The Tuesday Count: Initiatives certified in Maine and Washington

August 4, 2015

By Tyler King and Josh Altic

Taxes, minimum wages and campaign cash highlight this month's edition of the Tuesday Count. Statewide ballot measures in Maine and Washington are set for the November 3 election. Mainers will see one initiative and one legislatively referred bond question on their statewide ballot, while the people of Washington will vote on two initiatives and four advisory questions. The Maine initiative deals with disclosure of campaign finances and Initiative 1366 in Washington could change the state's approach to tax policy. At the local level, initiatives in Cincinnati and Kansas City are pulling at both sides of the minimum wage tug-of-war.

Two initiatives, four advisory questions on Washington ballot

Six measures will appear on the November 3, 2015, ballot in Washington. Two of the measures are Initiatives to the People, and the other four are advisory questions. Each ballot initiative has a prominent sponsor; Initiative 1366 is backed by conservative initiative activist Tim Eyman, and Initiative 1401 is sponsored by Paul Allen, co-founder of Microsoft. Signatures were not submitted for any other initiatives.

Initiative 1366 was designed to put the state legislature in a bind. If voters approve the initiative, legislators would have two options: (1) allow the sales tax to decrease or (2) refer an amendment to the ballot requiring a two-thirds vote in the legislature or voter approval to raise taxes. The first option would decrease state tax revenue by about $1 billion, and the second option would make increasing taxes more difficult. Supporters of Initiative 1366 seek to do this because the Washington State Constitution only requires the legislature to pass any piece of legislation, tax-related or other, by a simple majority vote, and Washington citizens do not have the power to initiate constitutional amendments.

Opponents did not waste time organizing against Initiative 1366. The day after the measure's certification, litigation against the measure was announced. According to Thurston County Auditor Mary Hall, "This [initiative] is a misuse of our democratic process. Initiatives were never intended to play a role in amending the state constitution. I-1366 is manipulating the intent of the initiative process. Allowing this to get on the ballot could set a dangerous precedent."

The other initiative on the ballot, Initiative 1401, does not have an organized opposition, although the National Rifle Association (NRA) has voiced some concerns. The measure would create new penalties for trafficking certain animal species and commodities made from them. Paul Allen is the measure's largest financial backer, followed by entrepreneur Nick Hanauer. PCI Consultants was paid $1,205,339 to collect signatures for the initiative. That is about $4.89 per required signature.

In addition to the two initiatives, four tax-related advisory questions were referred to the ballot by a requirement in Initiative 960, which was passed by voters in 2007. The four questions regard oil spill prevention taxes, medical marijuana fees, an increase in the gas tax and the elimination of tax preferences for certain manufacturers.

Mainers will vote on an initiative and a bond measure

There was one bond measure that the Maine Legislature and Gov. Paul LePage (R) agreed on—an $85 million transportation bond. Between 2000 and 2014, $477.13 million in transportation-related bonds were approved by voters. If voters approve this year's bond, the total amount for transportation-related bonds for the past 15 years would increase to $562.13 million. The governor praised the bond, saying, "This critical investment of $85 million into Maine’s transportation system will assure thousands of contractors and construction workers with long-term job security and continuing paychecks, and in turn will strengthen Maine’s infrastructure and economy. This bond is critical for the State to deliver on its current Work Plan commitments, which keep our transportation system strong."

Backed by a coalition of environmental, civil rights, labor and religious groups, the "Clean Elections" Initiative, also known as Question 1, was certified for the ballot after the legislature failed to address the indirect initiative. The measure would allow candidates to qualify for supplemental funds and require disclosures regarding gubernatorial inaugurations and transitions. Advertisements and communications would be required to disclose the campaign's top three funders. The initiative would increase penalties for violating campaign finance disclosure rules. Supplemental election funds would be funded through eliminating $6 million in “low-performing, unaccountable” corporate tax exemptions, deductions or credits “with little or no demonstrated economic development effect.” Maine currently exempts about $1 billion per year through tax breaks for businesses.

Local spotlight

Texas Supreme Court rules voters should decide fate of Houston's LGBT anti-discrimination HERO ordinance:

See also: City of Houston Anti-Discrimination HERO Veto Referendum, Proposition 1 (November 2015)

On July 24, 2015, the Texas Supreme Court allowed Houston voters to choose their own ending for the HERO saga that began more than a year earlier in May 2014, when the Houston City Council voted 11-6 to enact the "Houston Equal Rights Ordinance (HERO)." The ordinance, which was backed by Mayor Annise Parker, the first openly lesbian mayor of a major U.S. city, banned discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity—two criteria not covered by federal anti-discrimination laws. The ordinance also made prohibitions against discrimination based on sex, race, color, ethnicity, national origin, age, familial status, marital status, military status, religion, disability, genetic information and pregnancy explicit in the city's code.

Houston Mayor Annise Parker

Opponents of the ordinance's LGBT provisions, led by the Houston branch of the U.S. Pastor Council, were quick to launch a veto referendum petition against the ordinance. They needed 17,296 valid signatures within 30 days; they collected around 50,000 signatures and submitted them on July 3, 2014.

