News from 2004

• Nixon plans two 45th District Town Hall meetings December 11 (November 24, 2004)
• Rep. Toby Nixon announces re-election bid (June 2, 2004)
• Seattle Times: The 65-10 rule: a bad way to preserve rural land (May 18, 2004)
• King County Journal: Tent city approach won’t build charitable giving (May 16, 2004)
• Nixon shares reservations about plan to move tent city to Kingsgate area (May 5, 2004)
• Letter to Attorney General requesting opinion on same-sex marriage (March 9, 2004)
• House could have done more to clamp down on sex offenders (March 5, 2004)
• Nixon hoped for House vote on bill guaranteeing prison time for sex offenders (March 4, 2004)
• King County Journal: State Patrol questioned about officer’s accidents (March 2, 2004)
• House passes Nixon bill aimed at disclosure for cancer patients (February 19, 2004)
• Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Brame tragedy echoes in domestic violence bills’ passage (February 15, 2004)
• Nixon plans 45th District Town Hall meetings February 21 (February 11, 2004)
• Nixon strengthens bill to ensure toll payer privacy, wins approval (February 11, 2004)
• House adopts Nixon bill to help domestic violence victims (February 10, 2004)
• Republican lawmakers ask Sound Transit to consider re-bidding Rainer Valley light rail segment (February 10, 2004)
• Seattle Post-Intelligencer: A fairer tax break is in the works (February 8, 2004)
• Woodinville Weekly: Cascadia, UWB react to State U proposal (February 2, 2004)
• Nixon wants 2004 legislative session to pick up where 2003 left off (January 13, 2004)
• Nixon invites 45th District citizens to Town Hall Meetings (November 6, 2003)

News Archives

• 2003
• 2002

Nixon plans two 45th District Town Hall meetings December 11

• Duvall: 10 - 11:30 a.m., Duvall Fire Station, 15600 First Ave. NE
• Kirkland: 1:30 - 3 p.m., Kirkland Library, 308 Kirkland Ave.

Rep. Toby Nixon announces re-election bid

Seattle Times: The 65-10 rule: a bad way to preserve rural land

     Kirkland (May 18, 2004) -- We in King County are blessed to enjoy clean air, clean water, healthy habitat for birds, salmon and other wildlife, and recreational opportunities for our families. One of my favorite things about serving in the state House is finding and creating opportunities to advocate the protection of Washington’s natural environment as a perpetual legacy for our children and grandchildren.
     King County Executive Ron Sims has submitted to the County Council his proposal for how to enhance and preserve these blessings, in the form of the updated critical-areas ordinance.
     A key element of that ordinance is that each rural residential landowner must leave 65 percent of his or her land in a natural state, with no more than 10 percent of the land covered by impervious surfaces.
     This is the wrong approach. As is often the case with Sims’ proposals, I agree with the goal, but disagree over how best to achieve it.
     A clean environment benefits us all. The responsibility of paying for it should belong to all, not just rural residential landowners. The 65-10 rule, as it is known, may make sense as an overall land-use-policy goal if it represents the consensus of unbiased scientific experts. But it does not make sense to impose the rule on each individual parcel, with those individual landowners losing the value of the land they paid for and being required to continue paying taxes on land they can’t use. I heard that sentiment repeatedly last month in Woodinville, a community I represent, at the public meeting on Sims’ scheme.
     Instead, if King County wants 65 percent of the rural area to be in a natural state, Sims should instead propose buying that amount of land from the current owners and put the land in public trust. The outcome would be the same -- 65 percent of the land would be natural -- but nobody’s property rights would be trampled.
     And instead of the protected land being in scattered pieces, it could be in consolidated areas, with much greater benefit to wildlife.
     This would be the only moral and honest course.
     Some will object that this alternative would be incomprehensibly expensive, and that the county is so strapped for cash that it can’t even begin to afford it.
     If that’s the case, the county should go to the people for approval for long-term bonds to raise the money needed for the purchases. This makes sense, because since future generations will benefit from protecting the land, they should have the opportunity to help pay for that benefit.
     This alternative would also give the people a real voice in the prioritization of things they value. If the citizens of King County agree that protecting the land for themselves and future generations is of more value to them than other things they could spend the money on in their family budgets, then they will support the bond issue. If they disagree, then the county should act in accordance with the priorities the people have set.
     But in no case should the county take the value of private property, in pursuit of public benefits, without just compensation.
     The proposed update of the critical-areas ordinance in its current form should be rejected by the County Council and an alternative pursued that properly balances protection of individual property rights with protection of the environment.

     State Rep. Toby Nixon, R-Kirkland, represents the 45th Legislative District, encompassing rural and suburban areas of King County including Woodinville, Duvall, Carnation and parts of Kirkland, Redmond and Sammamish. He serves as vice chairman of the House Republican Caucus.

