Washington Initiative 1552, Private Facilities in Public Schools Restricted to Sex at Birth (2017)

Washington Initiative 1552: Private Facilities in Public Schools Restricted to Sex at Birth
Election date November 7, 2017
Topic LGBT issues
Status Not on the ballot
Type State statute	Origin Citizens

Washington Initiative 1552, the Private Facilities in Public Schools Restricted to Sex at Birth Initiative, was not on the ballot in Washington as an Initiative to the People, a type of initiated state statute, on November 7, 2017.

The measure would have restricted access to private facilities, such as restrooms and locker rooms, that are used by more than one person at a time in public schools to people of the same biological sex at birth.

The Washington Secretary of State said that the group behind this initiative—Just Want Privacy—cancelled an appointment to submit signatures that had been made for the afternoon of July 7, 2017. July 7 was the deadline for submitting signatures. The group did not submit signatures, which means Initiative 1552 will not be on the 2017 ballot.

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title was:

“

Initiative Measure No. 1552 concerns gender-segregated facilities and civil liability. This measure would override state/local prohibitions against gender-identity discrimination in certain public-accommodation facilities, require that public schools restrict access to some facilities based on sex at birth, and allow related lawsuits against schools. Should this measure be enacted into law? Yes [ ] No [ ]

”

Ballot summary

The ballot summary is:

“

This measure would amend the Law Against Discrimination to redefine “sex,” “gender,” and related terms to be based on biological sex at birth. With exceptions, covered public and private entities could restrict access to “private facilities” based on sex at birth regardless of gender identity. It would restrict state and local regulations banning gender-identity discrimination. It would require that some public school facilities be gender segregated and authorize lawsuits against schools that fail to comply.

”

Full text

The measure would have added the following underlined text to and deleted the following struck-through text from state statute:

AN ACT Relating to enhancing peoples' expectations of privacy and safety in public restrooms and school facilities; adding new sections to chapter 49.60 RCW; amending RCW 49.60.030; amending RCW 28A.640.020; adding new sections to chapter 28A.640 RCW; and creating remedies. BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON: Sec. 4. A new section is added to chapter 49.60 RCW to read as follows: The people of Washington state find they have a reasonable expectation of privacy and safety for themselves, their children, their families, and others in places separated for female use only or male use only such as restrooms, bathrooms, locker rooms, showers, and changing areas, and that promoting and protecting their privacy and safety is a serious matter of legitimate public concern. The people further find that schools, in particular, are places where a child’s privacy and safety should be promoted and protected and that students should never be forced into environments where they may be viewed in various stages of undress by members of the opposite sex or gender, or where they may view members of the opposite sex or gender in various stages of undress. The people also find that forcing female and male students to share private facilities such as restrooms, bathrooms, locker rooms, showers, and changing areas with each other will create significant risks of embarrassment, shame, emotional harm, or psychological injury to students. The people also find that any statewide mandate prohibiting schools and other places of public accommodation from providing separate private facilities such as bathrooms for female use only or male use only would wrongfully interfere with a student’s fundamental right to privacy and safety and a parent’s fundamental right to promote and protect the privacy and safety of their children and to determine when their children are exposed to sensitive issues and subjects. The people also find that creating civil liability for places of public accommodation based on their restroom policies creates an uncertain, unhealthy and unacceptable environment for businesses and others that discourages entrepreneurship, alienates customers and hinders economic development. The people intend by this act to clarify existing law that other than for primary and secondary schools there is no statewide restroom mandate prohibiting a public or private entity from providing sex or gender specific private facilities such as restrooms for female use only or male use only. The people further intend by this act to clarify existing law that there is no civil liability for any public or private entity that provides sex or gender specific private facilities such as restrooms for female use only or male use only. Sec. 2. A new section is added to chapter 28A.640 RCW to read as follows: (a) Designation and use of private facilities such as bathrooms in public schools (1) All public school facilities such as restrooms, bathrooms, locker rooms, showers, or changing areas that are for use by more than one person at a time shall be designated for use by females only or for use by males only. (2) All public school facilities such as restrooms, bathrooms, locker rooms, showers, and changing areas that are designated for use by one sex or gender shall be used only by members of that sex or gender. No person shall enter a school facility, such as a restroom, bathroom, locker room, shower, or changing area that is designated for use by one sex or gender unless he or she is a member of that sex or gender. (3) In any other public school facility or setting where a person of one sex or gender may be in a state of undress in the presence of another person of a different sex or gender, school personnel shall provide separate, private areas designated for use by persons based on their sex or gender, and no person shall enter these separate, private areas unless he or she is a member of the designated sex or gender. (4) This subsection (a) does not apply to a person of one sex or gender who enters a private facility designated for use by the opposite sex or gender if: (i) The person enters the private facility for custodial or maintenance purposes, when the facility is not occupied by a member of the opposite sex or gender. (ii) The person enters the private facility to render necessary medical aid or assistance. (iii) The person enters the private facility during a natural disaster, emergency, or when necessary to prevent a serious threat to bodily harm or death, good order or student safety. (iv) The person enters the private facility (A) who is an authorized school personnel, parent, guardian, supervisor, or caretaker of a student or person with a disability and is escorting the student or person to or from the facility, (B) the student or person remains under the custody, control, supervision, or care of the authorized school personnel, parent, guardian, supervisor, or caretaker while in the facility, and (C) the sex or gender of the authorized school personnel, parent, guardian, supervisor, or caretaker escorting the student or person with a disability if the person is the same as the sex or gender for which the facility is designated. (b)  Accommodation for Certain Students. (1) Students who consistently assert to school officials that their gender identity is different from their birth sex or gender, and whose parent or legal guardian provides written, signed consent to school officials, shall be provided with an alternative accommodation if one is available, but in no event shall that accommodation be access to a private facility such as a student restroom, student bathroom, student locker room, student shower room, or student changing area designated for use by students of the opposite sex or gender while students of the opposite sex or gender are or could be present at the same time.  (2) Acceptable alternative accommodations include access to single-use private facilities such as, single-use restrooms, bathrooms, locker rooms, showers, and changing areas, and controlled use of private faculty facilities, such as faculty restrooms, bathrooms, locker rooms, shower rooms, or changing areas. (c) Enforcement of student’s right to privacy and safety. (1) Students who access or use a public school facility such as a restroom, bathroom, locker room, shower, or changing area, designated for use by their sex or gender have a right not to encounter a person of the opposite sex or gender while in the facility and to be safe in such facility. (2) A student who accesses or uses a public school facility that is designated for use by the student's sex or gender such as a restroom, bathroom, locker room, shower, or changing area, and who encounters a person of a different sex or gender while accessing or using the facility, has a private cause of action against the school if: (i) The school gave the person permission to access or use a private facility designated for use by person's of the opposite sex or gender. (ii) The school failed to take reasonable steps to prohibit and prevent the person from accessing or using a private facility designated for use by persons of the opposite sex or gender. (iii) The school had no policies in place that imposed sanctions on persons of one sex or gender who accessed or used a private facility designated for use by persons of the opposite sex or gender, or had such policies but imposed no sanctions for the violation. (3) Any civil action based on a claim arising pursuant to this section shall be brought in the state or federal trial court in whose jurisdiction either the student or the school resides at the time of filing the