedies and remedial actions taken regarding hazardous waste. Reported by Committee on Agriculture and Environment
MAJORITY Recommendation: That Substitute Senate Bill No. 5427 be substituted therefor, and the substitute bill do pass and be referred to Committee on Ways and Means. Signed by Senators Morton, Chair; Swecker, Vice Chair; Fraser, McAuliffe, Newhouse, Oke and Rasmussen.
Referred to Committee on Ways and Means.
February 20, 1997
SB 5462 Prime Sponsor, Senator Hale: Changing local government permit timeline provisions. Reported by Committee on Government Operations
MAJORITY Recommendation: That Substitute Senate Bill No. 5462 be substituted therefor, and the substitute bill do pass. Signed by Senators McCaslin, Chair; Hale, Vice Chair; Anderson, Haugen, Horn and Patterson.
Passed to Committee on Rules for second reading.
February 20, 1997
SB 5599 Prime Sponsor, Senator McCaslin: Establishing a study group to determine whether further training for state investigators is needed. Reported by Committee on Government Operations
MAJORITY Recommendation: That Substitute Senate Bill No. 5599 be substituted therefor, and the substitute bill do pass. Signed by Senators McCaslin, Chair; Hale, Vice Chair; Anderson, Haugen, Horn, Patterson and Swanson.
Passed to Committee on Rules for second reading.
February 20, 1997
SB 5659 Prime Sponsor, Senator Morton: Regulating the beef commission. Reported by Committee on Agriculture and Environment
MAJORITY Recommendation: Do pass. Signed by Senators Morton, Chair; Swecker, Vice Chair; Fraser, McAuliffe, Newhouse, Oke and Rasmussen.
Passed to Committee on Rules for second reading.
February 20, 1997
SB 5660 Prime Sponsor, Senator Kohl: Requiring notice of enforcement actions taken against child day-care centers and family day-care providers. Reported by Committee on Human Services and Corrections
MAJORITY Recommendation: That Substitute Senate Bill No. 5660 be substituted therefor, and the substitute bill do pass and be referred to Committee on Ways and Means. Signed by Senators Long, Chair; Zarelli, Vice Chair; Franklin, Hargrove and Kohl.
Referred to Committee on Ways and Means.
REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE
GUBERNATORIAL APPOINTMENT
February 20, 1997
GA 9218 DAVID WILLIAMS, reappointed January 28, 1997, for a term ending June 15, 2001, as a member of the Marine Employees' Commission.
Reported by the Committee on Transportation
MAJORITY Recommendation: That said reappointment be confirmed. Signed by Senators Prince, Chair; Benton, Vice Chair; Wood, Vice Chair; Goings, Haugen, Heavey, Horn, Jacobsen, Morton, Oke, Patterson, Prentice and Rasmussen.
Passed to Committee on Rules.
MESSAGE FROM THE GOVERNOR
VETO MESSAGE ON ENGROSSED SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 5212
February 19, 1997
To the Honorable President and Members,
The Senate of the State of Washington
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I am returning herewith, without my approval, Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill No. 5212 entitled:
"AN ACT Relating to limiting property taxes by reducing the one hundred six percent limit calculation and allowing for valuation increases to be spread over time;"
Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill No. 5212 provides a "smoothing" mechanism that averages over time the value of property that is rapidly appreciating. In addition, the bill reduces the 6 percent growth limit to the rate of inflation for the state property tax levy and, under specific circumstances, for local regular taxing districts.
I personally favor some mechanism for smoothing large spikes in property valuation. This proposal, however, contains several fatal flaws. First, county assessors have pointed out numerous technical and implementation problems with the bill as passed. More significantly, the smoothing mechanism divides property into classes and treats the classes differently. This would violate the state Constitution.
The cost and benefits of this legislation must also be considered. This legislation would substantially reduce state revenues - by almost $100 million in the 1997-99 biennium, nearly $300 million in the next biennium, and by more than $460 million in the 2001-03 biennium - with minimal relief to homeowners. Homeowners should be the targeted beneficiaries of property tax relief as part of a comprehensive tax cut package that includes reductions in business taxes. ESSB 5212 does not further these goals.
The people of the state deserve a comprehensive approach to property tax reform rather than the short-sighted, piecemeal approach taken by the legislature so far. Washington's citizens deserve reasonable, fair and sustainable tax reform that does not jeopardize future investments in education and public safety and the maintenance of a healthy economy for future generations. I believe we can and should work together to achieve real reform for our citizens.
For these reasons, I have vetoed Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill No. 5212 in its entirety.
Respectfully submitted,
GARY LOCKE, Governor
MOTION
On motion of Senator Johnson, the Veto Message on Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill No. 5212 was held on the desk.
MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE
February 19, 1997
MR. PRESIDENT:
The House has passed:
ENGROSSED HOUSE BILL NO. 1096,
SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL NO. 1166,
SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL NO. 1171,
HOUSE BILL NO. 1189,
ENGROSSED HOUSE BILL NO. 1238,
HOUSE BILL NO. 1248,
HOUSE BILL NO. 1250, and the same are herewith transmitted.
TIMOTHY A. MARTIN, Chief Clerk
INTRODUCTION AND FIRST READING
SB 5946 by Senators Anderson, Deccio, McCaslin, Long, Oke, Johnson, Stevens and Schow
AN ACT Relating to property tax exemptions for persons confined in adult family homes and certain boarding homes; and amending RCW 84.36.381.
Referred to Committee on Health and Long-Term Care.
SB 5947 by Senators Benton, Zarelli, Stevens and Schow
AN ACT Relating to the commission on student learning; reenacting and amending RCW 28A.630.885 and 28A.630.885; and providing expiration dates.
Referred to Committee on Education.
SB 5948 by Senators Benton, Finkbeiner, Zarelli, Schow, Hochstatter, Stevens, Anderson and Roach
AN ACT Relating to improving public mass transportation systems; adding new sections to chapter 35.58 RCW; adding new sections to chapter 36.57 RCW; adding new sections to chapter 36.57A RCW; adding new sections to chapter 47.60 RCW; adding new sections to chapter 81.112 RCW; and repealing RCW 35.58.250, 35.58.265, 36.57.080, 36.57.090, 36.57A.100, 36.57A.120, 81.112.100, and 81.112.110.
Referred to Committee on Transportation.
SB 5949 by Senators Benton, Bauer, Finkbeiner, Heavey, Sellar, Schow, Patterson, Brown and Goings
AN ACT Relating to cemetery district commissioners; and amending RCW 68.52.220.
Referred to Committee on Government Operations.
SB 5950 by Senators Schow and Heavey
AN ACT Relating to taxation of gambling activities; and amending RCW 9.46.110.
Referred to Committee on Commerce and Labor.
SB 5951 by Senators Sheldon, Prentice, McAuliffe, Fairley, Goings, Franklin, Jacobsen, Snyder, Rasmussen, Fraser, Kohl, Oke, Heavey, Bauer, Patterson, Kline, Wood, Winsley and Prince
AN ACT Relating to the Washington state organ donor medal; and adding a new chapter to Title 1 RCW.
Referred to Committee on Government Operations.
SB 5952 by Senators Deccio and Wood
AN ACT Relating to water recreation facilities; amending RCW 70.90.150; and repealing RCW 70.90.170.
Referred to Committee on Health and Long-Term Care.
SB 5953 by Senators Deccio, Wojahn and Wood
AN ACT Relating to water recreation facilities; and amending RCW 70.90.250.
Referred to Committee on Health and Long-Term Care.
SB 5954 by Senators West, Swecker, Rossi, Snyder and Kohl
AN ACT Relating to claims against the University of Washington; amending RCW 28B.20.253; adding a new section to chapter 28B.20 RCW; providing an effective date; and declaring an emergency.
Referred to Committee on Higher Education.
SB 5955 by Senators Wood, Winsley, Oke, Strannigan and Sheldon
AN ACT Relating to jumbo ferry construction; adding new sections to chapter 47.60 RCW; creating a new section; and declaring an emergency.
Referred to Committee on Transportation.
SB 5956 by Senators Schow, Franklin, Strannigan, Kohl, Roach, Swanson, Hale, Rasmussen, Finkbeiner, Heavey and Goings
AN ACT Relating to inmate labor; amending RCW 72.09.010, 72.09.015, 72.09.070, 72.09.080, 72.09.090, 72.09.100, 72.09.104, 72.09.106, 72.09.111, 72.64.001, 72.64.010, 72.64.020, 72.64.030, 72.64.040, 72.64.050, 72.64.060, 72.64.070, 72.64.080, 72.64.090, 72.64.100, 72.64.110, 72.63.010, 72.63.020, 72.63.030, 72.63.040, 72.01.010, 72.01.110, 72.01.140, 72.01.150, 72.01.450, 72.01.452, 72.60.110, 72.60.160, 72.60.220, 43.19.534, 43.19.535, 72.62.010, 72.62.020, 72.62.030, 72.62.040, and 72.62.050; adding a new section to chapter 72.09 RCW; adding new sections to chapter 72.64 RCW; creating a new section; repealing RCW 72.60.235; providing an effective date; and declaring an emergency.
Referred to Committee on Human Services and Corrections.
SB 5957 by Senators Franklin, Schow, Kohl, Strannigan, Swanson, Roach, Rasmussen, Finkbeiner, Heavey, Hale and Goings
AN ACT Relating to the correctional industries board of directors; amending RCW 72.09.010, 72.09.015, 72.09.070, 72.09.080, 72.09.090, 72.09.100, 43.19.534, and 43.19.535; adding a new section to chapter 72.09 RCW; creating a new section; providing an effective date; and declaring an emergency.
Referred to Committee on Human Services and Corrections.
SB 5958 by Senators Strannigan, Swecker and Goings
AN ACT Relating to business and occupation tax exemption for licensed nursing homes and licensed boarding homes; amending RCW 82.04.390 and 82.04.4289; and adding new sections to chapter 82.04 RCW.
Referred to Committee on Health and Long-Term Care.
SB 5959 by Senators Anderson and Morton
AN ACT Relating to seed potato production; adding a new chapter to Title 15 RCW; creating a new section; and declaring an emergency.
Referred to Committee on Agriculture and Environment.
INTRODUCTION AND FIRST READING OF HOUSE BILL
EHB 1096 by Representatives Sheahan, Costa, Lambert, Scott and Hatfield
Concerning the payment and recovery of fees.
Referred to Committee on Law and Justice.
SHB 1166 by House Committee on Government Administration (originally sponsored by Representatives Romero, D. Schmidt, Scott, Wolfe, Dunn and Mason)
Establishing procedures for handling found property.
Referred to Committee on Government Operations.
SHB 1171 by House Committee on Government Administration (originally sponsored by Representatives D. Schmidt, Scott and Dunshee) (by request of Military Department)
Revising emergency management statutes.
Referred to Committee on Government Operations.
HB 1189 by Representatives K. Schmidt, Chandler, DeBolt, Zellinsky, Buck, McMorris, Mastin, Carlson, Radcliff, Talcott, D. Schmidt, Carrell, Cairnes, Ballasiotes, Huff, Robertson, Hickel, Mitchell, Wolfe, Chopp, Kessler, H. Sommers, Cody, Murray, Doumit, Gardner, Regala, Morris, Wensman, Butler, Hatfield, Fisher, Ogden, Wood, Keiser, Conway, Kenney, Anderson, O'Brien, Cooper, Romero, Poulsen, Mason and Blalock
Making the moratorium on oil and gas exploration and production off the Washington coast permanent.
Referred to Committee on Natural Resources and Parks.
EHB 1238 by Representatives Sheahan, Ballasiotes, Delvin, Appelwick, O'Brien, Costa, Wensman, Constantine, Mason and Robertson (by request of Supreme Court and Administrator for the Courts)
Authorizing appellate judges to be appointed as pro tempore judges to complete pending business at the end of their terms of office.
Referred to Committee on Law and Justice.
HB 1248 by Representatives Sump, Costa, Sheahan, Sterk, Sherstad, Skinner, Lantz, Lambert, D. Schmidt, D. Sommers, Backlund, Ogden, Wensman and Constantine (by request of Secretary of State Munro)
Allowing facsimile filings with the secretary of state's office.
Referred to Committee on Law and Justice.
HB 1250 by Representatives Wensman, Costa, Sheahan, Sterk, Lantz, Kenney, Skinner, Sherstad, Lambert, Gardner, D. Schmidt and Pennington (by request of Secretary of State Munro)
Regulating trademarks.
Referred to Committee on Law and Justice.
MOTION
At 10:08 a.m., on motion of Senator Johnson, the Senate was declared to be at ease.
The Senate was called to order at 11:20 a.m. by President Owen.
INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUEST
The President welcomed and introduced the Roy Rodeo Queen, Jacqueline Loyer, a guest of Senator Marilyn Rasmussen, who was seated in the gallery.