(return to top)

King County Journal: Tent city approach won’t build charitable giving

     Kirkland (May 16, 2004) -- It would be nice to think common sense prevailed in the case of King County’s traveling tent city, which will occupy land generously offered by St. Brendan’s Catholic Church rather than the Brickyard Park and Ride lot in Bothell. Too bad it took the threat of a court injunction to bring common sense into the picture. I hope things go smoothly with Tent City 4, because the process that led to the St. Brendan’s property was anything but smooth.
     Clearly, King County Executive Ron Sims and Councilwoman Carolyn Edmonds underestimated the willingness of Eastsiders to help people who are homeless. Perhaps they weren’t aware of how many in East King County have contributed time, energy, and money to Habitat for Humanity, Kirkland Interfaith Transitions in Housing, Hopelink, and other organizations that seek to help our neighbors who are homeless - in addition to paying taxes to fund government programs with the same aim.
     More troubling is how Sims and Edmonds underestimated their constituents’ desire to be informed about and involved in important public policy decisions.
     As president of the Kingsgate 3 & 4 Homeowners Association (less than a 15-minute walk from the Brickyard site, easily reached via the NE 160th overpass) and as state representative for the 45th Legislative District, which includes the Juanita and Kingsgate areas, I shared the deep reservations expressed by other community members regarding the decision to let the tent city occupy the Brickyard site.
     Our concerns had less to do with the homeless who would have lived there than it did with land use - an issue on which Sims is inconsistent. He has no trouble having public meetings to discuss a controversial plan that would prevent rural county residents from developing the majority of their property. Yet he thought it was OK to invite as many as 100 people to live on a piece of public property for at least three months without giving the community adequate notice, seeking or accepting input from neighbors, following proper permitting procedures, or taking steps to ensure protection of neighborhoods and the provision of basic services (showers, trash disposal, water or sanitation, etc.) to tent city residents. That’s inexcusable.
     Sims claimed his staff had been looking for months for county property that could be used for a tent city. But did Sims instruct his staff to check with churches while they were hunting for publicly owned sites? St. Brendan’s and another church came forward with their offer of space only after Sims’ decision incensed the community. Perhaps St. Brendan’s would have stepped forward sooner, if someone from the county simply had asked.
     Also, Sims must have known he would be raising the bar by allowing a tent city on public land for the first time. Did that influence the county’s search for a new site? It’s worth noting Sims’ decision to allow the homeless to occupy public land, which he made as county executive, drew a standing ovation recently when he spoke to the Washington State Coalition for the Homeless - as a candidate for governor. I wonder whether the applause would have been as loud if he had announced the tent city was moving to St. Brendan’s property.
     What can be done? Hopefully, Sims and Edmonds learned a valuable lesson about involving the public in decisions concerning the use of public resources. We’ll know whether they did when it’s time to find a place for Tent City 5.
     Long term, we can work to revise state law, county ordinance, and the county charter to prevent any county executive from unilaterally taking such actions. In the meantime, we should also consider extra gifts to Habitat for Humanity, KITH, Hopelink, and other organizations that seek to help our homeless neighbors without threatening to occupy public land.
     There are many ways to help homeless people, and many are willing to help. We’re aware that there but for the grace of God go us. We hope that if we’re ever in a tough spot, our families, neighbors, and communities would be in a position to help us as well. Unfortunately, Sims’ approach isn’t the way to build support for charitable giving and service. I hope he hasn’t done more harm than good.

     Toby Nixon is State Representative for the 45th District, encompassing the Kingsgate, Queensgate and High Woodlands neighborhoods, Woodinville, Duvall, Carnation, and parts of Kirkland, Redmond, and Sammamish. He serves as vice chair of the House Republican Caucus.

(return to top)

Nixon shares reservations about plan to move tent city to Kingsgate area

Letter to Attorney General requesting opinion on same-sex marriage

1. Does any public official or entity within the state of Washington have any legal authority to issue a marriage license to persons of the same sex?
   
   
2. Is any marriage license issued by any public official or entity within the state of Washington to persons of the same sex valid or have any legal status, force or effect within this state?
   
   
3. Is any marriage between persons of the same sex performed pursuant to a marriage license issued by any public official or entity within the state of Washington valid or have any legal status, force or effect within this state?
   
   
4. Does any public official or entity within the state of Washington have any legal authority to recognize a marriage between persons of the same sex that was performed outside the state of Washington?
   
   
5. Is any marriage between persons of the same sex performed outside the state of Washington valid or have any legal status, force or effect within this state?
   
   
6. Is any marriage between persons of the same sex performed outside the state of Washington that is recognized by any public official or entity within the state of Washington valid or have any legal status, force or effect within this state?
   

House could have done more to clamp down on sex offenders

     Olympia (March 5, 2004) -- Rep. Toby Nixon is disappointed that concerns about the cost of imprisoning sex offenders caused the watering-down of a bill originally intended to increase penalties for sex crimes against children. Even so, he was among 93 House members who overwhelmingly approved House Bill 2400 late Thursday night.
     Before voting for the weakened version of HB 2400, Nixon, R-Kirkland, made it clear he would have supported the original version, despite the multimillion-dollar price tag it would have carried.
     “If we had to shut down all the rest of the government because all we could afford to do is to apprehend, prosecute and incarcerate those who would sexually abuse our children, then that’s what we should do,” said Nixon.
     The original version of HB 2400 would have instituted mandatory prison sentences for certain sex crimes against children. However, Nixon explained, the Democrats who control the House changed the bill before Thursday night’s vote. The protections for victims were removed, and the most serious offenders still would be able to dodge serious prison time by opting for treatment under the state Special Sex Offender Sentencing Alternative – which could include work release or home detention back in the neighborhood of the victim.
     “I wanted to vote on a bill that would offer justice and protection to victims rather than focus on alternatives to incarceration,” said Nixon. “However, I have to remember the words of Jesus, who said, whoever shall offend one of these little ones it is better for him that a millstone were hanged around his neck and he were cast into the sea. This might not be as big a millstone as we want, but it’s a start.”
     The bill now goes to the Senate for consideration. Because the bill is budget-related, it is not subject to the same deadlines as policy bills, lawmakers have until midnight March 11, when the 2004 legislative session ends, to adopt it.