claim. (4) Any civil actions brought pursuant to this section must be initiated within four years from the time the claim first arose. (5) A student who brings a civil action under this section and who prevails in a court of law shall be awarded the following to be paid by the defendant school: (i) a minimum amount of two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500.00) but no more than five thousand dollars ($5,000.00) for each separate instance in which the aggrieved student encountered a person of the opposite sex or gender while the aggrieved student was accessing or using a public school facility such as a restroom, bathroom, locker room, shower, or changing area, that was designated for use by the aggrieved student's sex or gender, (ii) monetary damages for all psychological, emotional, and physical harm or injuries suffered by the aggrieved student, and (iii) reasonable attorney fees and costs. (6) Nothing in this section shall limit other remedies at law or equity available to the aggrieved student against the school. Sec. 4. RCW 28A.640.020 and 1994 c 213 § 1 are each amended to read as follows: (1) The superintendent of public instruction shall develop regulations and guidelines to eliminate sex discrimination as it applies to public school employment, counseling and guidance services to students, recreational and athletic activities for students, access to course offerings, and in textbooks and instructional materials used by students. (a) Specifically with respect to public school employment, all schools shall be required to: (i) Maintain credential requirements for all personnel without regard to sex; (ii) Make no differentiation in pay scale on the basis of sex; (iii) Assign school duties without regard to sex except where such assignment would involve duty in areas or situations, such as but not limited to a shower room private facilities such as restrooms, bathrooms, locker rooms, showers, and changing areas where persons might be disrobed or viewed in various stages of undress by members of the opposite sex or gender, or where they may view members of the opposite sex or gender in various stages of undress. (iv) Provide the same opportunities for advancement to males and females; and (v) Make no difference in conditions of employment including, but not limited to, hiring practices, leaves of absence, hours of employment, and assignment of, or pay for, instructional and noninstructional duties, on the basis of sex. (b) Specifically with respect to counseling and guidance services for students, they shall be made available to all students equally. All certificated personnel shall be required to stress access to all career and vocational opportunities to students without regard to sex. (c) Specifically with respect to recreational and athletic activities, they shall be offered to all students without regard to sex. Schools may provide separate teams for each sex. Schools which provide the following shall do so with no disparities based on sex: Equipment and supplies; medical care; services and insurance; transportation and per diem allowances; opportunities to receive coaching and instruction; laundry services; assignment of game officials; opportunities for competition, publicity and awards; scheduling of games and practice times including use of courts, gyms, and pools: PROVIDED, That such scheduling of games and practice times shall be determined by local administrative authorities after consideration of the public and student interest in attending and participating in various recreational and athletic activities. Each school which provides private facilities such as restrooms, bathrooms, locker rooms, showers, toilets changing areas, or training room facilities for athletic purposes shall provide comparable facilities for both sexes or genders. Such facilities may be provided either as separate facilities or shall be scheduled and used separately by each sex or gender. The superintendent of public instruction shall also be required to develop a student survey to distribute every three years to each local school district in the state to determine student interest for male/female participation in specific sports. (d) Specifically with respect to course offerings, all classes shall be required to be available to all students without regard to sex or gender: PROVIDED, That separation is permitted within any class during sessions on sex education or gym classes. (e) Specifically with respect to textbooks and instructional materials, which shall also include, but not be limited to, reference books and audiovisual materials, they shall be required to adhere to the guidelines developed by the superintendent of public instruction to implement the intent of this chapter: PROVIDED, That this subsection shall not be construed to prohibit the introduction of material deemed appropriate by the instructor for educational purposes. (2)(a) By December 31, 1994, the superintendent of public instruction shall develop criteria for use by school districts in developing sexual harassment policies as required under (b) of this subsection. The criteria shall address the subjects of grievance procedures, remedies to victims of sexual harassment, disciplinary actions against violators of the policy, and other subjects at the discretion of the superintendent of public instruction. Disciplinary actions must conform with collective bargaining agreements and state and federal laws. The superintendent of public instruction also shall supply sample policies to school districts upon request. (b) By June 30, 1995, every school district shall adopt and implement a written policy concerning sexual harassment. The policy shall apply to all school district employees, volunteers, parents, and students, including, but not limited to, conduct between students. (c) School district policies on sexual harassment shall be reviewed by the superintendent of public instruction considering the criteria established under (a) of this subsection as part of the monitoring process established in RCW 28A.640.030. (d) The school district's sexual harassment policy shall be conspicuously posted throughout each school building, and provided to each employee. A copy of the policy shall appear in any publication of the school or school district setting forth the rules, regulations, procedures, and standards of conduct for the school or school district. (e) Each school shall develop a process for discussing the district's sexual harassment policy. The process shall ensure the discussion addresses the definition of sexual harassment and issues covered in the sexual harassment policy. (f) "Sexual harassment" as used in this section means unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, sexually motivated physical contact, or other verbal or physical conduct or communication of a sexual nature if: (i) Submission to that conduct or communication is made a term or condition, either explicitly or implicitly, of obtaining an education or employment; (ii) Submission to or rejection of that conduct or communication by an individual is used as a factor in decisions affecting that individual's education or employment; or (iii) That conduct or communication has the purpose or effect of substantially interfering with an individual's educational or work performance, or of creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive educational or work environment. Sec. 3. A new section is added to chapter 28A.640 RCW to read as follows: (a) By June 30, 2017, every school district shall adopt and implement a written policy, consistent with the provisions of this act, concerning the designation and use of private facilities in school district buildings and properties, such as restrooms, bathrooms, locker rooms, showers, and changing areas.  (b) The policy shall apply to all school district employees, students, parents, volunteers, and guests. (c) School district policies on the designation and use shall be reviewed by the superintendent of public instruction to ensure they are consistent with the provisions of this act. (d) The school district's policy on the designation and use of private facilities, such as, restrooms, bathrooms, locker rooms, showers, and changing areas, shall be conspicuously posted throughout each school building, and provided to each employee. (e) A copy of the policy shall appear in any publication of the school or school district setting forth the rules, regulations, procedures, and standards of conduct for the school or school district. (f) Each school shall develop a process for discussing the district's policy regarding the designation and use of private facilities, such as, restrooms, bathrooms, locker rooms, showers, and changing areas. Sec. 4. A new section is added to chapter 49.60 RCW to read as follows: This act may be known and cited as the promoting and protecting privacy and safety in women, men, and student restroom facilities act. Sec. 5. RCW 49.60.030 and 2009 c 164 s 1 are each amended to read as follows: (1) The right to be free from discrimination because of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, honorably discharged veteran or military status, sexual orientation, or the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability or the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a person with a disability is recognized as and declared to be a civil right.  This right shall include, but not be limited to: (a) The right to obtain and hold employment without discrimination; (b) The right to the full enjoyment of any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, or privileges of any place of public resort, accommodation, assemblage, or amusement; (c) The right to engage in real estate transactions without discrimination, including discrimination against families with children; (d) The right to engage in credit transactions without discrimination; (e) The right to engage in insurance transactions or transactions with health maintenance organizations without discrimination:  PROVIDED, That a practice which is not unlawful under RCW 48.30.300, 48.44.220, or 48.46.370 does not constitute an unfair practice for the purposes of this subparagraph; (f) The right to engage in commerce free from any discriminatory boycotts or blacklists.  Discriminatory boycotts or blacklists for purposes of this section shall be defined as the formation or execution of any express or implied agreement, understanding, policy or contractual arrangement for economic benefit between any persons which is not specifically authorized by the laws of the United States and which is required or imposed, either directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, by a foreign government or foreign person in order to restrict, condition, prohibit, or interfere with or in order to exclude any person or persons from any business relationship on the basis of race, color, creed, religion, sex, honorably discharged veteran or military status, sexual orientation, the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability, or the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a person with a disability, or national origin or lawful business relationship:  PROVIDED HOWEVER, That nothing herein contained shall prohibit the use of boycotts as authorized by law pertaining to labor disputes and unfair labor practices; and (g) The right of a mother to breastfeed her child in any place of public resort, accommodation, assemblage, or amusement. (3) Any person deeming himself or herself injured by any act in violation of this chapter shall have a civil action in a court of competent jurisdiction to enjoin further violations, or to recover the actual damages sustained by the person, or both, together with the cost of suit including reasonable attorneys' fees or any other appropriate remedy authorized by this chapter or the United States Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended, or the Federal Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 3601 et seq.). (4) Except for any unfair practice committed by an employer against an employee or a prospective employee, or any unfair practice in a real estate transaction which is the basis for relief specified in the amendments to RCW 49.60.225 contained in chapter 69, Laws of 1993, any unfair practice prohibited by this chapter which is committed in the course of trade or commerce as defined in the Consumer Protection Act, chapter 19.86 RCW, is, for the purpose of applying that chapter, a matter affecting the public interest, is not reasonable in relation to the development and preservation of business, and is an unfair or deceptive act in trade or commerce. (5) Nothing in this chapter prohibits a public or private entity from designating private facilities under its control, such as a restroom, bathroom, locker room, shower, or changing area for the exclusive use by females only or by males only. Nothing in this chapter creates or grants any right to a person of one sex or gender, to access a private facility, such as a restroom, bathroom, locker room, shower, or changing area, that is under the control of and designated by a public or private entity to be for the exclusive use by persons of the opposite sex or gender. (6) Nothing in this section prevents a child under the age of eight or a person with a disability from entering a private facility such as a restroom, bathroom, locker room, or changing area designated by a public or private entity for the exclusive use by members of the opposite sex or gender if: (a) a parent, guardian, supervisor, or caretaker of the child or person with the disability is escorting the child or person to or from the facility, (b) the child or person remains under the custody, control, supervision, or care of the parent, guardian, supervisor, or caretaker while in the facility, and (c) the sex or gender of the parent, guardian, supervisor, or caretaker is the same as the sex or gender for which the facility is designated. (7) Nothing in this chapter or any other provision of law authorizes or may be construed as authorizing any state or local governmental entity to adopt an ordinance, rule, or other policy, formal or informal, requiring or allowing a person of one sex or gender, to use a private facility that is for use by more than one person at a time, such as a restroom, bathroom, locker room, shower, or changing area, and that is separated for use by persons of a different opposite sex or gender. (8) Nothing in this chapter or any other provision of law authorizes or may be construed to authorize any cause of action or civil liability against or on the part of any public or private entity based on the entity providing a private facility, such as a restroom, bathroom, locker room, shower, or changing area, that is for use by more than one person at a time, and that is separated for use by females only or by males only. Sec. 7. For purposes of this act, if and whenever used, the terms "female," "male," "woman," "women," "man," "men," "he," "she," "sex," and "gender," shall mean and be based upon the person's sex or gender as determined or that existed biologically or genetically at the time of a person's birth. Sec. 8. 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.