MOTION
On motion of Senator Kline, the following resolution was adopted:
SENATE RESOLUTION 1997-8623
By Senators Kline, Fairley, Haugen, Zarelli, McCaslin, Roach, Long, Brown, Rasmussen, Spanel and Kohl
WHEREAS, Each year in the United States, millions of children are abused, neglected, or abandoned by their families; and
WHEREAS, Thousands of children are removed from their homes and placed in foster care or institutions; and
WHEREAS, Every child deserves a safe, supportive, and permanent home; and
WHEREAS, Washington State is fortunate to have a highly regarded volunteer Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) program; and
WHEREAS, Citizens in this program have, since 1976, worked to help protect and meet the needs of abused and neglected children; and
WHEREAS, One thousand five hundred CASA volunteers contribute over two hundred fifty thousand hours a year to support five thousand children; and
WHEREAS, CASA volunteers help find families willing to give children homes; and
WHEREAS, Without the commitment of CASA volunteers, thousands of children would never know what it is like to have a permanent home; and
WHEREAS, Without the dedication of the CASA volunteers, many children would be lost in the judicial system;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Senate of the state of Washington recognize and applaud CASA volunteers for their exceptional commitment to the children of Washington State; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Senate of the state of Washington recognize and commend the mission statement of the CASA program which states: "Our mission is to support effective volunteer advocacy for the best interests of abused and neglected children involved in the court system. Our vision is to ensure that every child has a safe, supportive and permanent home;" and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That copies of this resolution be immediately transmitted by the Secretary of the Senate to the National Court Appointed Special Advocate Association.
MOTION
On motion of Senator Johnson, the Senate reverted to the sixth order of business.
There being no objection, the Senate resumed consideration of Senate Bill No. 5109 and the pending amendment by Senator Fairley on page 2, after line 11, deferred February 19, 1997.
President Pro Tempore Newhouse assumed the Chair.
RULING BY THE PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE
President Pro Tempore Newhouse: "In ruling upon the point of order raised by Senator Roach, the President finds that Senate Bill No. 5109 is a measure which permits a limited liability company to be composed of a single member.
"The amendment by Senator Fairley on page 2, line 11, would require that a limited liability company possess at least one million dollars of insurance or other form of financial responsibility in order to avail itself of limited liability protection.
"The President, therefore, finds that the proposed amendment does change the scope and object of the bill and the point of order is well taken."
The amendment by Senator Fairley on page 2, after line 11, to Senate Bill No. 5109 was ruled out of order.
President Owen assumed the Chair.
MOTION
On motion of Senator Roach, the rules were suspended, Senate Bill No. 5109 was advanced to third reading, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
Debate ensued.
The President declared the question before the Senate to be the roll call on the final passage of Senate Bill No. 5109.
ROLL CALL
The Secretary called the roll on the final passage of Senate Bill No. 5109 and the bill passed the Senate by the following vote: Yeas, 36; Nays, 13; Absent, 0; Excused, 0.
Voting yea: Senators Anderson, Bauer, Benton, Deccio, Finkbeiner, Goings, Hale, Hargrove, Haugen, Heavey, Hochstatter, Horn, Johnson, Long, Loveland, McCaslin, McDonald, Morton, Newhouse, Oke, Prince, Rasmussen, Roach, Rossi, Schow, Sellar, Sheldon, Snyder, Spanel, Stevens, Strannigan, Swecker, West, Winsley, Wood and Zarelli - 36. Voting nay: Senators Brown, Fairley, Franklin, Fraser, Jacobsen, Kline, Kohl, McAuliffe, Patterson, Prentice, Swanson, Thibaudeau and Wojahn - 13. SENATE BILL NO. 5109, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed. There being no objection, the title of the bill will stand as the title of the act.
MOTION
On motion of Senator Loveland, all the remarks on the final passage of Senate Bill No. 5835 will be spread across the Journal.
SECOND READING
SENATE BILL NO. 5835, by Senators Swecker, McDonald, Benton, McCaslin, Zarelli, Horn, Sellar, Stevens, Deccio, Johnson, Newhouse, Winsley, Oke, Long, Anderson, Rossi, Roach and Hochstatter.
Limiting property taxes.
The bill was read the second time.
REMARKS BY SENATOR BENTON
Senator Benton: "Thank you, Mr. President. I would like to withdraw the amendment on page 3, line 6."
REPLY BY THE PRESIDENT
President Owen: "Hearing no objection, the amendment is withdrawn."
MOTION
Senator Loveland moved that the following amendment be adopted:
On page 4, line 22, after "section." insert "The increase in value resulting from the subdivision of land is considered an improvement increase." REMARKS BY SENATOR LOVELAND
Senator Loveland: "Thank you, Mr. President. This amendment simply allows the market value assessment of subdivided land. This is a cleanup amendment, a technical amendment, to help make this bill work. I urge the adoption of the amendment."
REMARKS BY SENATOR SWECKER
Senator Swecker: "Thank you, Mr. President. I rise to ask the members to be patient and wait. I rise to oppose this amendment. There is a bill, Senate Bill No. 5574, that was heard in committee this morning and we'll have a number of very important meetings to discuss its content, in the next few days. The purpose of that bill is to clean up many of the issues surrounding the assessment of property and assessor practices and the way taxes are computed on those properties. Some of the provisions of the amendment, as proposed, could significantly affect some other aspects of property tax, not included in this piece of legislation. So, again, without commenting on the merit of the issue, I would ask the body to vote 'no,' and be patient and have this issue discussed on the other vehicle. Thank you."
PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY
Senator Heavey: "A point of parliamentary inquiry. There is no word 'section' on line 22, page 4, and the amendment says, 'On page 4, line 22, after "section," There is no 'section' on line 22."
REPLY BY THE PRESIDENT
President Owen: "Senate Bill No. 5835 shows--that we have--shows that there is, Senator Heavey. The first word on the line."
REMARKS BY SENATOR HEAVEY
Senator Heavey: "Excuse me, I was looking at the Benton amendment. I am sorry."
REMARKS BY SENATOR LOVELAND
Senator Loveland: "Thank you, Mr. President. I guess we do have a series of amendments here. They are technical; they will improve the bill. We are going to be asked to vote on this bill without these technical amendments being adopted. It is news to me that there is another bill out there. I guess we are just going to keep doing this over and over again. Why can't we adopt the amendments that will perfect the bill and then there will be no necessity for another bill?"
REMARKS BY SENATOR HORN
Senator Horn: "Thank you very much, Mr. President. Ladies and gentlemen of the Senate, that bill is my bill, Senate Bill No. 5574, and was heard in our Government Operations Committee today. Those amendments that you have, if you will forward them to me, we will be happy to work with you. The process of this bill is to try to separate out the administrative and some of the technical issues into that bill, as opposed to this bill, so that it is very clean. This bill deals with substantive valuations that go on. The other bill is technical and administrative in detail. That is the reason that we have two bills. The tax package that we had--always had. The five point seven four percent or four point seven one percent to make it permanent. This tax bill that we have here and the third one that deals with the cats and dogs."
POINT OF INQUIRY
Senator Loveland: "Am I in error in that the bill that is on the floor today has a referendum clause on it that will be going to the vote of the people and is not correct as written? Or am I incorrect on that? It is my understanding that there is a referendum on the bill that we will be voting on today?"
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
President Owen: "Are you looking or asking for someone to yield, Senator Loveland?"
Senator Loveland: "Yes, Senator Horn"
President Owen: "Senator Horn, do you yield? Yes, he does."
Senator Horn: "I do yield for a question and the bill that's on the floor is correctly written and it deals with those specific sections. There are other things that deal with administrative things in the code that, I think, we can agree on, and it does not need to the vote of the people."
REMARKS BY SENATOR HEAVEY
Senator Heavey: "Thank you, Mr. President. Speaking in favor of the amendment, it is common sense and we should put a perfect product that we can to the voters. It is imperfect without this amendment. This amendment does no harm to the bill. I urge your support of the amendment."
REMARKS BY SENATOR WEST
Senator West: "Thank you, Mr. President. I notice, now, a flood of amendments on our desk. This bill that is before us is not new; it has been heard twice in the Ways and Means Committee. It has been considered on the floor in the same version that it is. In fact, it has been considered a couple of times on this floor, because of the way it has gone through the process and now we have all of these technical amendments that may or may not be technical and we are asked to judge that they are simply technical at this time.
"The good Senator from the forty-first district is working on a bill that has all the technical aspects of assessments, valuations and application of property taxes. This bill here is simply dealing with the tax side of it and this is the tax cut bill. Those technical aspects are in the Government Operations Committee and it has been heard and will be in a work group, I understand, next week where all of these things can be offered. As to the question or issue regarding the referendum that may or may not be on this bill, because I see there are a couple of amendments here that strike that entirely. There may be other pieces of legislation this session that maybe will make changes to what's been done in any one of the pieces of legislation that we have here. We checked with the Secretary of State's Office. They said that if the Legislature makes any other changes, they can't be incorporated. So, they would incorporate them and so it is not the time to pass these. Again, we had plenty of opportunity to hear or consider these and now we need to move on with this bill."
REMARKS BY SENATOR SNYDER
Senator Snyder: "Thank you, Mr. President. Well, I think this shows what happens when we suspend the five day rule. There wasn't a five day notice given on this bill and I think if there had been, we could have considered some of these amendments over there in the committee. It seems to be that we are trying to rush these things through. It is a little over a third of the way through the session is all and we are being criticized because we are not giving you bumps on these bills when we don't thoroughly understand them. We don't know if these bills are perfected or not. We are trying to perfect them and we are doing it on the floor and we probably should be doing it in committee where we have the time and we have the staff to ask questions. Here, we are doing it on the floor. We think these amendments are necessary to perfect the bill and make it more understanding to the public when it gets on a referendum. I would urge you to adopt the series of amendments as proposed by Senator Loveland."
Senator Sheldon demanded a roll call and the demand was sustained.
The President declared the question before the Senate to be the roll call on the adoption of the amendment by Senator Loveland on page 4, line 22, to Senate Bill No. 5835.
ROLL CALL
The Secretary called the roll and the amendment was not adopted by the following vote: Yeas, 23; Nays, 26; Absent, 0; Excused, 0.
Voting yea: Senators Bauer, Brown, Fairley, Franklin, Fraser, Goings, Hargrove, Haugen, Heavey, Jacobsen, Kline, Kohl, Loveland, McAuliffe, Patterson, Prentice, Rasmussen, Sheldon, Snyder, Spanel, Swanson, Thibaudeau and Wojahn - 23. Voting nay: Senators Anderson, Benton, Deccio, Finkbeiner, Hale, Hochstatter, Horn, Johnson, Long, McCaslin, McDonald, Morton, Newhouse, Oke, Prince, Roach, Rossi, Schow, Sellar, Stevens, Strannigan, Swecker, West, Winsley, Wood and Zarelli - 26.
MOTION
At 11:50 a.m., Senator Heavey moved that the Senate adjourn.
The President declared the question before the Senate to be the motion by Senator Heavey to adjourn.
The motion by Senator Heavey to adjourn failed on a voice vote.
MOTION
Senator Loveland moved that the following amendment be adopted:
On page 4, line 34, after "(3)" insert "This section does not apply to property valued under chapter 84.33 or 84.34 RCW or RCW 84.35.381."
REMARKS BY SENATOR LOVELAND
Senator Loveland: “Thank you, Mr. President. I move the amendment be adopted. Thank you, Mr. President, members of the Senate. This amendment provides that value averaging does not apply to property values at current use over property subject to the senior citizen program. Again, this is a technical fix for senior citizens and current use. The current bill without this amendment does not address this important issue. I urge the adoption of this amendment.”
REMARKS BY SENATOR SWECKER
Senator Swecker: “Thank you, Mr. President. I rise again to oppose this amendment. I think issues of current use versus fair market value are major, significant issues that have ramifications including ramifications in the Constitution. I think that we could take these kinds of amendments and tack them onto the bill forever, and I think we've already voted on the bill a number of times. I think it's time to get on with the bill as it exists. I know that these issues will have an opportunity to be heard in the committee under Senator Horn's bill, and I urge you to vote no on the amendment.”
REMARKS BY SENATOR BROWN
Senator Brown: “Thank you, Mr. President. There is something very strange and contradictory going on here. We are being told that we need to move on this bill, we need to move on this bill. Not only that, but we know that there's a referendum clause, we know that there will be quotes in the paper that say, ‛We're sending this to the people', okay? And yet, here we have an amendment that is incredibly significant. It affects the senior citizen property tax assessment and exemptions that affect the seniors in all of our districts. We need to clarify this. It needs to be part of the final bill. And to say, ‛Well, we're going to work on this somewhere else with another bill sometime later.' We do need to clarify these things. We do need to work on them more. We do need to bring them back to this body and pass them in an acceptable form, not in an unacceptable form, when they contain a referendum clause that we're sending to the people of Washington State, as if we do not take this process and take their input into this process seriously.