(return to top)

Nixon hoped for House vote on bill guaranteeing prison time for sex offenders

     Olympia (March 4, 2004) -- Last year Rep. Toby Nixon worked with citizens he represents in the 45th Legislative District to successfully oppose a proposed halfway house for sex offenders. This year Nixon, R-Kirkland, hopes he will get to vote on a House bill that would protect children not only in northeast King County but around the state by instituting minimum mandatory prison sentences for certain sex crimes.
     “Based on my experience battling the state over putting a sex-offender halfway house near Carnation, I introduced a bill to make sure sex predators wouldn’t be housed near the homes of vulnerable senior citizens, or summer camps where innocent young girls sleep out under the stars,” said Nixon. “House Bill 2400 has a similar aim -- to ensure the safety of our children by guaranteeing that offenders aren’t back in the victim’s neighborhood, or any other neighborhood, for at least a year, or maybe much longer.”
     Sex offenders do not face minimum mandatory prison terms in Washington. The original version of HB 2400 would impose minimum mandatory sentences of 10 years for Level A sex offenders, five years for Level B offenders, and three years for Level C offenders. Misdemeanor sex offenses against children would carry a minimum penalty of one year in prison.
     “I’ve never known a bill to generate phone calls and messages of support like House Bill 2400 has, and it’s easy to understand why -- citizens want tougher penalties for sex offenders whose victims are children,” said Nixon. “What I don’t understand is the seeming reluctance of House leadership to allow a vote on this legislation, when two House committees have already given their unanimous, bipartisan support.
     “The bill has been on our voting calendar since Tuesday. It’s time to bring this important measure before the entire House, make the necessary improvements, pass it and send it on to the Senate,” Nixon said. “I’m ready to show the citizens that their pleas for justice have been heard.”
     Because the bill is budget-related, it is not subject to the same deadlines as policy bills, which means lawmakers have until midnight March 11, when the 2004 legislative session ends, to adopt it.

(return to top)

King County Journal: State Patrol questioned about officer’s accidents

     Olympia (March 2, 2004) -- State lawmakers grilled a State Patrol captain Monday over why a trooper who had six accidents in 20 months, including one that killed a pedestrian, is still patrolling state roads.
     “I’m increasingly incensed,” said Rep. Dennis Flannigan, D-Pierce County. “It’s difficult to understand. When is enough enough?”
     The question-and-answer session came at a House Transportation Committee hearing on a bill drafted late last week by Eastside representatives Laura Ruderman and Toby Nixon in response to Journal reports about Trooper Jason M. Crandall.
     Crandall had been found at fault in five traffic accidents, including some with injuries, between November 2001 and June 2003, but still has a clean driving record. A sixth accident involving Crandall, killed 22-year-old Brock Loshbaugh, who was crossing a street in Mill Creek.
     The bill would specify that law enforcement officers aren’t exempt from being cited when they cause traffic accidents.
     The State Patrol and most other police agencies in King County don’t cite their officers when found at fault in accidents. Instead, the cases are handled internally.
     State Patrol Capt. Fred Fakkema said he couldn’t provide the number of maximum allowable accidents by a trooper that Flannigan and other representatives demanded because there is none. State Patrol policy leaves the decision squarely in the hands of the trooper’s commanding officer. And those decisions, he added, are “strong fair and equitable.”
     “We feel that our process addresses each one of the issues,” Fakkema said. “If we were to cite our employees while on duty ... how would that effect the discipline we put on them through our disciplinary process. Would it be double jeopardy?
     “The discipline would have a greater impact that a citation would.”
     Two of Crandall’s accidents occurred before he ran into and killed Loshbaugh. Crandall was exonerated in that accident because Loshbaugh wasn’t in a crosswalk. But within three weeks, Crandall caused another accident and then two more over the next 15 months.
     What surprised legislators and others was that Crandall never was cited for a traffic violation. His record is clean.
     “How is that strong, fair and equitable?” asked Rep. Mary Lou Dickerson, D-Seattle.
     Fakkema pointed to the statistics as evidence for how effective State Patrol policy is.
     In 2003 troopers were involved in 268 accidents. They were found at fault in 148 accidents. That’s 38 percent less than in 2002, he said.
     But when pressed by a representative, Fakkema revealed that the trend isn’t holding. So far this year, troopers have been involved in 37 crashes with 26 caused by troopers. Last year by this date, 26 accidents had occurred with 11 troopers faulted.
     “We realized the system is really flawed because the State Patrol has the ability to investigate themselves,” said Loshbaugh’s mother, Melodee Loshbaugh of Woodinville, before testifying at Monday’s hearing.
     “Jason Crandall wasn’t in pursuit. He was on his way home. He had his foot to the floor and he was driving between the lines.”
     Learning of Crandall’s driving record before and after hitting their son only made the second anniversary of their son’s death last week harder to bear, said Brock’s father, Dan Loshbaugh.
     Learning that Crandall is still patrolling state roads in South Seattle just made them angrier.
     “He’s on the road today and it doesn’t make me feel very safe,” he said.
     The Loshbaughs have filed a wrongful death civil lawsuit against the state.
     Crandall didn’t go unpunished for the accidents he caused, Fakkema said. In addition to written reprimands, driver training and evaluations, he also was suspended for total of 14 days, several of which he was allowed to forfeit vacation days instead of losing pay.
     “While on routine patrol the guy simply drives too fast,” Ruderman, a Redmond Democrat, said in introducing House Bill 3211 -- which she dubbed “Brock’s Bill” -- to the committee. “Wow, that’s pretty frightening. Somehow this trooper, whose job is to protect us, has become a menace.”
     The bill was entered too late for passage in this year’s session, but Nixon, a Kirkland Republican, intends to introduce it again next year.
     Ruderman said she doesn’t claim to know how to fix the problem. Rather, she intended her bill to open a discussion about police accountability.
     “The purpose of this bill is to start the conversation to answer these questions. ... Is there a problem?” she said. “We think that (law enforcement officers) need to be held to the same standard as regular citizens.”
     While most members of the committee agreed there is a problem when an officer can have six accidents in less than two years, several questioned whether changing the word of the law is the right approach to fixing it.
     “We do have some problems that need to be addressed,” said Rep. Doug Ericksen of Whatcom County, the ranking minority Republican member of the committee. “I don’t think the bill gets us to where we want to be, which is the safety issue.”

