State initiatives

OLYMPIA – This Election Day, Washingtonians will weigh in on topics as diverse as alternative energy, property rights, death and taxes.

There are four measures on the ballot this year, one of which would amend the state constitution.

Initiative 920: Estate tax

This measure would repeal Washington’s state laws imposing tax, currently dedicated for the education legacy trust fund, on transfers of estates of persons dying on or after the effective date of this measure.

What it means: Placed on the ballot with hundreds of thousands of dollars in help from Seattle real estate magnate Martin Selig, I-920 would do away with Washington’s tax on multimillion-dollar estates. Currently when someone dies, the state imposes a tax of 10 percent to 19 percent on the portion of any estate that exceeds $2 million.

Among the exceptions: willing your property to a family member is typically tax-free if it’s farmland or timberland. The tax – which nets about $100 million a year – helps pay for education.

Proponents – including business owners, entrepreneurs and developers – say it’s ludicrous to tax death. It hurts family members, they say, penalizes success, and makes it hard to keep family businesses in the family.

Critics, including the state teachers union, say it’s foolish to repeal a tax that benefits schools, especially when the tax affects only a small percentage of the wealthiest Washingtonians. It’s reasonable, they say, to expect the most fortunate people in the state to contribute to the education system that likely helped them and their workers.

Initiative 933: Property rights

This measure would require compensation when government regulation damages the use or value of private property, would forbid regulations that prohibit existing legal uses of private property, and would provide exceptions or payments.

What it means: Backed heavily by the Washington Farm Bureau and Illinois-based Americans for Limited Government, I-933 would allow property owners to seek compensation for government regulations that hurt the value of their land. Rather than pay, agencies are allowed to waive the restriction. Oregon passed a similar measure recently; Idahoans will also vote on one this year.

State agencies predict about 6,000 such claims a year, much of them involving mining, forestry and shorelines. The expected price tag: about $2 billion during the next six years.

Proponents say that the Growth Management Act and other land-use regulations are choking the rights of farmers, timber owners and others. They say proposed buffer zones around streams, for example, would dramatically curtail the use of large stretches of private property. Efforts to get state lawmakers and the governor to ease up regulations haven’t worked, according to the farm bureau.

Critics counter that the measure would let a small number of property owners pocket billions of dollars of taxpayers’ money – or else erode safeguards against responsible development. They predict “endless lawsuits” and loss of family farms to a new, highly profitable crop: housing subdivisions.

Initiative 937: Alternative energy

This measure would require certain electric utilities with 25,000 or more customers to meet certain targets for energy conservation and use of renewable energy resources, as defined, including energy credits, or pay penalties.

What it means: This measure would require the state’s 17 largest electrical utilities to get 15 percent of their power from renewable sources by 2020. Since the region already gets so much electricity from dams, most hydropower is not included in that figure. Instead, the measure focuses on wind farms, solar panels and geothermal power. Companies failing to meet the goal would be fined.

The move would diversify Washington’s power sources and allow for cleaner air, backers say. It would also reduce the dependence on oil.

Critics – including businesses, utilities and irrigators – predict that the measure will make power more expensive. Cheap hydropower will be sold to California, they predict, while Washington ratepayers will pay hundreds of millions of dollars a year for more expensive alternative power. Any fines, they say, will be passed along to customers.

HJR 4223: Property tax exemption

This amendment would authorize the legislature to increase the personal property tax exemption for taxable personal property owned by each ‘head of a family’ from three thousand ($3,000) to fifteen thousand ($15,000) dollars.

What it means: A proposed amendment to the state constitution, HJR 4223 would boost the personal property tax exemption from $3,000 to $15,000.

Proponents say the change would ease the tax burden on small businesses, which must pay a personal property tax on their assets. Startups and in-home businesses particularly need the change, they say.

State lawmakers have already approved the change. So far, the change has no significant opposition.