“I would just urge members to take another look at this one. This says it relates to the senior citizen exemption. If we don't have the details on this correct, if you can't explain it to the folks who are going to have to vote on it. We've heard that people said, ‛Well, this is just simply a property tax cut bill.' There's nothing simple about the property tax system. If there's anything I've learned in my four years in the legislature, is there is nothing simple about property tax, because if you don't do it right and you push it down here, it pushes up somewhere else. So, we have to make sure we do it correctly, and we're getting this contradictory message about we've got to move it today, not to mention exactly why, but then to take care of these other things later. No explanation of exactly why. Is this a symbolic gesture to someone out there? Or, is this a real attempt to craft a good policy for the people of the State of Washington? I leave that question up to you and up to the public to decide.”
The President declared the question before the Senate to be the adoption of the amendment by Senator Loveland on page 4, line 34, to Senate Bill No. 5835.
The motion by Senator Loveland failed and the amendment was not adopted on a rising vote.
MOTION
Senator Loveland moved that the following amendment be adopted:
On page 4, line 36, after "84.36 RCW," strike all material down through line 38 and insert "the previous assessed value shall be the market value of the property in the prior year determined without regard to the preferential tax treatment."
REMARKS BY SENATOR LOVELAND
Senator Loveland: “Thank you, Mr. President, members of the Senate. Again, another technical amendment which is extremely important. It provides for the use of market value upon the loss of preferential tax treatment. This clarification is needed in order for the assessors and the Department of Revenue in this state to carry out the intent of the legislation as proposed. I urge the adoption of this amendment.”
REMARKS BY SENATOR SWECKER
Senator Swecker: “Thank you, Mr. President. I rise again to urge a no vote on this amendment. It was suggested that the property tax bill is a simple bill, and it certainly is not. It was suggested that we have to deal with all the property tax issues in this bill, and that's not the case. In fact, dealing with property taxes is a life style. I think what we ought to do is take this one, small step at a time and give the people some tax relief. I think that's just exactly what the bill does, and I think that's what we ought to continue to do. I urge a no vote on the amendment.”
REMARKS BY SENATOR LOVELAND
Senator Loveland: “Mr. President, this, by no means, is a small step. This is a blind leap of faith. If, in fact, we have identified issues within the bill that are not clear, it is the responsibility of this body to make it clear. And, again, when we have an opportunity to put technical corrections into a bill that is going to be on the ballot, if, in fact, the referendum is placed on this bill and it goes to the November election, how are we going to explain to the public when they go to the polls--if you go back to the legislature and look in the records, you'll find the bill that will probably try to answer the question you have right now. I don't think that's the way you put an issue to the public, and I would certainly urge rather than just off-handedly refusing perfecting amendments, that you perfect the bill. And one further technical or non technical correction, this is not a tax cut bill. This is a reduction in the increase. I want the record to be clear that we're not cutting anybody's taxes, and I'm trying to fix, with group technical amendments, the bill that will be before us on Monday. Please vote in favor of this amendment.”
The President declared the question before the Senate to be the adoption of the amendment by Senator Loveland on page 4, line 36, to Senate Bill No. 5835.
The motion by Senator Loveland failed and the amendment was not adopted.
MOTION
Senator Loveland moved that the following amendment be adopted:
On page 4, after line 38, insert the following:"Sec. 106. RCW 84.40.038 and 1994 c 123 s 4 are each amended to read as follows: (1) The owner or person responsible for payment of taxes on any property may petition the county board of equalization for a change in the appraised valuation or calculation under section 105 of the assessed valuation placed upon such property by the county assessor. Such petition must be made on forms prescribed or approved by the department of revenue and any petition not conforming to those requirements or not properly completed shall not be considered by the board. The petition must be filed with the board on or before July 1st of the year of the assessment or within thirty days after the date an assessment or value change notice has been mailed, whichever is later. If the appraised valuation is changed, the assessed value shall be recalculated under section 105 of this act.
(2) The board of equalization may waive the filing deadline if the petition is filed within a reasonable time after the filing deadline and the petitioner shows good cause for the late filing. The decision of the board of equalization regarding a waiver of the filing deadline is final and not appealable under RCW 84.08.130. Good cause may be shown by one or more of the following events or circumstances:
(a) Death or serious illness of the taxpayer or his or her immediate family;
(b) The taxpayer was absent from the address where the taxpayer normally receives the assessment or value change notice, was absent for more than fifteen of the thirty days prior to the filing deadline, and the filing deadline is after July 1;
(c) Incorrect written advice regarding filing requirements received from board of equalization staff, county assessor's staff, or staff of the property tax advisor designated under RCW 84.48.140;
(d) Natural disaster such as flood or earthquake;
(e) Delay or loss related to the delivery of the petition by the postal service, and documented by the postal service; or
(f) Other circumstances as the department may provide by rule.
(3) The owner or person responsible for payment of taxes on any property may request that the appeal be heard by the state board of tax appeals without a hearing by the county board of equalization when the assessor, the owner or person responsible for payment of taxes on the property, and a majority of the county board of equalization agree that a direct appeal to the state board of tax appeals is appropriate. The state board of tax appeals may reject the appeal, in which case the county board of equalization shall consider the appeal under RCW 84.48.010. Notice of such a rejection, together with the reason therefor, shall be provided to the affected parties and the county board of equalization within thirty days of receipt of the direct appeal by the state board."
Renumber the sections consecutively and correct any internal references accordingly
REMARKS BY SENATOR LOVELAND
Senator Loveland: “Again, this is a technical amendment, if anybody's listening, that would perfect the bill. Clarifying that appeals to the County Board of Equalization be for changes and appraised values and calculation of assessed values. And if you will note, fellow Senators, I've made my explanations brief so that I don't bore you. On the other hand, I can assure you after thirty years of collecting these property taxes, I know that we need this amendment. I urge the adoption of the amendment.”
REMARKS BY SENATOR SWECKER
Senator Swecker: “Thank you, Mr. President. I rise again to oppose this amendment. It has plenty of opportunity to be included in Senate Bill No. 5574, which is currently under discussion in committee, and I think it's not appropriate for this particular piece of legislation. I urge your opposition.”
The President declared the question before the Senate to be the adoption of the amendment by Senator Loveland on page 4, after line 38, to Senate Bill No. 5835.
The motion by Senator Loveland failed and the amendment was not adopted.
MOTION
Senator Loveland moved that the following amendment be adopted:
On page 6, line 22, after "84.33 RCW." insert "In counties in which the appraised value of property is not changed every year, the notice sent in the year the appraised value is changed may include a notice of the changes in the assessed value of the property for all of the years between appraisals."
REMARKS BY SENATOR LOVELAND
Senator Loveland: "Thank you, Mr. President. This is technical with a capital T--a technical amendment that allows one revaluation notice to be sent to counties on four year revaluation cycles, showing the assessed valued changes for the next four years. This will save over ahalf a million dollars. I urge the adoption of this amendment."
REMARKS BY SENATOR SWECKER
Senator Swecker: "Thank you, Mr. President. I believe that the intent of the amendment is good. I believe that it would have a great deal of merit if submitted on Senate Bill No. 5574. I urge your opposition to this amendment."
The President declared the question before the Senate to be the adoption of the amendment by Senator Loveland on page 6, after line 22, to Senate Bill No. 5835.
The motion by Senator Loveland failed and the amendment was not adopted.
REMARKS BY SENATOR BENTON
WITHDRAWAL OF AMENDMENT
Senator Benton: "Thank you, Mr. President, with the consent of the Senate, I would like to withdraw this amendment. In asking for that consent, I would like to point out that this amendment would make it fair for everybody if we were to pass it. However, I am told that we might have trouble getting this bill out of here today if we do, so in the interest of fast tax relief, I am going to withdraw this amendment."
MOTION
Senator Loveland moved that the following amendment be adopted:
On page 27, line 16, after "with" strike everything through "thousand" on line 17 and insert "fewer than ten thousand registered voters as of the November general election.
REMARKS BY SENATOR LOVELAND
Senator Loveland: "Thank you, Mr. President, and members of the Senate. This is another important change that needs to occur. All of us know that we keep population based on cities, towns and/or registered voters. The bill is unclear as to how people would calculate the ten thousand population figure the way business is currently done, so this would change the threshold for small district use of the one hundred six percent limit to ten thousand registered voters. I urge the adoption of the amendment."
REMARKS BY SENATOR SWECKER
Senator Swecker: "Thank you, Mr. President. This amendment is far from a technical amendment. It changes the intent of the legislation to draw the threshold at ten thousand population to ten thousand registered voters, which is a sufficient increase in the number of people required to reach this cutoff point. I think that the amendments to the bill which allowed for a majority vote by a three member council virtually eliminates this issue anyway, so I urge a 'no' vote on the amendment."
The President declared the question before the Senate to be the adoption of the amendment by Senator Loveland on page 27, line 16, to Senate Bill No. 5835.
The motion by Senator Loveland failed and the amendment was not adopted.
MOTION
Senator Loveland moved that the following amendment be adopted:
On page 27, after line 18, strike all material down through line 21 and insert the following: "(b) For taxing districts for which a limit factor may be authorized under section 204 of this act, the lesser of the limit factor authorized under that section or the limit factor under (c) of this subsection;"
REMARKS BY SENATOR LOVELAND
Senator Loveland: "Thank you, Mr. President, and members of the Senate. This is a technical amendment, clarifying the hundred and six percent limit for most taxing districts. It is a hundred percent plus inflation unless a greater limit is approved by the legislative authority of the district. Again, necessary to clarify for the implementation of the bill that will be before us--how this works. I urge the adoption of the amendment."
REMARKS BY SENATOR SWECKER
Senator Swecker: "I urge the opposition to the amendment on the same grounds as the previous amendments."
The President declared the question before the Senate to be the adoption of the amendment by Senator Loveland on page 27, after line 18, to Senate Bill No. 5835.
The motion by Senator Loveland failed and the amendment was not adopted.
MOTION
Senator Loveland moved that the following amendment be adopted:
On page 34, line 19, after "terms of" strike all material down through line 22 and insert "of both a percentage and an estimated amount. The ordinance or resolution may cover a period of up to two years, but the ordinance shall specifically state for each year the percentage change and the estimated dollar increase in the levy from the previous year."
REMARKS BY SENATOR LOVELAND
Senator Loveland: "Thank you Mr. President. This amendment would provide for a statement for an estimated amount of taxes to be raised in adoption a resolution or ordinance indicating an intent to raise property tax revenue of more than one hundred percent of the previous years revenue. Again, the bill as written, is unclear. This will allow assessors to properly interpret and carry out the intent of the Legislature. I urge the adoption of the amendment."
REMARKS BY SENATOR SWECKER
Senator Swecker: "I urge a 'no' vote on the amendment."
The President declared the question before the Senate to be the adoption of the amendment by Senator Loveland on page 34, line 19, to Senate Bill No. 5835.
The motion by Senator Loveland failed and the amendment was not adopted on a rising vote
REMARKS BY SENATOR BENTON
WITHDRAWAL OF AMENDMENT
Senator Benton: "Thank you, Mr. President. With the consent of the Senate, I would like to withdraw this amendment and I would like to speak to it. This amendment could have been offered and passed; it would have provided real property tax reform to the people of the state of Washington. Now, the underlying bill does exactly what it says it will do. It will slow the growth of taxes, but it does not reduce property taxes. The people next door may receive their tax bill--will receive a bill that is higher than it is today. If we passed this amendment, that would not be true. This amendment will take this business out of--this amendment would take the state out of property taxes for over the next ten years, slowly, methodically, carefully over the next ten years--would reduce the state's portion completely. I plan to offer this again at a future date, because it is important, I think, to move this bill out of here today and that is why I am withdrawing it. Thank you."
REMARKS BY PRESIDENT OWEN
President Owen: "With the permission of the Senate, the amendment is--Senator McCaslin?"
PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY
Senator McCaslin: "A point of parliamentary inquiry. When a Senator withdraws an amendment, which means it is no longer before the body, shouldn't he be speaking to a point of personal privilege, rather than to the amendment that is not longer before us?"
REPLY BY THE PRESIDENT
President Owen: "I believe that is correct."
Senator McCaslin: "Thank you."
President Owen: " Senator McCaslin, I had not yet withdrawn the amendment. I let him speak before--”
Senator McCaslin: "So, even though the Senator withdraws it, until the President says it is withdrawn--"
President Owen: "With the permission of the Senate, that is correct."
Senator McCaslin: "I would appreciate it if you would be faster."
President Owen: "Patience, first year."
PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY
Senator Snyder: "A parliamentary inquiry. Can a member of the Senate move that the amendment be adopted? Would that be the positive motion, rather than the motion to withdraw?"
REPLY BY THE PRESIDENT
President Owen: "I believe that an objection should be made when the--with no objections and then yes, a member could move the amendment. However, Senator Snyder, I would point out to the members that an identical amendment has been placed on your desk."
Senator Snyder: "That was my next question and you have answered it."
President Owen: "The amendment by Senator Benton has been withdrawn."
