Surprise! No Tim Eyman initiatives on the ballot this year! But that doesn't mean the election's all well and good—there are still some frightening proposals out there. This is not the year for you to do what you always do: procrastinate on studying the confusing petition-proposed measures, leaving your mail-in ballot to molder among the beer cans on your kitchen table until you desperately fill in its "yes" and "no" bubbles mere hours before it's due. We've done the legwork and assembled some hard facts about the ballot measures, along with their cheerleading statements from the voter's-guide pamphlet. Now buckle down for five minutes and learn what'll be on the ballot before you accidentally mark your vote for something awful.
Initiative 920: Estate-Tax Repeal
• Proponents' Pitch: "Young people look forward to an economically successful life. They don't need another tax on their family's hard-earned assets. The Death Tax reduces entrepreneurial endeavors that create jobs and expand capital formation. Death should not be a taxable event."
• Real rundown: I-920 repeals the tax on inherited wealth that burdens the 250 richest families in Washington. The estate tax (or death tax, if you talk like a Republican) falls on estates worth over $2 million, exempting farms and timberland if they make up at least half of the estate. And if you for some reason don't exact even an ounce of glee from taxing the crustiest of the upper crust, think of the children: The money from the tax goes into an education trust fund that provides support for K–12 programs and student loans.
Initiative 933: Land-Use-Regulation Rollback
• Proponents' Pitch: "Too often, government adopts regulations without fully understanding the impact on the people it represents. I-933 will require government to identify the likely impact on property owners and pursue voluntary, cooperative efforts to achieve environmental goals before adopting new regulations."
• Real rundown: This right-wing funded initiative will gut Washington's environmental and smart-growth laws. It mandates that state and local governments compensate property owners with cash for regulations that cause any direct or indirect damage to the use or value of any private property (think laws that ban tree removal or designate natural areas) or waive the regulation. The state financial office estimated I-933 would force government agencies to pony up between $7.29 billion and $8.99 billion (equivalent to four viaducts) in the next six years to pay for the inevitable avalanche of litigation. Oregon passed a similar measure in 2004 and has been extorted out of millions by citizens who threaten to build gravel mines in residential backyards and pumice mines in national parks.
Initiative 937: Green-Energy Mandate
• Proponents' Pitch: "As Washington's demand for energy grows, we can choose where we get our electricity. We can either burn more fossil fuels like coal that pollute the air. Or we can use more clean, affordable renewable energy like wind and solar power—produced here in the Northwest."
• Real rundown: Hey! Many seasoned politicos vote straight "no" down the initiative ballot every year, since thousands of Washingtonians can get talked into signing a petition for pretty much anything (see examples one and two above). But I-937 is actually an initiative worth considering. It steers the state away from increased reliance on fossil fuels by forcing large utility companies to get 15 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2020. Companies will also have to hit specific targets on investing in energy conservation, like paying subsidies to customers who weatherize their homes. Twenty states have similar policies, but this initiative throws the twist that most hydroelectric projects wouldn't count as "renewable" since Washington's dams are maxed out. That annoys utility companies, who also say the changes will increase energy prices.
The city hasn't pulled together the pro/con statements for the voter's guide yet, so the following rah-rah rundowns are culled from the supporter's websites.
Initiative 91: Professional Stadium Subsidies
• Proponents' Pitch: "With professional basketball now pitting sports-tax boosters against the people's pocketbooks, [I-91] is leading another fight for fiscal sanity in stadium funding. The existence of I-91 has already significantly impacted negotiations between the Sonics and the city. After I-91 passes, there will be no more giveaways, period."
• Real Rundown: Bitter about the infamous voter-unapproved construction of the Mariners stadium, the citizens backing this initiative don't want to see a repeat for the Sonics. I-91 bans tax subsidies to for-profit sports teams and requires that the city earn a positive cash return on whatever it invests in the for-profit teams. At the time of the contract signing, any citizen could legally challenge that the city would not make a profit on the deal. Opponents are afraid I-91 will keep the Sonics and other teams from choosing Seattle over more hospitable places like, say, Oklahoma.
Referendum 1: Strip-Club Regulations
• Proponents' Pitch: "Why did some members of the [city] council impose the strictest regulations on strip clubs among big cities in the country? If we allow it, this attempt to overly regulate the legal choices of consenting adults will likely shut down strip clubs in Seattle. Is this the type of city we want? Where the council plays the role of nanny, unnecessarily restricting our choices of legal adult entertainment?"
• Real Rundown: Strip-club owners and their esteemed patrons hate the nanny-government ordinance that's turned the Lusty Lady into a clean, well-lit place and can be used to shut down clubs for a variety of miniscule offenses. It's pretty straightforward how to vote—do you want strip clubs in Seattle or do you want them perched just outside the city limits?
• Bridging the Gap, a transportation levy from team Nickels, raises $365 million from taxpayers over nine years. Sixty-five percent of that money will go toward repair and maintenance of roads, bridges, and sidewalks, and just a quarter will be spent on urban essentials like "improvements for bikes, pedestrians and safety, and enhanced transit services." Transit Now, a levy from the county, is a small and necessary sales-tax increase to fund a 15-20 percent increase in Metro bus service, so we can all spend more time on the only slow, smelly public transportation we've got. Voters must approve amendments to the state constitution; thus we have House Joint Resolution 4223—a tax break for small businesses that passed both the house and senate unanimously and now sits on the ballot. There are also 16 Seattle City Charter amendments, which are minor, boring legal changes no one's too concerned about. The only one of note is number eight, which would require that the heads of the finance department, parks department, and personnel department be reconfirmed every four years. 