Nixon pushes BAC test bill

     Before the on-duty driving record of State Trooper Jason M. Crandall was made public, Rep. Toby Nixon, R-Kirkland, already was pushing another bill that would require all motorists involved in fatal traffic accidents, including law enforcement officers, be tested for blood-alcohol content.
     “By having the testing done every time, it removes that cloud of suspicion,” Nixon said.
     Like the bill he and Rep. Laura Ruderman introduced at a hearing Monday, Nixon’s House Bill 1050 was created to address problems in the way the Washington State Patrol investigated the death of Brock Loshbaugh, 22, of Mill Creek.
     After his death, Loshbaugh’s blood was tested, and showed .13 percent blood-alcohol content. The legal limit is .08 percent.
     Even though Crandall was off duty and on his way home, he wasn’t tested.
     “The officer who was first on the scene who had to make the decision (to test Crandall’s blood) was a close personal friend of Crandall’s,” Nixon said.
     Nixon’s bill was stalled in the House Transportation Committee this year because its language conflicts with federal oversight in the investigation of aircraft and train accidents.
     But Nixon said Monday that he intends to redraft the bill and file again next session.

(return to top)

House passes Nixon bill aimed at disclosure for cancer patients

     Olympia (February 19, 2004) -- Legislation prompted by a cancer researcher’s letter to Woodinville resident Darla Eastman has been passed by the House of Representatives and sent to the state Senate. Rep. Toby Nixon, R-Kirkland, is the prime sponsor of House Bill 2404, which would require that cancer patients like Eastman be notified when data about them is entered into the state’s cancer registry. It passed 96-0 last week.
     “Darla’s story is a great example of how what President Lincoln called ‘government of the people, by the people, for the people’ is supposed to work. She is proof that one person can make a difference,” said Nixon.
     Eastman was contacted by the researcher last summer, just before she had a recurrence of cancer. She said Saturday she was surprised to learn how much the researcher knew about her, because she had not had any contact with the cancer center. “My Social Security number was even out there. It upset me, to say the least,” she said.
     Concerned about how and why her name, medical information and other data had come into the cancer center’s possession, Eastman began a search that led her through federal law, Washington laws and administrative codes to the Washington State Cancer Registry, kept by the state Department of Health.
     The registry, established by a 1990 state law, collects data related to the identity of cancer patients, their cancer diagnoses, their treatment, their health care providers, and other information that may be required for the purposes of understanding, controlling, and reducing the occurrence of cancer. Health care facilities, independent clinical laboratories, and principal health care providers are required to report this information.
     Eastman, a single mother and certified paralegal who is studying for her bachelor’s degree at the University of Washington, mentioned her experience to one of her professors, who suggested she contact her legislators. She got around to sending them e-mails in late December, and about 24 hours later, received one reply – from Nixon, who represents the 45th Legislative District in which Eastman resides.
     “Within a few weeks there was a bill. Then Representative Nixon called to ask if I wanted to testify about the bill before the House Health Care Committee, so I went to Olympia. Now the bill is on its way to the Senate. This has been such an uplifting experience,” Eastman said.
     “The cancer registry is an important program that we want to preserve. But we don’t want people to be surprised that data about them is in the database. They deserve to be adequately informed, which Darla wasn’t,” said Nixon. “House Bill 2404 wouldn’t allow people to opt out of the database, but it would require that whenever someone’s information is entered, the contractor entering that data will send that person a letter informing them about the registry and its purpose.”
     “It seems so practical,” said Eastman, now a two-time cancer survivor.
     “The best kind of legislation is the kind that makes government work a little bit better and citizens’ lives a little bit simpler. That describes House Bill 2404 perfectly,” added Nixon.
     The bill has been referred to the Senate Health & Long-Term Care Committee.