MOTION
Senator Hargrove moved that the following amendment be adopted:
REMARKS BY PRESIDENT OWEN
President Owen: "For the members information, this is exactly the same amendment that Senator Benton had introduced and withdrawn and is now reintroduced by Senator Hargrove, so rather than reprinting and supporting the timber industry in Senator Hargrove's district, we chose to allow the same amendment to be used with Senator Hargrove's name.",
On page 34, after line 24, strike all of new section 301 and insert the following: “Sec. 301. RCW 84.52.065 and 1991 sp.s. c 31 s 16 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) Subject to the limitations in RCW 84.55.010, in each year the state shall levy for collection in the following year for the support of common schools of the state a tax ((of three dollars and sixty cents per thousand dollars of assessed value)) at the rate specified in subsection (2) of this section upon the assessed valuation of all taxable property within the state adjusted to the state equalized value in accordance with the indicated ratio fixed by the state department of revenue.
(2) The rate of state tax in subsection (1) of this section shall be as follows:
(a) Three dollars and sixty cents per thousand dollars of assessed value for taxes levied for collection in 1997, and before;
(b) Three dollars and twenty-four cents per thousand dollars of assessed value for taxes levied for collection in 1998;
(c) Two dollars and eighty-eight cents per thousand dollars of assessed value for taxes levied for collection in 1999;
(d) Two dollars and fifty-two cents per thousand dollars of assessed value for taxes levied for collection in 2000;
(e) Two dollars and sixteen cents per thousand dollars of assessed value for taxes levied for collection in 2001; and
(f) One dollar and eighty cents per thousand dollars of assessed value for taxes levied for collection in 2002; and
(g) One dollar and forty-four cents per thousand dollars of assessed value for taxes levied for collection in 2003; and
(h) One dollar and eight cents per thousand dollars of assessed value for taxes levied for collection in 2004; and
(i) Seventy-two cents per thousand dollars of assessed value for taxes levied for collection in 2005; and
(j) Thirty-six cents per thousand dollars of assessed value for taxes levied for collection in 2006; and
(k) No tax may be levied under this section for taxes levied for collection in 2007 and thereafter.
(3) As used in this section, "the support of common schools" includes the payment of the principal and interest on bonds issued for capital construction projects for the common schools.
Sec. 302. RCW 84.52.043 and 1995 c 99 s 3 are each amended to read as follows:
Within and subject to the limitations imposed by RCW 84.52.050 as amended, the regular ad valorem tax levies upon real and personal property by the taxing districts hereafter named shall be as follows:
(1) Levies of the senior taxing districts shall be as follows: (a) The levy by the state shall not exceed ((three dollars and sixty cents)) the dollar rate per thousand dollars of assessed value specified in RCW 84.52.065 adjusted to the state equalized value in accordance with the indicated ratio fixed by the state department of revenue to be used exclusively for the support of the common schools; (b) the levy by any county shall not exceed one dollar and eighty cents per thousand dollars of assessed value; (c) the levy by any road district shall not exceed two dollars and twenty-five cents per thousand dollars of assessed value; and (d) the levy by any city or town shall not exceed three dollars and thirty-seven and one-half cents per thousand dollars of assessed value. However any county is hereby authorized to increase its levy from one dollar and eighty cents to a rate not to exceed two dollars and forty-seven and one-half cents per thousand dollars of assessed value for general county purposes if the total levies for both the county and any road district within the county do not exceed four dollars and five cents per thousand dollars of assessed value, and no other taxing district has its levy reduced as a result of the increased county levy.
(2) The aggregate levies of junior taxing districts and senior taxing districts, other than the state, shall not exceed five dollars and ninety cents per thousand dollars of assessed valuation. The term "junior taxing districts" includes all taxing districts other than the state, counties, road districts, cities, towns, port districts, and public utility districts. The limitations provided in this subsection shall not apply to: (a) Levies at the rates provided by existing law by or for any port or public utility district; (b) excess property tax levies authorized in Article VII, section 2 of the state Constitution; (c) levies for acquiring conservation futures as authorized under RCW 84.34.230; (d) levies for emergency medical care or emergency medical services imposed under RCW 84.52.069; (e) levies to finance affordable housing for very low-income housing imposed under RCW 84.52.105; and (f) the portions of levies by metropolitan park districts that are protected under RCW 84.52.120.
Sec. 303. RCW 84.52.050 and 1973 1st ex.s. c 194 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) Except as hereinafter provided, the aggregate of all tax levies upon real and personal property by the state and all taxing districts, now existing or hereafter created, shall not in any year exceed ((one percentum)) the following percentage of the true and fair value of such property in money: ((PROVIDED, HOWEVER, That))
(a) For taxes levied for collection in 1997, and before, 1.0 percent;
(b) For taxes levied for collection in 1998, 0.964 percent;
(c) For taxes levied for collection in 1999, 0.928 percent;
(d) For taxes levied for collection in 2000, 0.892 percent;
(e) For taxes levied for collection in 2001, 0.856 percent;
(f) For taxes levied for collection in 2002, 0.820 percent;
(g) For taxes levied for collection in 2003, 0.784 percent;
(h) For taxes levied for collection in 2004, 0.748 percent;
(i) For taxes levied for collection in 2005, 0.712 percent;
(j) For taxes levied for collection in 2006, 0.676 percent; and
(k) For taxes levied for collection in 2007 and thereafter, 0.64 percent.
(2) Nothing herein shall prevent levies at the rates now provided by law by or for any port or public utility district. The term "taxing district" for the purposes of this section shall mean any political subdivision, municipal corporation, district, or other governmental agency authorized by law to levy, or have levied for it, ad valorem taxes on property, other than a port or public utility district. Such aggregate limitation or any specific limitation imposed by law in conformity therewith may be exceeded only as authorized by law and in conformity with the provisions of Article VII, section 2(a), (b), or (c) of the Constitution of the state of Washington.
(3) Nothing herein contained shall prohibit the legislature from allocating or reallocating the authority to levy taxes between the taxing districts of the state and its political subdivisions in a manner which complies with the aggregate tax limitation set forth in this section.
Sec. 304. RCW 36.58.150 and 1984 c 186 s 25 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) A solid waste disposal district shall not have the power to levy an annual levy without voter approval, but it shall have the power to levy a tax, in excess of the ((one percent)) limitation in RCW 84.52.050, upon the property within the district for a one year period to be used for operating or capital purposes whenever authorized by the electors of the district pursuant to RCW 84.52.052 and Article VII, section 2(a) of the state Constitution.
A solid waste disposal district may issue general obligation bonds for capital purposes only, subject to the limitations prescribed in RCW 39.36.020(1), and may provide for the retirement of the bonds by voter-approved bond retirement tax levies pursuant to Article VII, section 2(b) of the state Constitution and RCW 84.52.056. Such general obligation bonds shall be issued and sold in accordance with chapter 39.46 RCW.
A solid waste disposal district may issue revenue bonds to fund its activities. Such revenue bonds may be in any form, including bearer bonds or registered bonds as provided in RCW 39.46.030.
(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1) of this section, such revenue bonds may be issued and sold in accordance with chapter 39.46 RCW.
Sec. 305. RCW 36.60.040 and 1983 c 303 s 11 are each amended to read as follows:
A county rail district is not authorized to impose a regular ad valorem property tax levy but may:
(1) Levy an ad valorem property tax, in excess of the ((one percent)) limitation in RCW 84.52.050, upon the property within the district for a one-year period to be used for operating or capital purposes whenever authorized by the voters of the district pursuant to RCW 84.52.052 and Article VII, section 2(a) of the state Constitution.
(2) Provide for the retirement of voter approved general obligation bonds, issued for capital purposes only, by levying bond retirement ad valorem property tax levies, in excess of the one percent limitation, whenever authorized by the voters of the district pursuant to Article VII, section 2(b) of the state Constitution and RCW 84.52.056.
Sec. 306. RCW 36.69.145 and 1994 c 156 s 3 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) A park and recreation district may impose regular property tax levies in an amount equal to sixty cents or less per thousand dollars of assessed value of property in the district in each year for six consecutive years when specifically authorized so to do by a majority of at least three-fifths of the voters thereof approving a proposition authorizing the levies submitted at a special election or at the regular election of the district, at which election the number of voters voting "yes" on the proposition shall constitute three-fifths of a number equal to forty per centum of the number of voters voting in such district at the last preceding general election when the number of voters voting on the proposition does not exceed forty per centum of the number of voters voting in such taxing district in the last preceding general election; or by a majority of at least three-fifths of the voters thereof voting on the proposition if the number of voters voting on the proposition exceeds forty per centum of the number of voters voting in such taxing district in the last preceding general election. A proposition authorizing the tax levies shall not be submitted by a park and recreation district more than twice in any twelve-month period. Ballot propositions shall conform with RCW 29.30.111. In the event a park and recreation district is levying property taxes, which in combination with property taxes levied by other taxing districts subject to the ((one percent)) limitation provided for in ((Article 7, section 2, of our state Constitution)) RCW 84.52.050 result in taxes in excess of the limitation provided for in RCW 84.52.043, the park and recreation district property tax levy shall be reduced or eliminated before the property tax levies of other taxing districts are reduced.
(2) The limitation in RCW 84.55.010 shall not apply to the first levy imposed under this section following the approval of the levies by the voters under subsection (1) of this section.
Sec. 307. RCW 36.73.060 and 1987 c 327 s 6 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) A transportation benefit district may levy an ad valorem property tax in excess of the ((one percent)) limitation in RCW 84.52.050 upon the property within the district for a one-year period whenever authorized by the voters of the district pursuant to RCW 84.52.052 and Article VII, section 2(a) of the state Constitution.
(2) A district may provide for the retirement of voter-approved general obligation bonds, issued for capital purposes only, by levying bond retirement ad valorem property tax levies in excess of the one percent limitation whenever authorized by the voters of the district pursuant to Article VII, section 2(b) of the state Constitution and RCW 84.52.056.
Sec. 308. RCW 36.83.030 and 1983 c 130 s 3 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) A service district may levy an ad valorem property tax, in excess of the ((one percent)) limitation in RCW 84.52.050, upon the property within the district for a one-year period whenever authorized by the voters of the district pursuant to RCW 84.52.052 and Article VII, section 2(a) of the state Constitution.
(2) A service district may provide for the retirement of voter approved general obligation bonds, issued for capital purposes only, by levying bond retirement ad valorem property tax levies, in excess of the one percent limitation, whenever authorized by the voters of the district pursuant to Article VII, section 2(b) of the state Constitution and RCW 84.52.056.
Sec. 309. RCW 36.100.050 and 1988 ex.s. c 1 s 15 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) A public facilities district may levy an ad valorem property tax, in excess of the ((one percent)) limitation in RCW 84.52.050, upon the property within the district for a one-year period to be used for operating or capital purposes whenever authorized by the voters of the district pursuant to RCW 84.52.052 and Article VII, section 2(a) of the state Constitution.
(2) A public facilities district may provide for the retirement of voter-approved general obligation bonds, issued for capital purposes only, by levying bond retirement ad valorem property tax levies, in excess of the one percent limitation, whenever authorized by the voters of the district pursuant to Article VII, section 2(b) of the state Constitution and RCW 84.52.056.
Sec. 310. RCW 67.38.130 and 1984 c 131 s 4 are each amended to read as follows:
The governing body of a cultural arts, stadium and convention district may levy or cause to levy the following ad valorem taxes:
(1) Regular ad valorem property tax levies in an amount equal to twenty-five cents or less per thousand dollars of the assessed value of property in the district in each year for six consecutive years when specifically authorized so to do by a majority of at least three-fifths of the electors thereof approving a proposition authorizing the levies submitted at a general or special election, at which election the number of persons voting "yes" on the proposition shall constitute three-fifths of a number equal to forty percentum of the total votes cast in such taxing district at the last preceding general election; or by a majority of at least three-fifths of the electors thereof voting on the proposition when the number of electors voting yes on the proposition exceeds forty percentum of the total votes cast in such taxing district in the last preceding general election. Ballot propositions shall conform with RCW 29.30.111.
In the event a cultural arts, stadium and convention district is levying property taxes, which in combination with property taxes levied by other taxing districts subject to the ((one percent)) limitation provided for in ((Article VII, section 2, of our state Constitution)) RCW 84.52.050 result in taxes in excess of the limitation provided for in RCW 84.52.043, the cultural arts, stadium and convention district property tax levy shall be reduced or eliminated before the property tax levies of other taxing districts are reduced: PROVIDED, That no cultural arts, stadium, and convention district may pledge anticipated revenues derived from the property tax herein authorized as security for payments of bonds issued pursuant to subsection (1) of this section: PROVIDED, FURTHER, That such limitation shall not apply to property taxes approved pursuant to subsections (2) and (3) of this section.
The limitation in RCW 84.55.010 shall apply to levies after the first levy authorized under this section following the approval of such levy by voters pursuant to this section.
(2) An annual excess ad valorem property tax for general district purposes when authorized by the district voters in the manner prescribed by ((section 2,)) Article VII, section 2 of the state Constitution and by RCW 84.52.052.
(3) Multi-year excess ad valorem property tax levies used to retire general obligation bond issues when authorized by the district voters in the manner prescribed by ((section 2,)) Article VII, section 2 of the state Constitution and by RCW 84.52.056.
