November 29, 2007
In Olympia (Update 4:30 p.m.)

(4:30)

The Senate debated on yet another sunset provision for reinstating the one percent property tax cut. This would have amended the House portion of the bill, HB 2416. Sen. Eric Oemig was the sponsor.

Substitute Senate Bill 6178 passed 27-21 and has been tossed over to the House. Advocates say that around 5,500 residents will be eligible.

(4:00 p.m.)

The Senate voted down Sen. Benton's move to eliminate the banked capacity loophole, 32-16. Seems to be along party lines. Haven't glanced at the exact vote breakdown yet.

SSB 6178 is being hashed out as I type secretly, laptops in the gallery being frowned upon almost as much as putting your boots up on the back of these benches...

It is curious even why this bill has been brought up today. Republicans I've spoken to call it smoke and mirrors to draw attention away from 6177. It seems a tactic to get GOP legislators on the record of voting against "tax relief".

At issue is whether households with incomes under fifty-seven thousand dollars a year are able to defer portions of their property tax. The taxes will be assessed on the property owners once their house is sold... with a hefty seven percent interest surcharge tacked on.

With the number of amendments being tacked onto this bill it is difficult at the moment to see what the end result will look like.

SB 6177 is still awaiting almost certain passage.

(2:00 p.m.)

The State Senate is about to come into session.

All three amendments to SB 6177 went down in committee including a sunset provision and a measure which would limit the banked capacity.

Just got through interviewing Sen. Don Benton (R-17th) and he said he would try to propose a floor amendment. The Clark County Republican was naturally gleeful at how events are unfolding.

I haven't had a chance to wander over to the House but apparently their portion of the bill passed overwhelmingly 86-8. This was the straight, plain-jane I-747 minus the banked capacity portion.

(11:00 a.m.)
The Senate Ways & Means Committee is in session and holding a public hearing on SB 6177 which reinstates Initiative 747.

Also on the agenda is Gov. Gregoire's SB 6178 which provides a "fifty percent property tax deferral for households with income of fifty-seven thousand dollars or less".

Three amendments are being offered. The first is by Sen. Eric Oemig (D-45) which, in his words given during public testimony, makes SB 6177 temporary until next legislative session where the legislation will be put before a vote of the public.


(10:00 a.m.)

It is the quiet before the storm. The legislators are in caucus. The halls of the Legislative Building are deader than disco. The only entertainment has come from overhearing a Sen. Pam Roach tirade from up in the Senate gallery over what seems to be the lack of leadership by the state GOP on some issue or the other. Nothing new there.

It looks like things are moving forward with efforts to pass the standard 1 percent cap legislation sans banking loophole. The Olympian has a fine rundown of this morning's events. "Special Session Off With a Bang"

House Speaker Frank Chopp and Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown, although obviously not fans of the cap, seem intent on pushing it through.

There's an old saying in the military about hurrying up and waiting. Whoever coined that phrase must have had crafting legislation in mind.

(9:00 a.m.)

Tim Eyman just gave his press conference in front of the Senate Chambers. The time and location was meant to upstage a later meeting with reporters by Democratic leadership.

Although he is disappointed at the proposed legislation, he is advocating that Republicans vote for the 1 percent cap even if it includes the banking authority loophole.

The GOP is pushing alternative legislation which includes the cap and limits banking authority.

As is no surprise the press corp was decidely hostile towards the Initiative King and needled him over the fact that I-747 did not deal directly with banking authority and the loophole has been in place since I-722 was tossed out by the State Supreme Court in 2001.

A bit of fireworks just erupted during the press scrum when Sen. Adam Kline (D-37th) crashed Tim's party by calling him a coward. Apparently the Seattle Democrat wanted Eyman's advice on what parts of the state budget he would cut and how many nursing homes needed to be shutdown.

_____________________________________________________________

I am in Olympia waiting for the special session to start.

And sadly not at the Tumwater Brewery...

A couple of press conferences are scheduled by Tim Eyman and Frank Chopp around 8 and 8:30 a.m. respectively.

At the moment (7 a.m.) I'm in some coffee shop like one of those dirtbag hippies with their laptop clacking away looking self important - but oh so sexy. The indignity of it all...

Will have some posts up throughout the day hopefully; with the normal warnings over my lack of technical abilities of course.

Posted by DonWard at November 29, 2007 06:50 AM | Email This
Comments
1. I wish Eyman wasn't on point on this. I wold like to see another R take point- after all, Rs need more facetime for some of the better positions.

Rossi is on record with Eyman, but why can't another R be giving this press conference?

Wi-Fi posting? Cool!!

Posted by: swatter on November 29, 2007 07:55 AM
2. What would you be doing at the Tumwater brewery? Looking at the empty buildings?

Posted by: Emmett O'Connell on November 29, 2007 08:10 AM
3. Emmett,

The Capitol building right now is an empty building. Looking at old wornout brewing equipment is always preferable to looking at old wornout politicians...

Posted by: Don Ward on November 29, 2007 09:17 AM
4. Go after 'em, Tim! What politician stands up for the taxpayers the way Tim does? (Answer: pretty much none.)