(return to top)

Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Brame tragedy echoes in domestic violence bills’ passage

     Olympia (February 15, 2004) -- The gunshots Dave Brame fired last April when he killed his wife, Crystal, and then himself echoed off the walls of the state capitol last week as the House of Representatives passed -- unanimously -- a spate of bills dealing with domestic violence.
     The centerpiece was House Bill 2392, informally known as the “Crystal Brame Bill.” It would require that all law enforcement agencies develop and use policies to specifically deal with allegations of domestic violence by a police officer.
     A similar bill, sponsored by Sen. Debbie Regala, D-Tacoma, passed the Senate Feb. 3, also unanimously. Of course the Senate success of that bill, SB 6161, doesn’t necessarily guarantee Senate passage of the rest of the House’s domestic violence bills.
     Although he voted for the House bills, Rep. Mike Carrell, R-Lakewood, ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, raised a specter that could haunt at least one bill in the Republican-controlled Senate. In a floor speech, Carrell said he was concerned that House Bill 1949, sponsored by fellow Republican Toby Nixon of Kirkland, contained no definition of “family” and could apply to people with “no romantic relationship” or who “couldn’t get married.” Carrell warned that the legislation could represent “a very brave new world.”
     Rep. Dave Upthegrove, a Des Moines Democrat and one of several gay members of the House, rose quickly to the floor to retort that the legislation was “not about marriage but domestic violence.”
     The Senate should avoid such distractions. A victim of such violence is a victim, regardless of the relationship or the sanctity society may have bestowed upon it.
     Several of the bills passed in the House have companion bills in the Senate. One veteran legislative handicapper rated most of the House bills’ early prospects as “good.”
     Tragedy is a powerful lobbyist. Domestic violence bills have vied for attention down here for years. The bloody shock of the Tacoma police chief gunning his wife down in a Gig Harbor shopping center parking lot as their children stood by -- not to mention the stink of corruption that arose from the case -- provoked legislative action.
     Having two in our family who carry badges, it would have seemed silly a year ago to bar a police officer from carrying his firearm into a courthouse just because the officer was party to a case of harassment or domestic violence. But then came Brame. Court can be a hot box of sadness, jealousy and anger, into which it’s probably best to go unarmed, as House Bill 2473 requires.
     The provisions in House Bill 1645 that allow victims of domestic violence, assault or stalking to break a lease are troubling. Should landlords bear the full cost of a societal wrong? Why not appropriate some state funds to reimburse landlords who lose tenants -- and money?
     Absolutely commendable, on the other hand, is the House Bill 2397 requirement that convicted domestic violence offenders pony up $100 to help pay for prevention and advocacy programs.
     Requiring that victims be notified of changes in the protection order against their abusers, as would House Bill 2398, is a no-brainer. Surprises can be scary, even fatal.
     House Bill 1949 allows judges to order that accused abusers not pull the financial rug out from under their accusers. That’s quite bold coming from its Eastside Republican sponsor. Bold, bright and right.
     Those prone to condemn all this as wishy-washy, anti-guy stuff must have missed the floor speech by the gruff Republican Yakima Valley orchardist Jim Clements and the story he told about having to step in after watching a young man he knew slug his wife as she held their young child in her arms.
     Kudos to Regala, Nixon, Upthegrove, Reps. Pat Lantz, D-Gig Harbor, Mary Lou Dickerson, D-Seattle, and Judy Clibborn, D-Mercer Island, and the law enforcement officers and victims advocates in the Tacoma-based Task Force on Officer-Involved Domestic Violence.

(return to top)

Nixon plans 45th District Town Hall meetings February 21

     Olympia (February 11, 2004) -- Rep. Toby Nixon invites residents of the 45th Legislative District to talk with him at three “town hall meetings” Saturday, February 21. The meetings are open to the public and no reservations are needed.
     Nixon, R-Kirkland, will provide an update on the 2004 legislative session, which is scheduled to conclude March 11. He also will listen to citizens’ concerns and ideas, and answer questions about state government.
     The town hall meetings will be in:

• Kirkland: 10-11:30 a.m., Kingsgate Library, 12315 NE 143rd St.
• Duvall: 1-2:30 p.m., Duvall Library, Rose Room, 15619 NE Main St.
• Redmond: 3:30-5 p.m., Lake Washington Resource Center, 16250 NE 74th St.