The district shall include in its regular property tax levy for each year a sum sufficient to pay the interest and principal on all outstanding general obligation bonds issued without voter approval pursuant to RCW 67.38.110 and may include a sum sufficient to create a sinking fund for the redemption of all outstanding bonds.
Sec. 311. RCW 84.52.010 and 1995 2nd sp.s. c 13 s 4 are each amended to read as follows:
Except as is permitted under RCW 84.55.050, all taxes shall be levied or voted in specific amounts.
The rate percent of all taxes for state and county purposes, and purposes of taxing districts coextensive with the county, shall be determined, calculated and fixed by the county assessors of the respective counties, within the limitations provided by law, upon the assessed valuation of the property of the county, as shown by the completed tax rolls of the county, and the rate percent of all taxes levied for purposes of taxing districts within any county shall be determined, calculated and fixed by the county assessors of the respective counties, within the limitations provided by law, upon the assessed valuation of the property of the taxing districts respectively.
When a county assessor finds that the aggregate rate of tax levy on any property, that is subject to the limitations set forth in RCW 84.52.043 or 84.52.050, exceeds the limitations provided in either of these sections, the assessor shall recompute and establish a consolidated levy in the following manner:
(1) The full certified rates of tax levy for state, county, county road district, and city or town purposes shall be extended on the tax rolls in amounts not exceeding the limitations established by law; however any state levy shall take precedence over all other levies and shall not be reduced for any purpose other than that required by RCW 84.55.010. If, as a result of the levies imposed under RCW 84.52.069, 84.34.230, the portion of the levy by a metropolitan park district that was protected under RCW 84.52.120, and 84.52.105, the combined rate of regular property tax levies that are subject to the ((one percent)) limitation under RCW 84.52.050 exceeds ((one percent of the true and fair value of any property)) the limitation under RCW 84.52.050, then these levies shall be reduced as follows: (a) The portion of the levy by a metropolitan park district that is protected under RCW 84.52.120 shall be reduced until the combined rate no longer exceeds ((one percent of the true and fair value of any property)) the limitation under RCW 84.52.050 or shall be eliminated; (b) if the combined rate of regular property tax levies that are subject to the ((one percent)) limitation under RCW 84.52.050 still exceeds ((one percent of the true and fair value of any property)) the limitation under RCW 84.52.050, then the levies imposed under RCW 84.34.230, 84.52.105, and any portion of the levy imposed under RCW 84.52.069 that is in excess of thirty cents per thousand dollars of assessed value, shall be reduced on a pro rata basis until the combined rate no longer exceeds one percent of the true and fair value of any property or shall be eliminated; and (c) if the combined rate of regular property tax levies that are subject to the one percent limitation still exceeds one percent of the true and fair value of any property, then the thirty cents per thousand dollars of assessed value of tax levy imposed under RCW 84.52.069 shall be reduced until the combined rate no longer exceeds one percent of the true and fair value of any property or eliminated.
(2) The certified rates of tax levy subject to these limitations by all junior taxing districts imposing taxes on such property shall be reduced or eliminated as follows to bring the consolidated levy of taxes on such property within the provisions of these limitations:
(a) First, the certified property tax levy rates of those junior taxing districts authorized under RCW 36.68.525, 36.69.145, and 67.38.130 shall be reduced on a pro rata basis or eliminated;
(b) Second, if the consolidated tax levy rate still exceeds these limitations, the certified property tax levy rates of flood control zone districts shall be reduced on a pro rata basis or eliminated;
(c) Third, if the consolidated tax levy rate still exceeds these limitations, the certified property tax levy rates of all other junior taxing districts, other than fire protection districts, library districts, the first fifty cent per thousand dollars of assessed valuation levies for metropolitan park districts, and the first fifty cent per thousand dollars of assessed valuation levies for public hospital districts, shall be reduced on a pro rata basis or eliminated;
(d) Fourth, if the consolidated tax levy rate still exceeds these limitations, the certified property tax levy rates authorized to fire protection districts under RCW 52.16.140 and 52.16.160 shall be reduced on a pro rata basis or eliminated; and
(e) Fifth, if the consolidated tax levy rate still exceeds these limitations, the certified property tax levy rates authorized for fire protection districts under RCW 52.16.130, library districts, metropolitan park districts under their first fifty cent per thousand dollars of assessed valuation levy, and public hospital districts under their first fifty cent per thousand dollars of assessed valuation levy, shall be reduced on a pro rata basis or eliminated.
In determining whether the aggregate rate of tax levy on any property, that is subject to the limitations set forth in RCW 84.52.050, exceeds the limitations provided in that section, the assessor shall use the hypothetical state levy, as apportioned to the county under RCW 84.48.080, that was computed under RCW 84.48.080 without regard to the reduction under RCW 84.55.012.
Sec. 312. RCW 84.69.020 and 1994 c 301 s 55 are each amended to read as follows:
On the order of the county treasurer, ad valorem taxes paid before or after delinquency shall be refunded if they were:
(1) Paid more than once; or
(2) Paid as a result of manifest error in description; or
(3) Paid as a result of a clerical error in extending the tax rolls; or
(4) Paid as a result of other clerical errors in listing property; or
(5) Paid with respect to improvements which did not exist on assessment date; or
(6) Paid under levies or statutes adjudicated to be illegal or unconstitutional; or
(7) Paid as a result of mistake, inadvertence, or lack of knowledge by any person exempted from paying real property taxes or a portion thereof pursuant to RCW 84.36.381 through 84.36.389, as now or hereafter amended; or
(8) Paid as a result of mistake, inadvertence, or lack of knowledge by either a public official or employee or by any person with respect to real property in which the person paying the same has no legal interest; or
(9) Paid on the basis of an assessed valuation which was appealed to the county board of equalization and ordered reduced by the board; or
(10) Paid on the basis of an assessed valuation which was appealed to the state board of tax appeals and ordered reduced by the board: PROVIDED, That the amount refunded under subsections (9) and (10) of this section shall only be for the difference between the tax paid on the basis of the appealed valuation and the tax payable on the valuation adjusted in accordance with the board's order; or
(11) Paid as a state property tax levied upon property, the assessed value of which has been established by the state board of tax appeals for the year of such levy: PROVIDED, HOWEVER, That the amount refunded shall only be for the difference between the state property tax paid and the amount of state property tax which would, when added to all other property taxes within the ((one percent)) limitation of Article VII, section 2 of the state Constitution equal ((one percent)) the percentage under RCW 84.52.050 of the assessed value established by the board;
(12) Paid on the basis of an assessed valuation which was adjudicated to be unlawful or excessive: PROVIDED, That the amount refunded shall be for the difference between the amount of tax which was paid on the basis of the valuation adjudged unlawful or excessive and the amount of tax payable on the basis of the assessed valuation determined as a result of the proceeding; or
(13) Paid on property acquired under RCW 84.60.050, and canceled under RCW 84.60.050(2).
No refunds under the provisions of this section shall be made because of any error in determining the valuation of property, except as authorized in subsections (9), (10), (11), and (12) of this section nor may any refunds be made if a bona fide purchaser has acquired rights that would preclude the assessment and collection of the refunded tax from the property that should properly have been charged with the tax. Any refunds made on delinquent taxes shall include the proportionate amount of interest and penalties paid. The county treasurer may deduct from moneys collected for the benefit of the state's levy, refunds of the state levy including interest on the levy as provided by this section and chapter 84.68 RCW.
The county treasurer of each county shall make all refunds determined to be authorized by this section, and by the first Monday in January of each year, report to the county legislative authority a list of all refunds made under this section during the previous year. The list is to include the name of the person receiving the refund, the amount of the refund, and the reason for the refund."
REMARKS BY SENATOR HARGROVE
Senator Hargrove: "I do object to not using more paper, however. That is a crucial point with pulp mills in my district. Well, Senator Benton referred to considering this amendment at a later time. It is the later time right now. I think this is an excellent amendment. What it does is it gradually eliminates the state's share of the state property tax, which, by the way, is essentially identical to the plan that Senator Loveland introduced last year, which would have gradually used the surplus to eliminate the state's share of the property tax.
"We have issues with our local governments and their need to use that property tax for their various duties that they perform for the citizens, but the state is the one with the surplus. I think we can get some real significant property tax relief here and, in fact, that has been my only complaint about this property tax issue as it has moved along. It has not been significant enough for the people of my district. I think this amendment will make this a significant bill. I would refer you to the arguments previously made on the amendment that was withdrawn, about what a fine idea this was and I would suggest that we vote for this now and send this out to the people, because if they want it, they can vote for it. There is a referendum on this bill and they are going to have a chance to vote up or down on this and I suggest we give them the opportunity to vote on this particular idea. I urge your support."
REMARKS BY SENATOR SHELDON
Senator Sheldon: "Thank you, Mr. President. I would like to remind the body that when this amendment appeared before us last year as Senate Bill No. 6118, it did have bipartisan support. This entire body passed that bill and passed it over to the House where it did languish and was not at all acted upon. So, it is a very good amendment; it was a good bill and I urge the support of this body as they did last year."
REMARKS BY SENATOR SWECKER
Senator Swecker: "Thank you, Mr. President. It is good to have such a new-found group of folks who are interested in radical reductions in property taxes. It has been an issue I have been talking about for the last two years and, in fact, I think I offered this bill last year myself. I think in concept, it is great. I think we ought to have another bill just like it. I would probably vote for it if it were put on the floor in the form of another bill. Unfortunately, this year, we decided to do something else. The amendment, as written, would add another six hundred million dollars in tax reductions to the general fund or to the budget and we have already made the decision to do that in other ways this year. I think it would be a mistake to increase that; it would have a dramatic impact on our schools. It would have an incredible impact on our transportation system and it would throw the state into a deficit situation that we would take generations to recover from. I think there are other ways to create the kind of tax relief that this bill proposes to do. As I mentioned in a previous speech, that we will never be done dealing with property tax. It is a life style and I thank you for joining my life style. I urge a 'no' vote on the amendment."
REMARKS BY SENATOR FRANKLIN
Senator Franklin: "Thank you, Mr. President. Ladies and gentlemen of the Senate, we resurrect many things around here--many bills--it is never dead. The resurrection, being this amendment, which was once a bill in several different forms. It is a good resurrection, so I urge you to adopt this amendment. It is good for the people; they will have an opportunity to vote on it. Let them have a real opportunity for the reduction of meaningful tax."
REMARKS BY SENATOR GOINGS
Senator Goings: "Thank you, Mr. President. Well, let's recap. First, it wasn't enough, then it was, 'trust us, we will do more later,' and now 'this is just too much.' Well, I think one thing is very clear. The time has come for meaningful long-range property tax relief and this amendment, that is before the body, is exactly that. If we really want long-term meaningful tax relief, let us pass this amendment. This says the state will get out of the property tax business and the home owners and the taxpayers across the state of Washington will enjoy a ten percent reduction, over the next ten years, in their property taxes. This is real property tax relief. The time has come. Let us send a clear message to the citizens of Washington, we have heard you, we are going to pass this and we are your representatives in Olympia. Real property tax relief--the time has come to do it."
Senator Sheldon demanded a roll call and the demand was sustained.
REMARKS BY SENATOR HARGROVE
Senator Hargrove: "Thank you, Mr. President. just to wrap up. First of all, I am not a new convert to this idea. I have wanted to lower property taxes significantly. This is not something I am doing because it is some kind of a 'flash in the pan' issue. I also heard of a reference made to 'we decided to do something else.' Well, as far as I know, we haven't decided to do it until we vote on this amendment. So, we have the opportunity to make that decision right now that we are going to put out something to the people, on the ballot. with a referendum and let them decide on whether they want something to be more significant than the package that has been offered before us today.
"I would just say that I am not a new convert; I think this is finally a significant property tax relief measure. I think the people will have the chance to vote on it. They consider whether it is going to hurt education or it is going to hurt something else. They can make that decision; they can balance that. I suggest we give them the opportunity to vote on this. I urge your support."
The President declared the question before the Senate to be the roll call on the adoption of the amendment by Senator Hargrove on page 34, after line 24, to Senate Bill No. 5835.
ROLL CALL
The Secretary called the roll and the amendment was not adopted by the following vote: Yeas, 21; Nays, 28; Absent, 0; Excused, 0.
Voting yea: Senators Bauer, Brown, Fairley, Franklin, Fraser, Goings, Hargrove, Haugen, Kline, Kohl, Loveland, McAuliffe, Patterson, Prentice, Rasmussen, Sheldon, Snyder, Spanel, Swanson, Thibaudeau and Wojahn - 21. Voting nay: Senators Anderson, Benton, Deccio, Finkbeiner, Hale, Heavey, Hochstatter, Horn, Jacobsen, Johnson, Long, McCaslin, McDonald, Morton, Newhouse, Oke, Prince, Roach, Rossi, Schow, Sellar, Stevens, Strannigan, Swecker, West, Winsley, Wood and Zarelli - 28.
