I’m working on figuring it out and will let you know as soon as I have something to share.

UPDATE at 11:18 am: The official word from the Advocate4Culture people is, “Ways and Means has yet to determine if they have the 12 signatures required to move the bill to Rules.” Maybe dead, maybe alive. Still waiting to hear.

UPDATE AGAIN: It’s dead. From Advocate4Culture: “1997 is dead for now, it didn’t get the signature by the end of the day. Work is being done to resurrect it by the end of this session. There’s also a senate bill stalled in the house. The fight will continue and we will find a win for 4Culture this year.”

This is a travesty.

Jen Graves (The Stranger’s former arts critic) mostly writes about things you approach with your eyeballs. But she’s also a history nerd interested in anything that needs more talking about, from male...

11 replies on “No Word Yet on the Fate of the 4Culture Bill”

  1. Oddly enough, this actually happened when the bill was referred out of the Senate Economic Development Committee. They had a voice vote that passed, but there were not enough people to sign the agenda. It stayed in that state for one official day.

    See March 14, then March 15. That status said that there were not enough signatures, then that status changed.
    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.…

  2. Every fucking year they jerk this bill around, push it to the last day or minute, run out of time, or have flip their votes from what they said they would do to something else when a bill finally reaches the Senate floor.

    No matter what, the hotel tax will keep going on forever. When the bonds are paid off then the cities in King County, or the County (if the city does not use it). So, in 2021 the City of Seattle could do just about whatever they want with that revenuer as long as it is covered under the tourism RCW.

    So, what is left from this bill, a temporary window that allows 4Culture to use its endowment to bridge funding for projects and a carve out of the taxes at the end of that bridge to sustain them.
    There is the car rental tax that, more or less, funds Frank Chopp’s workforce housing. Plenty of people want that tax to end, and the same do not see that workforce housing is tourism related. Dow Constantine did a fine job of connecting that housing to the people that work in the tourism industry.
    Extending the food an beverage tax until 2015 to start the convention center expansion 3 years sooner. The legislature robbed the convention center fund if 54 million dollars before the hoteliers too the state to court, chewed off a foot to get away from the state, and are looking for a way to get back on plan, a plan that pumps tax dollars into the economy.

    In the end we end up with the state prescribing what King County must do with taxes it generates. Doing nothing, running out of time again allows the folks that want the car rental and the food and bev taxes to end exactly what they want, 4Culture gets hurt, and the majority party has only itself to blame.

    SB 5834 didn’t pass out of the House Ways & Means Committee.
    HB 1997 is splitting the hair of “those present” vote and the “subject to signature” on the last day (however long that legislative day lasts).

    Every year I think they can do better, but they usually end up just doing the same thing differently. Rodney Tom’s 12 amendment tacked on to HB 2912 last year was the icing on the cake. I’ll be shocked and surprised if he is the one of the two Senators to show up to sign the bill out of committee.

    I can’t think of a good reason that this was, again, pushed to the last minute.

  3. It would seem that the day ended when the Senate adjourned last night and the bill report now shows, “Executive action scheduled, but the report on the motion to move the bill out of committee did not receive sufficient signatures.”

    But until the final gavel at Sine Die nothing is totally dead…

  4. @4, the bill report said the same thing (same statement) on March 14 when they did not have enough signatures to refer the bill out of Economic Dev committee. That statement was actually there for a few days, then it stated “and referred to Sen WM” on March 15. It did not say that on that page on March 15.

  5. I think this is all about Rule 45 Committee Rules, specifically, 45.6

         6. A majority report of a committee must carry the signatures of a majority of the members of the committee. In the event a committee has a quorum pursuant to subsection 4 of this rule, a majority of the members present may act on a measure, subject to obtaining the signatures of a majority of the members of the committee on the majority report.

    That last bit about “subject to obtaining the signatures of a majority of the members of the committee on the majority report.” may be what is going on here.
    I could be wrong, but I think that is what committee staff was getting at yesterday.
    http://www.leg.wa.gov/Senate/Administrat…

    The question comes up around the 1:12 min mark., the bill discussion among committee members starts around the 1:10 mark.

    http://tinyurl.com/SWMHB1997vid

  6. Bill passed subject to signatures, cutoff for signatures is “typically” when the committee submits its final paperwork for that legislative day. It isn’t a “time”, and is subject to the discretion of the President of the Senate, and the body itself.

    At the 1:17.45 mark Ed Murray asks the staff the question, the bill passed subject to signature. Had those other two members been there and had they not voted then the measure would have failed. The majority of members present passed the bill.
    The absent members can sign the majority report (they did not vote, were not present) and it moves on to the Rules Committee.

    That is how it was explained in committee.
    http://tinyurl.com/SWMHB1997vid

  7. Agreed – caught that during the testimony as well – but the bill wasn’t facing cutoff the last time it was waiting on signatures… Still not counting out maneuvers beyond my comprehension, but I think the troubling bit currently is the “committee submits its final paperwork for that legislative day” part.

  8. This is strange, SB 5846 from yesterday’s agenda is in a similar state, how sad, both Hatfield and Tom are among it’s many sponsors.
    Gosh, I hope one of them is able to make it back to sign “the boards”, or teachers that are looking for 3 years of medical coverage so they can retire early and get replaced by younger (cheaper) teachers.
    Clearly I am reading way too much into that coincidence, and it is pure speculation on my part that it sure would suck to have the failure of that bill laid at the feet of Hatfield or Tom.

    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.…

Comments are closed.