Nixon strengthens bill to ensure toll payer privacy, wins approval

     Olympia (February 11, 2004) -- Rep. Toby Nixon didn’t consider it a setback when his bill to protect tollpayer privacy made it through the House of Representatives but not the Senate last year. Nixon, R-Kirkland, used the opportunity to talk with more of his constituents and fine-tune House Bill 1019. The result is a revised measure that would offer even stronger privacy protections to people who use electronic toll-paying technology. The House passed it today, 95-0.
     The technology targeted by Nixon’s bill allows participating commuters to cross toll bridges without stopping to pay. Using a transponder, it tracks a vehicle’s crossings and automatically deducts the appropriate tolls from an account set up by the vehicle owner. Nixon’s legislation would make personally identifiable information collected through electronic toll-paying technology exempt from the state’s public disclosure law.
     “Some people would refuse to use a transponder, despite the convenience, out of concern that someone would try to figure out where they were at a certain time, using the data collected. The original form of my bill would have prevented disclosure unless a subpoena is issued in a criminal investigation. The version passed today would require law enforcement to obtain a court order, except in toll-enforcement cases. That’s stronger from a privacy standpoint,” said Nixon.
     The bill anticipates the opening of the new Narrows bridge, which will use tolls; high-occupancy toll (“HOT”) lanes proposed for State Route 167; the proposed use of “smart cards” to pay fares on state ferries; and other toll bridges that may show up on the drawing board, such as a new SR 520 span across Lake Washington. It also would extend privacy protection to transit pass users.
     HB 1019 would not give news media special access to private information gathered by the government for toll-collection purposes, and it would forbid agencies collecting such data from supplying it to other agencies or groups concerned with public transportation or public safety, except in aggregate form with personally identifiable information removed. Both are privacy-strengthening changes from the original bill.
     “Citizens shouldn’t have to sacrifice their privacy in exchange for convenience,” Nixon said. “If you pay tolls or fares with cash, you don’t have to worry about your identity being disclosed. Payments made using electronic technology should carry the same protection.”

(return to top)

House adopts Nixon bill to help domestic violence victims

     Olympia (February 10, 2004) -- Domestic violence victims would have one less fear – that of being destitute – under a bill introduced by Rep. Toby Nixon and adopted today by the House of Representatives. House Bill 1949, approved 97-0, would give judges the option of directing alleged abusers to give temporary financial assistance to their victims.
     “It’s time we stopped forcing victims of domestic violence to stay with their abusers just because they can’t afford to leave,” said Nixon, R-Kirkland.
     HB 1949 would let judges, during a protective order hearing, order temporary financial assistance to be paid by an alleged abuser if the judge finds that the victim was financially dependent on the abuser and if the assistance is necessary for the protection, safety, and subsistence of the victim or other family members.
     On top of medical and counseling expenses and property damages that victims may face as a result of domestic violence, Nixon explained, the decision to leave their abuser often means new expenses for moving and temporary living arrangements. Obtaining a protective order brings victims a new dilemma -- it becomes illegal for the abuser on whom they are financially dependent to have contact with them, even to provide financial assistance.
     “Victims of domestic violence are often forced to remain in abusive relationships because they do not have the economic means to leave. Abusers retain control over their victims by ensuring their economic dependence,” said Nixon.
     HB 1949, Nixon said, will provide a way for victims to avoid having to use public benefits to support themselves and their children until a more formal support hearing can be held. The judge can also order alleged abusers to not liquidate their assets before such a hearing – something that often happens.
     The bill now goes to the state Senate for consideration.

(return to top)

Republican lawmakers ask Sound Transit to consider re-bidding Rainer Valley light rail segment

     Olympia (February 10, 2004) -- Out of fairness, Sound Transit should give contractors another opportunity to bid on the Rainier Valley segment of the Link light rail system, this time without the hiring quotas and other labor-related expenses that apparently were included in last year’s bidding process, says Rep. Toby Nixon. A letter written by Nixon and signed by six other Republican lawmakers asks the transit agency to consider issuing a new request for proposals.
     “Without going through the bidding process one more time, how will the taxpayers know whether they’re receiving the best return on an investment that will be well over $100 million? This is about following the rules and being accountable. Sound Transit doesn’t have credibility to spare,” said Nixon, R-Kirkland.
     The legislators’ concern centers on two executive orders issued in 2001 by President Bush. One prohibits mandatory project labor agreements (PLAs) on construction projects that use federal funds; the second allows contracts awarded prior to the first order to be exempt from the PLA prohibition.
     Sound Transit didn’t request proposals for the Rainier Valley light rail segment until June 2003, more than two years later. Also, it sought an exemption from the executive order forbidding mandatory PLAs even though the Rainier Valley project “was clearly not eligible,” Nixon wrote. The request for an exemption was denied last month by the U.S. Department of Transportation.
     Bids on the contract were opened last October. Sound Transit’s finance committee has recommended awarding the contract to one of the five bidders, but a protest by another bidder over the bid evaluation process has sidetracked any further action. Nixon, who helps oversee state transportation projects as a member of the House Transportation Committee, believes Sound Transit should use the delay as an opportunity to start the bid process anew, and go by the book.
     “The contract terms for the Rainier Valley light rail segment have fundamentally changed with the removal of the PLA requirement. If all bidders were given an opportunity to recalculate their labor costs without the PLA requirement, it is possible that a different low responsible bidder would emerge on the project,” Nixon wrote.
     “It thus appears that the fair course of action would be for Sound Transit to cancel all existing bids and re-advertise and re-bid the project rather than simply negotiating under the revised terms with the previous low bidder. Any other course of action would appear to expose Sound Transit to litigation from other bidders and threaten to delay the project much more than the delay that would occur by simply rebidding under corrected terms.”
     Joining Nixon in the letter to Pierce County Executive John Ladenburg, chair of the Sound Transit board, are Sen. Jim Horn, R-Mercer Island, chair of the Senate Highways and Transportation Committee; Sen. Don Benton, R-Vancouver, a member of the Highways and Transportation Committee; Rep. Doug Ericksen, R-Ferndale, ranking Republican on the House Transportation Committee; Rep. Tom Mielke, R-Battle Ground, also a Transportation Committee member; Rep. Glenn Anderson, R-Fall City, and Rep. Gigi Talcott, R-Tacoma, whose legislative districts are at least partly in the Sound Transit regional taxing district.
     The letter concludes with a request for a “detailing of Sound Transit’s plans to comply with the Executive Orders and provide a fair opportunity for all potential bidders to respond to the corrected request for proposal.”
     Joni Earl, chief executive officer of Sound Transit, responded Friday, promising Nixon she would discuss it with Ladenburg.