Support

The Just Want Privacy Campaign led the campaign in support of Initiative 1552.

Arguments

Just Want Privacy, the campaign in support of the initiative, stated the following:

“

1. It’s Discriminatory​. In an attempt to include 3/10 of one percent of the population, the regulation has effectively discriminated against the majority, alienating people of every major faith tradition, sexual assault survivors, and many others. 2. It’s Dangerous. ​Based on subjective standards, this is the Swiss Cheese of all regulations, containing multiple loopholes for predators to exploit and zero safeguards to penalize them when they do. 3. Locker Rooms. ​While proponents of the rule would have you believe this is just about peeing in peace, they fail to acknowledge the reality that this opens the state’s thousands of locker room doors to mixed sex nudity. 4. It Penalizes Free Speech. ​Section 162­32­040 prohibits not only “unwelcome questions related to gender identity, but also the intentional “misgendering” of someone. So now if you’re unsure about someone’s expressed gender identity, you’re not allowed to ask for clarification, and you’re in trouble if you get it wrong. 5. It Doesn’t Represent the People. ​The Human Rights Commission circumnavigated both the people and the legislators who represent them. They made a rule with dramatic implications for the 7 million residents of Washington after including only 46 of them in the conversation. We need a better option.

”

Opposition

Washington Won't Discriminate, also known as No on I-1552, led the campaign in opposition to Initiative 1552.

Opponents

Coalition

The following businesses and organizations were coalition partners of Washington Won't Discriminate:

1st Security Bank 8 Limbs Yoga Centers Access Database Systems Acupuncture Northwest & Associates Adobe Systems Advocacy Group AEG Worldwide AirBnB Alaska Airlines Algorithmia Amazon Amy Biviano CPA Anchovies & Olives AppNexus Inc. Asian Pacific Institute on Gender-Based Violence Ask An Atheist With Sam Mulvey AT&T Aurora Plumbing & Electric Supply Inc Back Alley Bike Repair Bait Shop Ballard Law Office Ballard Pizza Co Bar Cotto Bigelow Villa LLC BioMed Illustrations LLC Blue Utopia Blue Wave Political Partners, LLC Blush Celebrations Boots Bakery & Lounge Bramling Cross Broadway Vision Source Cafe Flora CallCassidy Capitol Hill Chamber of Commerce Casual Uncluttering Cedar River Clinics Cederstrand Rentals LLC Central Physical Therapy and Fitness Cintli City Catering City Lites Neon Cloutier Ortega Cone & Steiner Craftsman Plumbing Crown Social Damask Tattoo Dancing Ancestors, LLC Dani Weiss Photography David Owen Hastings Design + Fine Art David Watson Consulting Destiny City Comics Disability Rights Washington DML Insurance Dow Chemical Dragongirl Studios Dreamspirit EastLake Community Church Eastside Women's Health Center Empowering Life Ernest Loves Agnes Ethan Stowell Restaurants Expedia, Inc. Facebook Far West Family Services Farmers Insurance - The Jerry Hallman Agency Fat Yeti Photography Federal Way Courtyard by Marriott Federal Way Naturopathy Firedove Technology FiveFour Marketing Fix Coffeehouse Fogón Cocina Mexicana Food Lifeline Foodz Catering Free Key Productions Fremont Brewing Fuel Coffee Fugate Legal Services LLC Gaslight Inn Gentle Paws Dog Training Goldfinch Tavern Goldmine Design Jewelers Google Greater Seattle Business Association (GSBA) Grim's Provisions & Spirits GreenRubino Guild Seattle H.E.A.L. Hapertas & Company Harley F Broe, CPA Hawaii General Store Henry Waymack Design Hey High 5 Pie Hilliard's Beer Hot Diggity Dog Pet Services Hothouse Spa & Sauna How to Cook a Wolf Impact Hub Seattle Indie Business Law, PLLC Indigo Mental Health PLLC Inland Northwest Business Association (INBA) Irons Brothers Construction Iron Mountain Jazz Venture Partners Jen Garden Acupuncture JTobiason Photography Keri Fox Insurance Services King's Hardware Larson Marketing & Communications LLC Laughing Buddha Tattoo & Body Piercing Law Office of Susan K. Fuller, PLLC Leadership Designs Lens Communications Linda's Little Oddfellows Lockwood & Sons Loiselle Design Lush Beauty Lounge Lyons Insurance Group Macrina Bakery Making Waves Coaching & Consulting Marine Hardware Marymoor Productions Melissa Miksch Photography Miale Gix Law PLLC Microsoft Milepost Consulting, Inc. MKT. Mona Smith PPLC Moorea Seal Morgen Schuler Creative Ms. New Chapter Events & Weddings North Star Diner Northup Fundraising Auctions Nyhus Communications Oddfellows Old Town Bicycle One Love Seattle Orca Swim Team Out in Ballard / Straight Talk OutSmart Office Solutions, Inc. Pacific Medical Centers Pagliacci Pizza Parent Map Paris Insurance Services Patricia Fawver, Ph.D., Clinical Sexologist Pebble Cove Farm Pepper's Personal Assistants PFLAG Washington State Council Picket Fence Real Estate Pike Brewing Company Phinney Estate Law PJ Parsons Presents POP Poquitos Portland Area Business Association (PABA) Primarily Bookkeeping Progressive Strategies NW Prolumina ProMotion Arts Prompt Values LLC Puget Sound Pizza RealSelf Red Cow Renton Family Therapy Repair Revolution Rhine Haus Rione XIII Robinson Company Rocket CrossFit Salad Mob Records Inc. Salesforce Sally Schultz Co Samdhana-Karana Yoga Sara D. Longley, Attorney at Law Scotty's Doghouse Seattle Gay News Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce Seattle Pops Seattle Reign Seattle Restaurant Alliance Seattle Wine Lab Simply Built Sirius Leather Skytap Sleeping Bulldog Bed & Breakfast Smith Sound Strategy SRS Premier Realtime Staple & Fancy Stocklist Stone Crow Designs Streamline Sellutions LLC Street Treats Stuffed Cakes SugarPill Sun Life Financial (U.S.) Services Company, Inc. Superior Slabjacking Inc. Surge Tableau Software Talullah's Tavolàta Team Diva Real Estate Terra Plata The Derschang Group The Nesteggg Group The Pin Cushion The Seattle Lesbian Thinking Cap Communications & Design Tinkertopia, LLC. TomboyX Transmission Wellness Tutta Bella Neapolitan Pizzeria Twight Financial Education, LLC Two Big Blondes Plus Size Consignment Tyler Stewart, Couple and Family Therapist Umpqua Bank Vancouver 101 VCB Consulting & Accounting Services LLC Vela Cannabis Velocity Sports Rehab Verity Credit Union Visit Kitsap Peninsula Visit Seattle VitalSource IT Vulcan Wallendahl Group LLC Wimmer Solutions Windy City Pie Witness World Tree Wellness WW VET SERVICES YWCA Olympia YWCA Seattle, King, Snohomish YWCA Pierce County