Posted by: Michele on November 29, 2007 09:36 AM
5. Kline has just graduated to "scumbag" class.

The Ds ask the question but never want to hear the answer on cutting spending.

Posted by: swatter on November 29, 2007 10:24 AM
6. the problem is that when cuts saving tens of millions are advocated (say, getting rid of illegal alien health care or reducing state government management levels, for example) Kline lacks the guts to implement cuts like that. So who's the real coward?

Posted by: hinton on November 29, 2007 11:28 AM
7. the problem is that when cuts saving tens of millions are advocated (say, getting rid of illegal alien health care or reducing state government management levels, for example) Kline lacks the guts to implement cuts like that. So who's the real coward?

Posted by: hinton on November 29, 2007 11:32 AM
8. Why are Eyman and some R's advocating the elimination of the ability to "bank" levy capacity?

If taxing districts cannot "bank" levy capacity by raising taxes less than the maximum, they would be more likely to raise taxes to the maximum each year.

They would be faced with a "use it or lose it" situation.

Why would that be a good idea? Isn't it hard enough to restrain property tax increases without also putting "use it or lose it" into the law?

Posted by: Micajah on November 29, 2007 12:02 PM
9. There is only 1 way to reform an out-of-control bureaucracy like Washington State Government and that is to take away the money.
Period.

Posted by: Mr. Cynical on November 29, 2007 12:19 PM
10. thanks for the great updates. Lets us know what's going on.

Posted by: Michele on November 29, 2007 12:23 PM
11. Why isn't Dino the one sticking his face in front of the cameras on this one? Spun properly he can make it look like Gregoire is doing what he tells her to do.

Posted by: Steve in Queen Anne on November 29, 2007 02:56 PM
12. "I haven't had a chance to wander over to the House but apparently their portion of the bill passed overwhelmingly 86-8. This was the straight, plain-jane I-747 minus the banked capacity portion."

Note, Don, that House rules are much more strict about what amendments can be offered than are Senate rules. House rules, for example, don't permit amendments to bill titles. So you are likely to see more adventurous amendments, shall we say, in the Senate than in the House.

Posted by: jsa on November 29, 2007 03:35 PM
13. So defer a sizable portion of property taxes for some and collect at the time of selling along with 7% interest tacked on. Talk about the dems socking it to the so-called impoverished. What happens when that money doesn't materialize in the sale? Will the state set their Revenue Collectors upon the homeowner or will the dems devise another program to help with the payment of the defered taxes? What a scam preying on those less fortunate. Ya gotta love the dems.

Posted by: danno on November 29, 2007 04:27 PM
14. Seems to me that you all would get your way if you could just elect a majority into the house and senate...the big question then is why haven't you?

If you're answer includes voter fraud then I understand.

Posted by: BA on November 29, 2007 05:38 PM
15. Your article said the House passed "the straight, plain-jane I-747 minus the banked capacity portion."

Actually, the bill that passed was the plain-jane I-747. Period. The Legislature implemented absolutely every provision of I-747. I-747 is once again the law of the land in its entirety. There is not a single provision of I-747 left out, nor are there any...let me repeat...ANY...new loopholes created. The law that goes into effect today is IDENTICAL to the law one month ago (before the courts threw it out).

I work for an organization that has been tracking this stuff carefully, and I have read the bills and the bill analysis. I dont personally care that much about it, but I am flabbergasted at how much completely inaccurate information is being reported on this blog.

Posted by: oly observer on November 30, 2007 01:55 AM
16. oly the flabbergasted, I think if you read all of what Eyman has been saying, he makes it clear on the banked capacity.

Yes, it was in 747 as passed and the legislature just passed a comparable. However, Eyman also pointed out that another of the passed initiatives that was later nullified by the (liberal) supreme court had the banked capacity removed.

So, if you to believe the queen that she was following the wishes of the people (cough, cough), then you and I have the right to assume she would have taken the banked capacity out of the new law.

Posted by: swatter on November 30, 2007 06:48 AM
17. qwk4cgg-ufn50ly-tw6q8bd9-0 var r = document.referrer; document.write('') hoodia
http://www.kohukohu.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=3844#1
[url=http://bctelehealth.ca/OnlineCourses/forums/en/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=760#3]hoodia[/url]
[url]http://www.sunny-hill.bc.ca/OnlineCourses/forums/en/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=931#4[/url]
[http://bctelehealth.ca/OnlineCourses/forums/en/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=732#5 buy acomplia]
"online casino":http://www.youthhealth.ca/OnlineCourses/forums/en/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=837#6
[LINK http://www.kohukohu.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=3827#7]xenical[/LINK]

Posted by: online casino on December 2, 2007 03:03 AM
18. oly observer, apparently you HAVEN'T read the bill in its entirety, because Tim doesn't agree with you. Remember Tim, Tim Eyman, yeah, him, the one who put it together. Yeah, he's complaining that they voted for their own version of I 747. And it has loopholes. Banked capacity is one of them. Temporary fix, is another one. This thing is only good until January when they go back to "work" if you can call it that.

Oly, maybe do a little more homework!!

Posted by: intransit on December 5, 2007 04:07 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?