(return to top)

Seattle Post-Intelligencer: A fairer tax break is in the works

     Seattle (February 8, 2004) -- Washington voters who are sincerely concerned about the impact of rising property taxes on neighbors least able to afford them should welcome a legislative alternative to more draconian tax-slashing proposals.
     A bipartisan collection of co-sponsors has introduced a homestead exemption bill (HB 3076) that would free from any property taxation a certain percentage of the value of one’s home.
     The bill, whose prime sponsors are Reps. Sharon Tomiko Santos, D-Seattle, and Toby Nixon, R-Kirkland, would deliver property tax relief to those who most need it by shifting the tax burden to the most expensive homes and non-residential property.
     Because it is revenue-neutral, this progressive version of property tax relief would not come at the expense of state and local governments.
     According to preliminary estimates, the property tax burden on the owner of a home valued at $150,000 to $200,000 would be cut by about 10 percent. Homeowners overall would see an average of 6 percent savings, with only those whose homes are valued at $500,000 or more realizing an increase, of about 4 percent.
     Those top-end homeowners could likely soften even that small increase through a higher deduction on their federal income tax return.
     Washington’s tax system is deplorably regressive. Those earning less than $20,000 a year spend nearly 16 percent of their income on state and local taxes, while those earning more than $130,000 a year pay just over 4 percent.
     By joining 37 states in offering some form of property tax homestead exemption, the Washington Legislature could provide not only tax relief but also a less-regressive tax system.
     Meanwhile, voters tempted to sign ballot measures weighted to the benefit of the wealthy should know there’s a better way in the works.

(return to top)

Woodinville Weekly: Cascadia, UWB react to State U proposal

     Woodinville (February 2, 2004) -- The Washington State House of Representatives has a bill before it that would create a new regional university effective July 1, 2005: Cascadia State University in Bothell. The bill calls for the transfer of property, assets and staff of the University of Washington, Bothell and Cascadia Community College to the new university. The bill also directs a task force to identify issues and recommend solutions necessary to create the new university.
     State Rep. Helen Sommers (36th District) is the prime sponsor of the bill, HB 2843. On Jan. 27, she testified that she thought the state needed more four-year institutions, that students would rather go to one institution rather than transfer, and that the co-location was inefficient because there are two administrations.
 
The history

     In 1989, a study by the State Board for Community and Technical Colleges indicated the Woodinville-Bothell area had a great need for education services and not enough access to community college services.
     Around the same time, the Legislature directed the University of Washington to operate a branch campus in the same area.
     In ’93, the House Higher Education Coordinating Board reported after a study of its own that it supported the creation of both a new community college and the development of an upper division and graduate level branch campus of the UW, collocated on a single campus.
     In ’94, the Legislature created the 30th community college district: Cascadia Community College. The same legislation directed the UW Bothell campus be collocated with the new community college. The two learning institutions have been linked ever since.

Today

     Today, Cascadia is housed in a building on the north side of the shared campus, located just north of State Route 522 and west of Interstate 405.
     UW Bothell is primarily housed in two buildings on the south side of the campus. In between is a building shared by both institutions that houses a library, media center, bookstore and other common operations. Maintenance, safety and transportation are managed through a joint operating agreement.
     “Technically the state is not paying for two complete administrations” said Cascadia Community College Director of Communications Suzanne Ames. “Due to co-location, Cascadia and UWB share physical plant services, food services and library services. And, since UWB is a branch campus, it utilizes many services from the Seattle campus, including human resources and payroll. Both Cascadia and UWB use Seattle’s phone and computer services.”

Cascadia counters bill

     According to Ames, the college first heard about merging the two institutions last December. At the time, she said, college officials were asked how they felt about studying such an issue. The key word is “studying.”
     Then, said Ames, “We received a call a few days before the bill was introduced letting us know there would be a bill that would actually call for the merger, rather than studying it.”
     Said Cascadia Community College President Dr. Victoria Muñoz Richart, “Although we understand the intent of the Legislature to increase the capacity for baccalaureate degrees, we are very concerned that the Legislature would consider abandoning such a successful partnership that we have on this co-located campus with the University of Washington, Bothell. Cascadia has experienced tremendous success in its first three years and has proven to be a tremendous asset to this community.”
     Said Ames, “Cascadia supports the state’s increasing access to baccalaureate degrees. We do not feel this is the right way to go about it because eliminating a community college means the elimination of open access and lower tuition for students, in addition to worker retraining and professional technical programs …. Community colleges provide crucial access to higher education. All academic levels are served and the low tuition rate allows students of various economic incomes to gain an education. Cascadia’s tuition is $714 for 15 credits, compared to $1,394 at the Washington state regional institutions and $1,612 at the research universities. We’d like to see the state provide targeted funding to the branch campuses specifically designed for community college transfer students,” said Ames.