MOTION
Senator Bauer moved that the following amendment be adopted:
On page 34, line 29 after “section.” insert the following: "NEW SECTION. Sec. 302. It is the intent of the legislature to reduce the uncertainties and disparities inherent in substantial reliance on local levy funding for support of public education. It is further the intent of the legislature to reduce the burden on local property taxes caused by excessive reliance on local school levy funding. The purposes of this act are to reduce local property taxes, to limit the authorization for local school levy support of the common schools, and to provide for additional state funding equivalent to ten percent of local levy authority.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 303. A new section is added to chapter 28A.500 RCW to read as follows:
The legislature shall provide to each school district levy authority replacement moneys in an amount equal to the levy authority percentage reductions under RCW 84.52.0531(5).
NEW SECTION. Sec. 304. A new section is added to chapter 84.52 RCW to read as follows:
School levies authorized by this chapter shall be used for program enrichment purposes and may not be considered any part of the state's basic education obligation. Levy funds may be expended for basic education programs and such expenditures constitute enrichment of such programs.
Sec. 305. RCW 84.52.0531 and 1995 1st sp.s. c 11 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:
The maximum dollar amount which may be levied by or for any school district for maintenance and operation support under the provisions of RCW 84.52.053 shall be determined as follows:
(1) For excess levies for collection in calendar year 1992, the maximum dollar amount shall be calculated pursuant to the laws and rules in effect in November 1991.
(2) For the purpose of this section, the basic education allocation shall be determined pursuant to RCW 28A.150.250, 28A.150.260, and 28A.150.350: PROVIDED, That when determining the basic education allocation under subsection (4) of this section, nonresident full time equivalent pupils who are participating in a program provided for in chapter 28A.545 RCW or in any other program pursuant to an interdistrict agreement shall be included in the enrollment of the resident district and excluded from the enrollment of the serving district.
(3) For excess levies for collection in calendar year 1993 and thereafter, the maximum dollar amount shall be the sum of (a) and (b) of this subsection minus (c) of this subsection:
(a) The district's levy base as defined in subsection (4) of this section multiplied by the district's maximum levy percentage as defined in subsection (5) of this section;
(b) In the case of nonhigh school districts only, an amount equal to the total estimated amount due by the nonhigh school district to high school districts pursuant to chapter 28A.545 RCW for the school year during which collection of the levy is to commence, less the increase in the nonhigh school district's basic education allocation as computed pursuant to subsection (1) of this section due to the inclusion of pupils participating in a program provided for in chapter 28A.545 RCW in such computation;
(c) The maximum amount of state matching funds under RCW 28A.500.010 for which the district is eligible in that tax collection year.
(4) For excess levies for collection in calendar year 1993 and thereafter, a district's levy base shall be the sum of allocations in (a) through (c) of this subsection received by the district for the prior school year, including allocations for compensation increases, plus the sum of such allocations multiplied by the percent increase per full time equivalent student as stated in the state basic education appropriation section of the biennial budget between the prior school year and the current school year and divided by fifty-five percent. A district's levy base shall not include local school district property tax levies or other local revenues, or state and federal allocations not identified in (a) through (c) of this subsection.
(a) The district's basic education allocation as determined pursuant to RCW 28A.150.250, 28A.150.260, and 28A.150.350;
(b) State and federal categorical allocations for the following programs:
(i) Pupil transportation;
(ii) Handicapped education;
(iii) Education of highly capable students;
(iv) Compensatory education, including but not limited to learning assistance, migrant education, Indian education, refugee programs, and bilingual education;
(v) Food services; and
(vi) State-wide block grant programs; and
(c) Any other federal allocations for elementary and secondary school programs, including direct grants, other than federal impact aid funds and allocations in lieu of taxes.
(5) For excess levies for collection in calendar year ((1993)) 1998 and thereafter, a district's maximum levy percentage shall be determined as follows:
(a) Multiply the district's maximum levy percentage for the prior year by the district's levy base as determined in subsection (4) of this section, less:
(i) For levies collected in 1998, 4.7187 percent;
(b) Reduce the amount in (a) of this subsection by the total estimated amount of any levy reduction funds as defined in subsection (6) of this section which are to be allocated to the district for the current school year;
(c) Divide the amount in (b) of this subsection by the district's levy base to compute a new percentage;
(d) The percentage in (c) of this subsection or twenty percent, whichever is greater, shall be the district's maximum levy percentage for levies collected in that calendar year; and
(e) For levies to be collected in calendar years 1994 ((through 1997)) and thereafter, the maximum levy rate shall be the district's maximum levy percentage for 1993 plus four percent reduced by any levy reduction funds. ((For levies collected in 1998, the prior year shall mean 1993.))
(6) "Levy reduction funds" shall mean increases in state funds from the prior school year for programs included under subsection (4) of this section: (a) That are not attributable to enrollment changes, compensation increases, or inflationary adjustments; and (b) that are or were specifically identified as levy reduction funds in the appropriations act. If levy reduction funds are dependent on formula factors which would not be finalized until after the start of the current school year, the superintendent of public instruction shall estimate the total amount of levy reduction funds by using prior school year data in place of current school year data. Levy reduction funds shall not include moneys received by school districts from cities or counties.
(7) For the purposes of this section, "prior school year" shall mean the most recent school year completed prior to the year in which the levies are to be collected.
(8) For the purposes of this section, "current school year" shall mean the year immediately following the prior school year.
(9) Funds collected from transportation vehicle fund tax levies shall not be subject to the levy limitations in this section.
(10) The superintendent of public instruction shall develop rules and regulations and inform school districts of the pertinent data necessary to carry out the provisions of this section.
Sec. 306. RCW 43.135.025 and 1994 c 2 s 2 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) The state shall not expend from the general fund during any fiscal year state moneys in excess of the state expenditure limit established under this chapter.
(2) Except pursuant to a declaration of emergency under RCW 43.135.035 or pursuant to an appropriation under RCW 43.135.045(4)(b), the state treasurer shall not issue or redeem any check, warrant, or voucher that will result in a state general fund expenditure for any fiscal year in excess of the state expenditure limit established under this chapter. A violation of this subsection constitutes a violation of RCW 43.88.290 and shall subject the state treasurer to the penalties provided in RCW 43.88.300.
(3) The state expenditure limit for any fiscal year shall be the previous fiscal year's state expenditure limit increased by a percentage rate that equals the fiscal growth factor.
(4) For purposes of computing the state expenditure limit for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1995, the phrase "the previous fiscal year's state expenditure limit" means the total state expenditures from the state general fund, not including federal funds, for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1989, plus the fiscal growth factor. This calculation is then computed for the state expenditure limit for fiscal years 1992, 1993, 1994, and 1995, and as required under RCW 43.135.035(4).
(5) Each November, the office of financial management shall adjust the expenditure limit for the preceding fiscal year based on actual expenditures and known changes in the fiscal growth factor and then project an expenditure limit for the next two fiscal years. The office of financial management shall notify the legislative fiscal committees of all adjustments to the state expenditure limit and projections of future expenditure limits.
(6) This section does not apply to expenditures for levy authority replacement moneys under section 303 of this act.
(7) "Fiscal growth factor" means the average of the sum of inflation and population change for each of the prior three fiscal years.
(((7))) (8) "Inflation" means the percentage change in the implicit price deflator for the United States for each fiscal year as published by the federal bureau of labor statistics.
(((8))) (9) "Population change" means the percentage change in state population for each fiscal year as reported by the office of financial management.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 307.
Sections 302 through 306 of this act applies to special levies collected in calendar year 1998 and thereafter.”REMARKS BY SENATOR BAUER
Senator Bauer: "Thank you, Mr. President, and members of the Senate. I apologize for the site number on the page and the bill number. We hurriedly did this this morning when we found that the Rules Committee was going to bring this bill out to the floor today and we should have had more time to do a better job in terms of sites on it. This is an amendment that, I believe, can bring us together here today--an amendment that will achieve two objectives. It will achieve the objective of reducing property tax in a meaningful way and not taking it away from our revenue source which is the general fund on the state's property tax and it will give school districts an increased amount of state support, so they can reduce their local property taxes correspondently and consequently give meaningful property tax by cutting those levies down an equal amount.
"This proposal would give property owners, that pass school levies, sixty-six dollars per hundred thousand dollars of assessed valuation. This means all property--residential and business property. It would amount to approximately two hundred and two million dollars in tax relief. That means, it would cost the state two hundred and two million dollars in revenue, but it would come from the surplus and not out of the income to the state over the years. Now, you remember, that that three dollars and sixty cents of the ten dollars per thousand that you pay in local property tax--that three dollars and sixty cents was one time called a school tax--a tax to support your schools and collected at the state level. It is no longer called a school tax. Well, it still is, but it really is not, because it comes in to the general fund and is distributed out to school districts on an equitable basis.
"Many of these proposals are proposing that we cut the income to the state of Washington and that three dollars and sixty cents is the state property tax portion of it and then all you would have left coming into the general fund would be the sales tax and the B & O tax, which are the most regressive taxes of all of our taxes. What I am asking you here to do today is to solve two major problems. By solving these problems, you are not cutting your throat for future Legislatures to have resources available to them, because you will not have cut their income level by eliminating the three dollars and sixty cents per thousand.
"This Legislature is going to deal, in a few days, with the position of allowing four percent more levies--making permanent the four percent levies. We now allow twenty-four percent levies on property tax on special levies. By current law, four percent will go away. That will go away this year, but this Legislature is going to reinstate that four percent. Consequently, it is tantamount to keeping the property taxes at a level higher than what all your proposals, except the two hundred and five dollar proposal, higher than the relief you are going to give them. So, I think this is the time now to adopt a meaningful amendment, solve both objectives and get on with it."
REMARKS BY SENATOR SWECKER
Senator Swecker: "Thank you, Mr. President. I would like to compliment Senator Bauer for his efforts on this amendment. I know this is just one of several creative things that he has proposed this session and has had a long history in years past of trying to provide property tax relief and support schools. This is a substantial departure from the bill, as it currently exists, and I think it is going to require additional consideration before it can be adopted. I would look forward to that effort. Until then, I urge a 'no' vote on the amendment.”
REMARKS BY SENATOR FAIRLEY
Senator Fairley: "Thank you, Mr. President. Well, much to my surprise, I am rising to support Senator Al Bauer. I put this proposal in front of my school board. They loved this one and I looked at my property tax assessment that came last week--thirty-one hundred dollars was going to schools. In Shoreline School District, we pass every single levy that comes up our way. This would provide perfect relief for all my--my--constituents and I urge passage."
REMARKS BY SENATOR SWANSON
Senator Swanson: "Thank you, Mr. President. I rise in support of the amendment. It is similar to one that I had that apparently I am not going to get a hearing on. One message that I got clear from the people in my district--and by the way, all the levies in Mason and Kitsap Counties failed--people cannot handle amy more tax burdens. We must have some tax relief. This is a beautiful time for the Republicans and the Democrats to work together for a common solution to help the taxpayer. It is time to put partisan politics aside."
Senator Snyder demanded a roll call and the demand was sustained.
The President declared the question before the Senate to be the roll call on the adoption of the amendment by Senator Bauer on page 34, line 29, to Senate Bill No. 5835.
ROLL CALL
The Secretary called the roll and the amendment was not adopted by the following vote: Yeas, 22; Nays, 27; Absent, 0; Excused, 0.
Voting yea: Senators Bauer, Brown, Fairley, Franklin, Fraser, Goings, Haugen, Heavey, Jacobsen, Kline, Kohl, Loveland, McAuliffe, Patterson, Prentice, Rasmussen, Sheldon, Snyder, Spanel, Swanson, Thibaudeau and Wojahn - 22.
Voting nay: Senators Anderson, Benton, Deccio, Finkbeiner, Hale, Hargrove, Hochstatter, Horn, Johnson, Long, McCaslin, McDonald, Morton, Newhouse, Oke, Prince, Roach, Rossi, Schow, Sellar, Stevens, Strannigan, Swecker, West, Winsley, Wood and Zarelli - 27.
MOTION
Senator Snyder moved that the following amendment be adopted:
On page 1, strike everything after the enacting clause and insert the following: "NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. A new section is added to chapter 84.52 RCW to read as follows:
(1) There is allowed a credit against the state regular real property tax equal to the tax imposed on the first sixty-two thousand dollars of assessed valuation of owner-occupied residential property, multiplied by the indicated ratio fixed by the state department of revenue. The credit in any tax year shall not exceed the amount of state property tax imposed on the property.
(2) The credit in this section is in addition to any other property tax relief that may be provided by law.
(3) The following conditions apply to credit under this section:
(a) The residence must be occupied by the person claiming the credit as a principal place of residence as of January 1st of the year in which taxes are due. A person who sells, transfers, or is displaced from the person's residence may transfer the person's credit status to a replacement residence, but a claimant may not receive a credit on more than one residence in any year. Confinement of the person to a hospital or nursing home does not disqualify the claim of credit if:
(i) The residence is temporarily unoccupied;
(ii) The residence is occupied by either or both a spouse or a person financially dependent on the claimant for support; or
(iii) The residence is rented for the purpose of paying nursing home or hospital costs.