Arguments

Washington Won't Discriminate, the campaign in opposition to Initiative 1552, stated the following on the group's website:

“

I-1552 would rollback Washington State’s long, proud record of standing up against discrimination and encouraging diversity. We’re better than this. I-1552 could have unintended consequences on Washington’s economy, driving away hundreds of millions each year in conventions, tourism, and new business. North Carolina’s economy has lost an estimated $600 million since a similar law, HB2, went into place last year (Source: Forbes). That’s why more than 200 businesses oppose initiatives like I-1552. I-1552 could hurt our public schools. It opens up the doors to costly litigation against schools, and by violating federal non-discrimination laws, I-1552 could mean forfeiting up to $4.5 billion annually in federal dollars for our state’s schools and other services. I-1552’s discrimination would do nothing to keep us safe. In Washington, and the more than 200 cities and 17 states with these same non-discrimination protections, transgender people have been protected from unfair discrimination with no increase in public safety incidents as a result. (Source: National Task Force to End Sexual and Domestic Violence Against Women) That’s why law enforcement officials and sexual assault prevention groups oppose I-1552. I-1552 could make something as simple as using the restroom a hassle and an invasion of everyone’s privacy, by encouraging strangers to confront and question anyone who they decide doesn’t look “feminine” enough to use the women’s room or “masculine” enough for the men’s room.

”

Other arguments against the initiative included:

• Kris Hermanns, CEO of the Pride Foundation, said, "Using fear and lies, this initiative will allow legally sanctioned harassment and interrogation specifically targeting transgender Washingtonians."

Campaign finance

Total campaign contributions:
Support:	$279,239.58
Opposition:	$403,088.52

See also: Campaign finance requirements for Washington ballot measures

One ballot initiative committee, Just Want Privacy, was registered in support of the initiative as of July 12, 2017. The committee raised $279,240. Around $45,000 of the funds were transferred from the Just Want Privacy 2016 committee. The committee spent $228,314. Cedar Park Assembly of God Church was the top contributor, donating $51,000 to the committee.

In 2017, Just Want Privacy spent $175,843.75 on signature gathering. In 2016, the organization spent $184,189.00 on signature gathering, but the committee's initiative failed to make the ballot in 2016.

WA Won't Discriminate, a ballot initiative committee, was registered in opposition of the initiative as of July 12, 2017. The committee raised $403,089 and spent $$285,509. The ACLU of Washington was the top donor to the committee, contributing $51,313.

Support

The contribution and expenditure totals for the committee in support of the initiative were current as of July 12, 2017.

Committees in support of Initiative 1552 Supporting committees Cash contributions In-kind services Cash expenditures Just Want Privacy $277,807.58 $1,432.00 $279,239.58 Total $277,807.58 $1,432.00 $279,239.58

Totals in support Total raised: $279,239.58 Total spent: $228,314.15

Top donors

As of July 12, 2017, the following were the top five donors to Just Want Privacy:

Donor	Cash	In-kind	Total
Cedar Park Assembly of God Church	$51,000.00	$0.00	$51,000.00
John Olerud	$25,000.00	$0.00	$25,000.00
Kelly Olerud	$25,000.00	$0.00	$25,000.00
Family Policy Action	$15,000.00	$0.00	$15,000.00
Family Policy Institute of Washington (FPIW) Action	$10,000.00	$0.00	$10,000.00

Opposition

The contribution and expenditure totals for the committee in opposition to the initiative were current as of July 12, 2017.