The city secretary verified that more than the required number of the submitted signatures were valid. Before she certified the referendum petition as sufficient, however, City Attorney David Feldman informed her of certain problems with the petition sheets and other technical errors that, according to Feldman, invalidated most of the submitted signatures. The city ruled the petition insufficient. In response to the decision, HERO opponents filed a lawsuit against the city, arguing that the city attorney improperly and illegally interfered with the city secretary and that the technical problems pointed out by the city attorney should not have impeded the will of the tens of thousands of signers that wanted voters to decide the issue.

What followed was a year-long legal battle that brought national attention to the city. During the arguments and trials, subpoenas were issued by the city for sermons given by opponents of HERO who were suspected of giving out incorrect instructions for filling out petition sheets. Many reacted to these subpoenas by criticizing the city for violating the religious and free-speech rights of the targeted pastors. Ultimately, the city modified the subpoenas so they applied only to portions of the sermons that specifically addressed the referendum signature petition. After a trial by jury that reached a mixed verdict on the petition, District Judge Robert Schaffer, interpreting the jury's verdict, ruled that there was no fraud involved with the petition, but insisted that there were some forgeries and technical issues with the signatures. Schaffer demanded a recount and, ultimately, ruled the petition insufficient. This provoked petitioners to appeal to the state supreme court, which ruled the signature recount unnecessary and told the city it should have acted according to the city secretary's first count. The majority ruling of the state's highest court stated, "We agree ... that the city secretary certified their petition and thereby invoked the city council's ministerial duty to reconsider and repeal the ordinance or submit it to popular vote. The legislative power reserved to the people of Houston is not being honored." The ruling forced the city council to either repeal HERO directly or put it before voters on November 3, 2015.

Group logo

Cincinnati group seeks initiative to raise city minimum wage:

See also: City of Cincinnati Minimum Wage Increase Initiative (2016)

A group called Cincinnatians for a Strong Economy began circulating a petition this month for a minimum wage increase to $12.20 per hour by 2018. The initiative—which would go on the city's ballot for the election on November 3, 2015, if petitioners are successful—would also mandate a minimum of five paid sick days for all workers after at least 60 days of employment. The group needs about 6,000 valid signatures to qualify its measure for the ballot.

Kansas City businesses seek to repeal city's $13-per-hour minimum wage while activists push initiative for $15 per hour:

See also: Articles on the veto referendum effort against the city ordinance and the initiative seeking $15 per hour

In Kansas City, Missouri, two coalitions have set up camps on opposite sides of a minimum wage ordinance approved by the city council on July 16, 2015. The ordinance was designed to incrementally boost the city's minimum wage to $13 per hour by 2020. The first jump to $8.50 per hour was scheduled for August 24, 2015. This increase could be stopped, however, by a coalition of business owners and activists rallying around their stated goal of economic health. The group started collecting signatures for a veto referendum against the city's minimum wage ordinance, giving voters a chance to overturn the law in the city's election on November 3, 2015. The group needs to collect 3,417 valid signatures by the end of August 24, 2015, to qualify the referendum for the ballot.

Group logo

On the opposite side of the political spectrum, a group heavily featuring members and supporters of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference of Kansas City and Kansas City Jobs with Justice thinks that the city's ordinance doesn't do enough to lift low-wage workers out of poverty. The group collected enough signatures to qualify an initiative for the same November ballot that was designed to raise the minimum wage in phases to $15 per hour by 2020 and provide all workers who had been employed for at least 60 days a minimum of one week in paid sick leave.

Notable local measure elections in August

• Proposition 103: Phoenix Pension Reform Charter Amendment - On August 25, 2015, Phoenix voters will decide the city's fourth public pension-related ballot measure in three years. This measure would fix a few problems with the last reform and establish a few money-saving policies. One provision in Prop. 103 would cap employee contributions to the pension system at 11 percent of their paychecks. The pension reform approved by voters in 2013 had them paying half of the required pension fund contribution, which amounted to as much as 15 percent of salaries—and climbing—for many city employees. Other provisions would restrict pension spiking and reduce the guaranteed compound interest rate of pension contributions returned to employees who quit and withdrew from the system. Details are available here.

Other measures in the news

• California Proposition 47, Reduced Penalties for Some Crimes Initiative (2014): The California Fourth District Court of Appeal, in a unanimous decision, declared that the proposition applies to juvenile offenders.
• Oregon Legalized Marijuana Initiative, Measure 91 (2014): Gov. Kate Brown (D) signed a law moving the legal sale date for marijuana up a year to October 2015.
• North Dakota Corporate Dairy and Swine Farming Referendum (2016): The North Dakota Farmers Union collected more than enough signatures to put on the ballot, as a veto referendum, a bill that would allow domestic corporations and limited liability companies to own and operate dairy farms and swine production facilities.

See also

2015 ballot measures

Tuesday Count • 2015 Scorecard

• Ballotpedia's Tuesday Count for 2015
• 2015 ballot measures
• Local ballot measure elections in 2015