(b) The person claiming the credit must have owned, at the time of filing, in fee, as a life estate, or by contract purchase, the residence on which the property taxes have been imposed or if the person claiming the credit lives in a cooperative housing association, corporation, or partnership, the person must own a share therein representing the unit or portion of the structure in which the person resides. For purposes of this subsection, a residence owned by a marital community or owned by cotenants is deemed to be owned by each spouse or cotenant, and any lease for life is deemed a life estate.
(4) RCW 84.36.383, 84.36.385, 84.36.387, and 84.36.389 apply to this section.
Sec. 2. RCW 84.52.080 and 1989 c 378 s 16 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) The county assessor shall extend the taxes upon the tax rolls in the form herein prescribed. The rate percent necessary to raise the amounts of taxes levied for state and county purposes, and for purposes of taxing districts coextensive with the county, shall be computed upon the assessed value of the property of the county; the rate percent necessary to raise the amount of taxes levied for any taxing district within the county shall be computed upon the assessed value of the property of the district; all taxes assessed against any property shall be added together and extended on the rolls in a column headed consolidated or total tax. In extending any tax, whenever it amounts to a fractional part of a cent greater than five mills it shall be made one cent, and whenever it amounts to five mills or less than five mills it shall be dropped. The amount of all taxes shall be entered in the proper columns, as shown by entering the rate percent necessary to raise the consolidated or total tax and the total tax assessed against the property.
(2) After entering the amounts under subsection (1) of this section, the county assessor shall compute the amount of credit authorized under section 1 of this act for each parcel of property. The credit allowed for any property shall be extended on the rolls in a column headed tax credit. The county treasurer shall subtract the amount of the credit from the total tax and enter this amount in a column headed tax payable.
(3) For the purpose of computing the rate necessary to raise the amount of any excess levy in a taxing district which has classified or designated forest land under chapter 84.33 RCW, other than the state, the county assessor shall add the district's timber assessed value, as defined in RCW 84.33.035, to the assessed value of the property: PROVIDED, That for school districts maintenance and operations levies only one-half of the district's timber assessed value or eighty percent of the timber roll of such district in calendar year 1983 as determined under chapter 84.33 RCW, whichever is greater, shall be added.
(((3))) (4) Upon the completion of such tax extension, it shall be the duty of the county assessor to make in each assessment book, tax roll or list a certificate in the following form:
I, . . . . . ., assessor of . . . . . . county, state of Washington, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a correct list of taxes levied on the real and personal property in the county of . . . . . . for the year ((one thousand nine hundred and)) . . . . . .
Witness my hand this . . . . day of . . . . . ., ((19)). . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , County Assessor
(((4))) (5) The county assessor shall deliver said tax rolls to the county treasurer, on or before the fifteenth day of January, taking receipt therefor, and at the same time the county assessor shall provide the county auditor with an abstract of the tax rolls showing the total amount of taxes collectible in each of the taxing districts.
Sec. 3. RCW 84.56.050 and 1991 c 245 s 17 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) On receiving the tax rolls the treasurer shall post all real and personal property taxes from the rolls to the treasurer's tax roll, and shall carry forward to the current tax rolls a memorandum of all delinquent taxes on each and every description of property, and enter the same on the property upon which the taxes are delinquent showing the amounts for each year. The treasurer shall notify each taxpayer in the county, at the expense of the county, of the amount of the real and personal property((,)) and the current and delinquent amount of tax due on the same((; and)). The treasurer shall have printed on the notice the name of each tax ((and)), the levy made on the same, the amount of any credit under section 1 of this act, and the tax payable. The state tax credit authorized in section 1 of this act shall be credited against any state tax payable on the property. The county treasurer shall be the sole collector of all delinquent taxes and all other taxes due and collectible on the tax rolls of the county((: PROVIDED, That)).
(2) The term "taxpayer" as used in this section shall mean any person charged, or whose property is charged, with property tax; and the person to be notified is that person whose name appears on the tax roll herein mentioned((: PROVIDED, FURTHER, That)). If no name so appears the person to be notified is that person shown by the treasurer's tax rolls or duplicate tax receipts of any preceding year as the payer of the tax last paid on the property in question.
Sec. 4. RCW 84.36.383 and 1995 1st sp.s. c 8 s 2 are each amended to read as follows:
As used in RCW 84.36.381 through 84.36.389 and section 1 of this act, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning:
(1) The term "residence" shall mean a single family dwelling unit whether such unit be separate or part of a multiunit dwelling, including the land on which such dwelling stands not to exceed one acre. The term shall also include a share ownership in a cooperative housing association, corporation, or partnership if the person claiming exemption can establish that his or her share represents the specific unit or portion of such structure in which he or she resides. The term shall also include a single family dwelling situated upon lands the fee of which is vested in the United States or any instrumentality thereof including an Indian tribe or in the state of Washington, and notwithstanding the provisions of RCW 84.04.080 and 84.04.090, such a residence shall be deemed real property.
(2) The term "real property" shall also include a mobile home which has substantially lost its identity as a mobile unit by virtue of its being fixed in location upon land owned or leased by the owner of the mobile home and placed on a foundation (posts or blocks) with fixed pipe, connections with sewer, water, or other utilities: PROVIDED, That a mobile home located on land leased by the owner of the mobile home shall be subject, for tax billing, payment, and collection purposes, only to the personal property provisions of chapter 84.56 RCW and RCW 84.60.040.
(3) "Department" shall mean the state department of revenue.
(4) "Combined disposable income" means the disposable income of the person claiming the exemption, plus the disposable income of his or her spouse, and the disposable income of each cotenant occupying the residence for the assessment year, less amounts paid by the person claiming the exemption or his or her spouse during the assessment year for:
(a) Drugs supplied by prescription of a medical practitioner authorized by the laws of this state or another jurisdiction to issue prescriptions; and
(b) The treatment or care of either person received in the home or in a nursing home.
(5) "Disposable income" means adjusted gross income as defined in the federal internal revenue code, as amended prior to January 1, 1989, or such subsequent date as the director may provide by rule consistent with the purpose of this section, plus all of the following items to the extent they are not included in or have been deducted from adjusted gross income:
(a) Capital gains, other than nonrecognized gain on the sale of a principal residence under section 1034 of the federal internal revenue code, or gain excluded from income under section 121 of the federal internal revenue code to the extent it is reinvested in a new principal residence;
(b) Amounts deducted for loss;
(c) Amounts deducted for depreciation;
(d) Pension and annuity receipts;
(e) Military pay and benefits other than attendant-care and medical-aid payments;
(f) Veterans benefits other than attendant-care and medical-aid payments;
(g) Federal social security act and railroad retirement benefits;
(h) Dividend receipts; and
(i) Interest received on state and municipal bonds.
(6) "Cotenant" means a person who resides with the person claiming the exemption and who has an ownership interest in the residence.
Sec. 5. RCW 84.36.385 and 1992 c 206 s 13 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) A claim for exemption under RCW 84.36.381 ((as now or hereafter amended,)) or a credit under section 1 of this act shall be made and filed at any time during the year for exemption or credit from taxes payable the following year and thereafter and solely upon forms as prescribed ((and furnished)) by the department of revenue. However, an exemption from tax under RCW 84.36.381 shall continue for no more than four years unless a renewal application is filed as provided in subsection (3) of this section. The county assessor may also require, by written notice, a renewal application following an amendment of the income requirements set forth in RCW 84.36.381. Renewal applications shall be on forms prescribed and furnished by the department of revenue. A credit under section 1 of this act shall continue each year as long as the residence is eligible for credit.
(2) A person granted an exemption under RCW 84.36.381 or a credit under section 1 of this act shall inform the county assessor of any change in status affecting ((the person's)) entitlement to the exemption or credit on forms prescribed and furnished by the department of revenue.
(3) Each person exempt from taxes under RCW 84.36.381 in 1993 and thereafter, shall file with the county assessor a renewal application not later than December 31 of the year the assessor notifies such person of the requirement to file the renewal application.
(4) Beginning in 1992 and in each of the three succeeding years, the county assessor shall notify approximately one-fourth of those persons exempt from taxes under RCW 84.36.381 in the current year who have not filed a renewal application within the previous four years, of the requirement to file a renewal application.
(5) If the assessor finds that the applicant does not meet the qualifications as set forth in RCW 84.36.381((, as now or hereafter amended)) or section 1 of this act, the claim or exemption shall be denied but such denial shall be subject to appeal under the provisions of RCW 84.48.010(5). If the applicant had received exemption or credit in prior years based on erroneous information, the taxes shall be collected subject to penalties as provided in RCW 84.40.130 for a period of not to exceed three years.
(6) The department and each local assessor is hereby directed to publicize the qualifications and manner of making claims under RCW 84.36.381 through 84.36.389 and section 1 of this act, through communications media, including such paid advertisements or notices as it deems appropriate. Notice of the qualifications, method of making applications, the penalties for not reporting a change in status, and availability of further information shall be included on or with property tax statements and revaluation notices for all residential property including mobile homes, except rental properties.
Sec. 6. RCW 84.36.387 and 1992 c 206 s 14 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) All claims for exemption under RCW 84.36.381 or a credit under section 1 of this act shall be made and signed by the person entitled to the exemption or credit, by his or her attorney in fact or in the event the residence of such person is under mortgage or purchase contract requiring accumulation of reserves out of which the holder of the mortgage or contract is required to pay real estate taxes, by such holder or by the owner, either before two witnesses or the county assessor or his or her deputy in the county where the real property is located: PROVIDED, That if a claim for exemption or credit is made by a person living in a cooperative housing association, corporation, or partnership, such claim shall be made and signed by the person entitled to the exemption or credit and by the authorized agent of such cooperative.
(2) If the taxpayer is unable to submit his or her own claim, the claim shall be submitted by a duly authorized agent or by a guardian or other person charged with the care of the person or property of such taxpayer.
(3) All claims for exemption and renewal applications under RCW 84.36.381 shall be accompanied by such documented verification of income as shall be prescribed by rule adopted by the department of revenue.
(4) Any person signing a false claim with the intent to defraud or evade the payment of any tax shall be guilty of the offense of perjury.
(5) The tax liability of a cooperative housing association, corporation, or partnership shall be reduced by the amount of tax exemption or credit to which a claimant residing therein is entitled and such cooperative shall reduce any amount owed by the claimant to the cooperative by such exact amount of tax exemption or credit or, if no amount be owed, the cooperative shall make payment to the claimant of such exact amount of exemption or credit.
(6) A remainderman or other person who would have otherwise paid the tax on real property that is the subject of an exemption granted under RCW 84.36.381 or a credit granted under section 1 of this act for an estate for life shall reduce the amount which would have been payable by the life tenant to the remainderman or other person to the extent of the exemption or credit. If no amount is owed or separately stated as an obligation between these persons, the remainderman or other person shall make payment to the life tenant in the exact amount of the exemption or credit.
Sec. 7. RCW 84.36.389 and 1979 ex.s. c 214 s 4 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) The director of the department of revenue shall adopt such rules ((and regulations)) and prescribe such forms as may be necessary and appropriate for implementation and administration of this chapter subject to chapter 34.05 RCW, the administrative procedure act.
(2) The department may conduct such audits of the administration of RCW 84.36.381 through 84.36.389 and section 1 of this act and the claims for exemption or credit filed thereunder as it considers necessary. The powers of the department under chapter 84.08 RCW apply to these audits.
(3) Any information or facts concerning confidential income data obtained by the assessor or the department, or their agents or employees, under subsection (2) of this section shall be used only to administer RCW 84.36.381 through 84.36.389. Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, absent written consent by the person about whom the information or facts have been obtained, the confidential income data shall not be disclosed by the assessor or the assessor's agents or employees to anyone other than the department or the department's agents or employees nor by the department or the department's agents or employees to anyone other than the assessor or the assessor's agents or employees except in a judicial proceeding pertaining to the taxpayer's entitlement to the tax exemption under RCW 84.36.381 through 84.36.389 or credit under section 1 of this act. Any violation of this subsection is a misdemeanor.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 8. The following acts or parts of acts are each repealed:
(1) RCW 84.55.--- and 1997 c 2 s 2; and
(2) 1997 c 2 s 5 (uncodified).
NEW SECTION. Sec. 9. If any provision of this act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the act or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances is not affected.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 10. (1) Section 8 of this act is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, or support of the state government and its existing public institutions, and take effect immediately.
(2) Sections 1 through 7 and 9 of this act take effect for taxes payable in 1998 if the proposed amendment to Article VII of the state Constitution providing tax credits for owner-occupied residential housing (SJR 8200) is validly submitted to and is approved and ratified by the voters at a general election held in November 1997. If the proposed amendment is not approved and ratified, sections 1 through 7 and 9 of this act are null and void in their entirety."