The UWB stance

     “We have some concerns,” said UWB Director of Community and Government Relations Kathleen Drew. “At the hearing in Olympia (Jan. 27), several University of Washington, Bothell students, faculty and administrators testified. What was important to them was that UWB was a part of the University of Washington. This proposal would eliminate that connection.”
     Drew also said that the UWB library was linked to all of the University of Washington libraries. Having access to all those databases is a boon to UWB faculty and students. And since Cascadia Community College students share the library, they, too, can take advantage of all the UW library services.
     There is also the question of accreditation. UWB is accredited through the University of Washington. Attaining accreditation was a lengthy five-year process, said Drew. It would take a new Cascadia State University at least five years to become accredited.
     “There is a significant need for higher education now,” said Drew. “Whatever the Legislature does, it has to respond to that need relatively soon. Creation of a Cascadia State University would take time and resources. We’re working well. Our students value their education. We have over 4,200 alumni. We have two institutions that are in place. They have built reputations. It is in the best interest of the students and the community to allow the collaboration to continue. What the UWB believes is needed is added support from the state to fund more students.”

A view from Olympia

     State Rep. Toby Nixon (45th District ) said this about HB 2843, “I’ve heard a lot about the bill. Nobody likes the idea. I’ve heard from dozens of students and faculty at both schools, from parents, and many others. Apparently, the only person who spoke in favor of the idea at the hearing was the sponsor, Rep. Sommers.
     “I spoke with her about it, and I don’t think even she really expects it to go anywhere; but she’s frustrated by the lack of a state strategy for higher education and wanted to shake things up. I don’t think tossing a hand grenade like this is the way to ‘shake things up.’ The uncertainty it creates can lead to students deciding not to come to UWB, to faculty looking for more stable positions elsewhere, etc. – and that sort of thing is already happening, if the reports I’m hearing are true.
     “There is a general feeling in Olympia that we need to be graduating more students with bachelor’s degrees. I don’t necessarily think we need to create new colleges to do that – there is physical capacity at our regional universities, for example. The folks at UWB have worked very hard … to create a unique program the serves a specialized market, and we shouldn’t jump into changing that without very hard and careful thought. I am quite certain I will vote against this bill in the unlikely event it comes to the floor,” said Nixon.

(return to top)

Nixon wants 2004 legislative session to pick up where 2003 left off

     Olympia (January 13, 2004) -- If Washington lawmakers want to help the state economy recover, they should get right down to the business of improving Washington’s business climate, said Rep. Toby Nixon, R-Kirkland. The 2004 Legislature’s 60-day session opened Monday in Olympia.
     “Last year, five months passed before I was allowed to vote on legislation aimed at improving Washington’s business climate. We don’t have that kind of time this year,” said Nixon. “The reforms that will help our employers are ready and waiting to be adopted. Let’s pick up where we left off in June and take more steps to encourage the creation of new jobs, to put people back to work.”
     Nixon said his agenda for 2004 is changed little from 2003.
     “Number one, I’m focused on passing legislation that will help restore Washington’s economic vitality,” Nixon said. “Number two, I’m concerned that people have lost faith in their government. I want to see the Legislature address issues like education, health care, public safety and our state’s primary election system in ways that give our citizens a reason to have confidence again.”
     Lawmakers also can help restore the public’s trust by controlling state spending, Nixon said.
     “This year we’ll adopt a supplemental budget to cover spending changes that couldn’t have been anticipated when the budget was adopted last year – things like higher K-12 school enrollments, or the cost of fighting last summer’s wildfires. But we should not spend any more than absolutely necessary. This is no time to commit to big new programs. Instead, let’s be smart and pay more attention to building up the state’s reserves, to protect taxpayers down the road,” Nixon said.
     Nixon will again serve as vice chair of the House Republican Caucus, and assistant ranking Republican on the House Technology, Telecommunications and Energy. He also is a member of the House Transportation and House State Government committees.
     He welcomes 45th District residents to contact him in Olympia at 360-786-7878 or via the legislative hotline, 800-562-6000. His e-mail address is nixon_to@leg.wa.gov.

(return to top)

Nixon invites 45th District citizens to Town Hall Meetings

     Olympia (November 6, 2003) -- Issues ranging from the state’s budget priorities to the Brightwater sewage plant will be on the agenda when Rep. Toby Nixon meets with citizens at three town hall meetings on Saturday, November 15. The meetings are open to the public and no reservations are needed.
     Nixon, R-Kirkland, will provide a brief report on the 2003 legislative session. He also invites questions and opinions about transportation, teacher strikes, health care, the state’s blanket primary, creating jobs, or any other topic, in preparation for the 2004 legislative session.
     The town hall meetings will be in:

• Carnation: 10-11:30 a.m., Carnation Library, 4804 Tolt Avenue;
• Woodinville: 1-2:30 p.m., Council Chambers, Woodinville City Hall, 17301 133rd Avenue NE;
• Kirkland: 3:30-5 p.m., Kirkland Library, 308 Kirkland Avenue.