Committees in opposition to Initiative 1552 Opposing committees Cash contributions In-kind services Cash expenditures WA Won't Discriminate $313,857.22 $89,231.30 $196,277.26 Total $313,857.22 $89,231.30 $196,277.26

Totals in opposition Total raised: $403,088.52 Total spent: $285,508.56

Top donors

As of July 12, 2017, the following were the top five donors to WA Won't Discriminate:

Donor	Cash	In-kind	Total
ACLU of Washington	$50,000.00	$1,761.53	$51,761.53
Human Rights Campaign	$20,000.00	$20,617.38	$40,617.38
Microsoft	$25,000.00	$0.00	$25,000.00
Voqal USA Philanthropy	$20,000.00	$0.00	$20,000.00
Legal Voice	$0.00	$19,495.00	$19,495.00

Methodology

To read Ballotpedia's methodology for covering ballot measure campaign finance information, click here.

Media editorials

See also: 2017 ballot measure media endorsements

Support

Ballotpedia did not found media editorials supporting the measure. If you are aware of an editorial, please email it to editor@ballotpedia.org.

Opposition

• The Daily Herald said: "I-1552 represents a gross misrepresentation of who transgendered people are, assigns dangerous and insulting stereotypes to them, and by barring them from restrooms and similar facilities, would deny them public access to a simple human comfort."
• The Seattle Times said: "If I-1552 were to pass, it would be first transgender-bathroom law in the country passed on a statewide ballot, putting Washington at the vanguard of this toxic debate. Discrimination is bad for schools, business and society."

Background

Voting on LGBT Issues
Ballot Measures
By state
By year
Not on ballot
Local Local LGBT County responses to Obergefell v. Hodges

State of Washington

Human Rights Commission

In 2015, the Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC), a state agency tasked with enforcing anti-discrimination laws, introduced rules intended to carry out a state law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. One rule that went into effect prohibited transgender individuals from being required to use a gender-segregated facility, such as a restroom or locker room, inconsistent with their gender identity. The rule applied to public buildings, non-religious schools, restaurants, stores, and most places of employment.

Attempt in 2016

See also: Washington Bathroom Restricted to Biological Sex Initiative (2016)

Just Want Privacy, the group that sponsored the initiative campaign in 2017, attempted to get a similar initiative on the ballot for the election on November 8, 2016. The measure was designed to repeal rules prohibiting discrimination on the basis of gender identity in certain public-accommodation facilities, require that public schools restrict access to specific facilities based on anatomical or chromosomal sex, and allow related lawsuits against schools. The campaign failed to collect a sufficient number of signatures to get its measure on the ballot in 2016. Just Want Privacy faced opposition from some businesses, including Amazon, Microsoft, and Google.

Joseph Backholm, president of the Family Policy Institute of Washington, expressed optimism about the initiative making the ballot in 2017, saying, "The only restraint last year was time. We will have six months instead of 10 weeks. We know that public opinion still strongly opposes open private spaces."

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing the initiative process in Washington

In Washington, the signature requirement for Initiatives to the People is equivalent to 8 percent of the votes cast for the office of governor at the last gubernatorial election.

Kaeley Triller, Kristi Meritt, and Cassandra Nelson submitted a petition for the initiative on January 9, 2017. To make the 2017 ballot, proponents of Initiatives to the People were required to submit at least 259,622 valid signatures by July 7, 2017.

As of July 5, 2017, the campaign reported having 206,004 signatures. A month earlier, on June 6, 2017, Joseph Backholm, the chairperson of Just Want Privacy, said the campaign had 92,000 signatures in its office.

See also

Suggest a link

• 2017 ballot measures
• Washington 2017 ballot measures
• Laws governing the initiative process in Washington
• LGBT issues on the ballot
• Transgender bathroom access laws in the United States
• Federal policy on LGBTQ rights, 2017-2020

External links

Measure

• Initiative 1552

Support

• Just Want Privacy
• Just Want Privacy Facebook
• Just Want Privacy Twitter

Opposition

• Washington Won't Discriminate
• Washington Won't Discriminate Facebook
• Washington Won't Discriminate Twitter