REMARKS BY SENATOR SNYDER
Senator Snyder: "Thank you, Mr. President, and members of the Senate. This amendment, I think, is familiar to most everyone. It's the House Democrats proposal to save the middle income taxpayers, two hundred and five dollars on their property tax--something that is meaningful--something that will probably offset an initiative campaign, which, I don't think, the proposal before us now will. If we would adopt this, we would have to pull a constitutional amendment or get the constitutional amendment out of committee and adopt it.
"But, with the proposal before us now, there are grave concerns that it doesn't meet the constitutional requirements and I am sure it will be tied up in the courts if it is referred to the people and is adopted by them this fall. There won't be any tax relief until well past 1998. I think we can cure a lot of our ills today if we go ahead and adopt this amendment and refer it to the people and let them decide if they want a two hundred and five dollar reduction for the middle-class taxpayers in the state of Washington or not. Then, we can go ahead and proceed in the future by making some additional reductions in the state's share of the property tax. I urge your adoption of the amendment. Thank you."
REMARKS BY SENATOR SWECKER
Senator Swecker: "Thank you, Mr. President. I rise to oppose the amendment. We had an amendment earlier that talked about fazing out the state's portion of the property tax. That would be one hundred percent of the state's portion of the property tax over a ten year period. This bill proposes to return a small percentage of that to the taxpayer. Now, it really wouldn't make any difference whether we returned this small percentage or even a hundred percent of the state's portion of the property tax to the taxpayers. As soon as that relief was absorbed by the growth, property taxes would continue to grow at ten percent a year. Property taxpayers would continue to have their taxes double every seven to eight years and we would be right back in the same crisis that we are now. Unless we do something about the growth of property tax, unless we reduce that dramatically such as is in the underlying bill, any kind of relief on a temporary nature will simply postpone the inevitable.
"People don't want ten dollars now; they don't want eighteen dollars now; they don't want a hundred dollars now; they don't even want two hundred dollars now. What they want to know is in ten years or fifteen years or twenty years, when I retire, will I be able to stay in my home? And this bill does that. The amendment does not do that. I urge that we oppose this amendment. I think there will be opportunities, in the future, for additional tax relief from the state's portion and I am committed to participating in that activity, but we have to stop the growth first. This amendment to this bill would be gone--the two hundred and five dollars in less than two years. It will be eaten up by the growth. We have to do something meaningful. The amendment does not accomplish that. I urge you to vote 'no.'"
REMARKS BY SENATOR GOINGS
Senator Goings: "Thank you, Mr. President. I want to thank the minority leader for offering this amendment. Let the members make no mistake about what this amendment is all about. We, throughout the session, so far have heard from our constituents about meaningful, middle class property tax relief and that is what this amendment is all about. Are you going to throw people a pocket full of change--eighteen dollars--twenty-five dollars--or even the whopping thirty-two dollars? Or are we going to offer the working class families, the middle-class families in the state of Washington a two hundred and five dollar property tax cut, guaranteed, signed, sealed and delivered? That is what this amendment is all about. It is about whose side you are on and about how much of a meaningful middle-class property tax do we want to give--a pocket full of change or two hundred and five dollar that can be used for day care coverage, for putting your children through school? That is what this bill is all about. Make no mistakes. I am not afraid of letting the people decide. Let's the citizen, the hard working middle-class families of the state of Washington make this decision in November. Yes, to meaningful tax cuts. No, to a pocket full of change. I urge your adoption. Thank you, Mr. President."
REMARKS BY SENATOR HORN
Senator Horn: “Thank you, Mr. President. Ladies and gentlemen of the Senate, I stand up in opposition to this amendment. Oh, how easy it is to confuse. To talk about a mere two hundred dollars that would be quickly eaten up versus something, that over thirty years, the life of what most people mortgage your home on, will provide fifteen thousand and sixty-nine dollars in savings on a hundred and ten thousand dollar home. Now, two hundred dollars that can get quickly eaten up on might be that near terms situation, but I think most people are interested in that long-term out there. They moved into their homes, they took a mortgage, they want to be able to retire in that home. They want the savings and they want the curbing of growth over the long term of that mortgage, so they can stay comfortable and know, on the basis of our bill, that predictability end of property taxes, protection as to the growth in their property taxes and savings, significant savings, fifteen thousand and sixty-nine dollars for a hundred and ten thousand dollar home over the thirty year life of a mortgage. I think that's significant, and I submit to you we need to stay with the proposal that's before us. It's the same bill that we passed out of here before with the referendum clause. Now, we need to let the people have the choice to make that dream reality.
REMARKS BY SENATOR BROWN
Senator Brown: “Thank you, Mr. President. Thirty years. I have to say to the members of the Senate that in thirty years from now, a lot of folks in my district won't even be alive. They won't even be in their homes in ten years from now if we don't enact meaningful property tax relief. And, speaking of long term, significant relief, I asked the staff, “What would this underlying bill do to a home that cost fifty thousand dollars?” because I wanted to compare it to this amendment that's before us. And, as you know, the amendment that's before us provides two hundred and five dollars of relief for every homeowner. It says, you live in your home, we're going to take a percentage of your market value and take it off the books for every homeowner. The same amount for every homeowner. Because we've all got those on-going expenses as homeowners, we need relief for those. Two hundred and five dollars of relief, immediately. It's significant. People would notice it, it would count. It would significantly count for the people of Spokane. On the other hand, if we reject this amendment, what will a homeowner in Spokane with a fifty thousand dollar house receive--and there are a lot of fifty thousand dollar homes in my district--eight dollars and ninety-three cents, folks. It's an insult. I really believe that this amendment before us is the chance to do the right thing, to make a difference for every homeowner, to put our priorities straight. We're not giving thousands and millions to the biggest and the ones who have already got. We're saying to the average homeowner, “We believe that you are a priority, and we want to give you something that you'll notice.” Two hundred and five dollars, eight dollars, the people of Spokane can do the arithmetic on this one.
REMARKS BY SENATOR KLINE
Senator Kline: “Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, I would like to thank the Senator from the 41st District for his instructions that we think long-term. Many of us on this side of this chamber have thought long-term on environmental issues. We don't want short-term timber cutting to influence the long-term effects upon our environment. We've just been given, by Senator Bauer, and opportunity to thing long-term about education. To take some of that money that we might give away in the short-term and invest it in the longest possible term, in our children. And yet, on both counts, the short-term has won out in this chamber. I thank you for the opportunity to once again instruct, if I may, being one of the most junior members, to ask that we really consider long-term. Rather than give this money to Boeing, Weyerhaeuser, Simpson Timber, Plum Creek and other major land holders, who, of course, pay the major property taxes, why don't we give it to folks who can use it on investing it in their children's education, in buying food for the house, in doing the normal things that people do, rather than to Boeing. Thank you.
REMARKS BY SENATOR LOVELAND
Senator Loveland: “Thank you, Mr. President. Hopefully, to close debate on my side of the aisle, I would like to just make a couple of comments. I've heard statements from the majority party, and I guess that the reason that we have this amendment before you is that we're not able to get a hearing on the bill to discuss the merits of it. It is something that we came here trying to promote as property tax cuts, not relief. There's a big difference between the two words. I've watched the figures continue to change and be manipulated to make it look like thirty years from now you're going to be fifteen thousand dollars better off than you are today. And, in fact, you have to be a specific scenario. You have to have just gotten a mortgage, and what you will get is, potentially, a decrease in the increase, and no tax cut. The two hundred and five dollars that we've proposed does not spread the burden, is not pie-in-the-sky, it doesn't assume a bunch of things. What it does is, it targets two hundred and five dollars to every single, primary residence in the State of Washington. And it's a cut, and it's real money, it's not a decrease in the increase, it's two hundred and five dollars in every single pocket of homeowners in this state. Now, we have surplus revenue. The majority party in 1997, worked with our side in order to try to do real property tax cuts. I heard the speech about, gee, come to the party. I'm sorry. We have spent years trying to do property tax cuts, at least the four years that I've been here. We did have bipartisan support. Now, I certainly recognize that our side of the aisle is in the minority, but the sincerity of an actual cut, to give relief to working families, middle class families, has been a commitment that we've talked about here for the last three years. This looks to me to be the only opportunity that we're going to have to actually move tax cuts for the residential properties in this state. And, for goodness sakes, if you are going to go home and tell people that you cut their taxes, then you have to vote for this amendment. Please support this amendment. Thank you.
Senator Sheldon demanded a roll call and the demand was sustained.
The President declared the question before the Senate to be the roll call on the adoption of the striking amendment by Senator Snyder to Senate Bill No. 5835.
ROLL CALL
The Secretary called the roll and the amendment was not adopted by the following vote: Yeas, 23; Nays, 26; Absent, 0; Excused, 0.
Voting yea: Senators Bauer, Brown, Fairley, Franklin, Fraser, Goings, Hargrove, Haugen, Heavey, Jacobsen, Kline, Kohl, Loveland, McAuliffe, Patterson, Prentice, Rasmussen, Sheldon, Snyder, Spanel, Swanson, Thibaudeau and Wojahn - 23. Voting nay: Senators Anderson, Benton, Deccio, Finkbeiner, Hale, Hochstatter, Horn, Johnson, Long, McCaslin, McDonald, Morton, Newhouse, Oke, Prince, Roach, Rossi, Schow, Sellar, Stevens, Strannigan, Swecker, West, Winsley, Wood and Zarelli - 26.
MOTION
Senator Snyder: “Mr. President, I move that Senate Bill No. 5835 be referred to the Committee on Ways and Means. I think it is obvious from all the debate here today that this really isn't a perfect bill. We don't know if it is constitutional. I think we should refer it back to committee. We have had several other suggestions today. Governor Locke has a suggestion on a property tax relief bill. I think we should put this back in Ways and Means, study all of those different measures and I am quite sure if we work together, we can come up with something where we can give some property tax relief to the people of the state of Washington without going the referendum route. I urge your support of the motion.”
The President declared the question before the Senate to be the motion by Senator Snyder to refer Senate Bill No. 5835 to the Committee on Ways and Means.
The motion by Senator Snyder failed and Senate Bill No. 5835 was referred to the Committee on Rules for third reading.
MOTION
On motion of Senator Johnson, the Senate returned to the third order of business.
MESSAGE FROM THE GOVERNOR
VETO MESSAGE ON ENGROSSED SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 5398
February 21, 1997
To the Honorable President and Members,
The Senate of the State of Washington
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I am returning herewith, without my approval, Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill No. 5398 entitled:
"AN ACT Relating to reaffirming and protecting the institution of marriage;"
This bill amends the marriage statute by prohibiting same-sex marriage and prohibiting the state of Washington from recognizing any marriage that is not valid in this state. The first prohibition is unnecessary because persons of the same sex are already barred from legally marrying in the State of Washington. A Washington Court of Appeals decision, Singer v. Hara, 11 Wa. App. 247 (1974), clearly held that the Washington marriage statute does not allow marriage between persons of the same sex. The Washington Supreme Court approved the Singer analysis in Marchioro v. Chaney, 90 Wn. 2d 298 (1978).
In 1996, the federal Defense of Marriage Act exempted the individual states from any requirement that they recognize or give effect to same-sex marriages from other states. Washington courts have consistently held that marriages not recognized under Washington law will not be recognized or given effect in Washington, even if valid in the jurisdiction where they were contracted. The second prohibition of the ESSB 5398 is therefore unnecessary.
As I said in my Inaugural Address, I will oppose measures that divide, disrespect or diminish our humanity. Our overarching principle should be to promote civility, mutual respect and unity. This legislation fails to meet this test.
For these reasons, I have vetoed Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill No. 5398 in its entirety.
Respectfully submitted,
GARY LOCKE, Governor
MOTION
On motion of Senator Johnson, the Veto Message on Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill No. 5398 was held on the desk.
PERSONAL PRIVILEGE
Senator Patterson: “Thank you, Mr. President, and members of the Senate. Thank you for the opportunity to make this point of personal privilege today. You know, my colleagues, you told me that you had been greatly offended and, indeed, you had been caused an excessive amount of suffering and pain. I went home and thought about that and I decided that, indeed, I should compensate you for that pain--and attempt to make you all whole again.
“So, on your desks, today, is a small token. I hope that you will accept my deepest regrets for your pain. This comes from the Boeing Company, which is in my district and I believe the Thirty-third Legislative District, perhaps, has the greatest number of Boeing employees--maybe the Everett area exceeds us--but we have a significant number of Boeing employees and it plays a huge part in our economy and provides marvelous family-wage jobs to my people in the Thirty-third Legislative District, so I felt that this was appropriate.
“I want you to know that we also have another airplane related issued in my district and that is the Sea-Tac International Airport, which wishes to build a third runway. On Monday, my second token of apology will appear on your desks, with regards to the other airport issue in my district. Again, I apologize for that pain and suffering. Thank you.”
Further debate ensued.
MOTION
At 12:57 p.m., on motion of Senator Johnson, the Senate adjourned until 10:00 a.m., Monday, February 24, 1997.
BRAD OWEN, President of the Senate
MIKE O'CONNELL, Secretary of the Senate