WA State Adopts Transgender Bathroom & Locker Room Policies

The day after Christmas, the Washington State Human Rights Commission has adopted rules which allow transgender individuals to use opposite sex bathrooms. As reported by The Daily Signal the rules "make it illegal for business owners to limit sex-specific facilities (such as bathrooms, showers, and locker rooms) to persons with the anatomical parts of one sex." The article goes on: "The rules, which a state legislator told The Daily Signal took effect on Dec. 26, apply to businesses with eight or more employees. They also dictate that schools should "allow students to use the restroom that is consistent with their gender identity" and in most cases, give transgender students "access to the locker room that corresponds to their gender identity."

For some reason, the Human Rights Commission has not yet posted the final rules.

Washington State Rental Cost Stats Look Grim.

The National Low Income Housing Coalition has produced a nationwide report analyzing and comparing the cost of rent to wages. The Washington State highlights are below.

Statewide:

• $21.69: Fair Housing Wage (wage necessary to afford Fair Market Rent (hereafter "FMR") without paying more than 30% of income to rent & utilities)
• 92: Work hours per week at minimum wage to afford Rent (FMR).
• 2.3: number of full-time jobs at minimum wage to afford Rent (FMR).
• 2 Bedroom FMR: $1,128.00
• $3,760.00: Monthly ($45,119.00 annually) income necessary for FMR to be affordable.

Wenatchee & East Wenatchee Metropolitan Area

• $14.65: Fair Housing Wage (wage necessary to afford Fair Market Rent (hereafter "FMR") without paying more than 30% of income to rent & utilities)
• 1.5: number of full-time jobs at minimum wage to afford Rent (FMR).
• 2 Bedroom FMR: $762.00
• $2,540.00: Monthly ($30,480.00 annually) income necessary for FMR to be affordable.

Fair Market Rent (including utilities) is the cost for a two-bedroom apartment, i.e. $1,128.00 statewide and $762.00 in Wenatchee.

Affordability is defined as the ability of a renter to pay no more than 30% of its income on housing (including utilities), this is the federal standard for affordability.

Washington Marijuana Law won’t be blocked by the Feds!

Today, Attorney General Eric Holder confirmed that the Federal Government will not (at least for now) challenge Washington State's recreational marijuana law.

The Attorney General has instructed U.S. Attorneys to use prosecutorial discretion to focus on prosecuting individuals or entities engaged in the following types of activity:

• Preventing the distribution of marijuana to minors;
• Preventing revenue from the sale of marijuana from going to criminal enterprises, gangs, and cartels;
• Preventing the diversion of marijuana from states where it is legal under state law in some form to other states;
• Preventing state-authorized marijuana activity from being used as a cover or pretext for the trafficking of other illegal drugs or other illegal activity;
• Preventing violence and the use of firearms in the cultivation and distribution of marijuana;
• Preventing drugged driving and the exacerbation of other adverse public health consequences associated with marijuana use;
• Preventing the growing of marijuana on public lands and the attendant public safety and environmental dangers posed by marijuana production on public lands; and
• Preventing marijuana possession or use on federal property.

This from a Memo to U.S. Attorneys from James M. Cole, Deputy Attorney General.

Presumably, therefore, Federal Prosecutors will focus on prosecuting individuals/entities engaged in the above activities, but not recreational use. Although the Federal government could jump back in to enforce federal law at any time, the Attorney General's guidance on prosecutorial discretion should be welcome news to those in support of recreational marijuana in Washington State.

For more information, see the Seattle Times here.

Washington State L&I: Insolvency (and a 19% per year rate increase) looms

The Washington Policy Center (WPC) has a great piece on the current fiscal position of Washington State's L&I worker's compensation system.

The most recent report by the State Auditor's Office found that L&I's Contingency Reserve (difference between fund's total assets and total liabilities) is at a "historically low level and below the Department's target." The report also stated there is a 56.9% chance of insolvency within the next five years.

According to WPC: "In a June 21 meeting an L&I actuary recommended workers' compensation taxes be increased by a staggering 19 percent every year for the next ten years to plug the $3.1 billion hole in the program's budget. The shortfall is the result of the critically depleted contingency reserve funds, in need of some $1.7 billion, and a decrease in expected investment returns that increase the value of future pension liabilities by $1.35 billion."

This annual 19% increase does not include normal annual increases necessary to achieve the program's break-even costs.

The WPC states the historically low reserve is the result of L&I using contingency reserve funds to artificially suppress worker's compensation rates for more than a decade.

Much more great stuff in the article which can be found here.

Washington Superior Court (King County) holds 2/3 vote requirement for tax increases unconstitutional

Today, in his memorandum opinion, Judge Heller of the King County Superior Court ruled that Washington State's supermajority requirement for tax increases is unconstitutional. This ruling will no doubt be appealed.

The Court reasoned that since Article II, § 22 of Washington's Constitution only requires a bare "majority" of the House and Senate to pass a measure, a voter initiative that requires a greater than majority (i.e. supermajority) for tax measures violates the State Constitution. Essentially, the Court ruled that the Constitution's requirement of a "majority" to pass a law constitutes both a floor (measures cannot be passed with less than a majority) and a ceiling (the people cannot require more than a simple majority to pass a measure).

As the Washington Policy Center points out, this 2/3 vote requirement has been approved by the voters 5 times since it was originally enacted 18 years ago, and this will ultimately end up before the Washington Supreme Court.