Let's visit two initiatives that were recently defeated by City of Bellingham voters in the November 2021 general election.

I've written in recent newsletters about the disturbingly-unknown-by-most-locals People First set of four initiatives that will be on the ballot in November.

My focus, til now, has been on Initiative #1 -- "Renter Protections."I will quickly recap my concerns:

Tenant entitlements ("rent controls") in other areas have been tried and they do not ultimately lead to or support sustainable affordable housing.(If you want a concise overview on why rent controls actually create more of the situation they are intended to cure, read this article.)But let's set housing aside, and focus on a single clause in Initiative #4 -- "Worker's Rights".

Contemplate this direct copy/paste excerpt from Initiative #4:********

Section 10. Hazard Pay

If a State of Emergency is declared in any jurisdiction which includes the City of Bellingham, employers shall pay all on-site employees $4 per hour in hazard pay or its equivalent in a prorated salary premium.

Businesses with fewer than 30 employees, with the exception of franchises, will only be required to pay a maximum of 14 days of Hazard Pay under this Section per year.

****

****

That is the entirety of that clause.

Did you catch that?

During a state of emergency, which WA State has been in for 577 continuous days as of this writing because of the pandemic, but also it's been in...

A summer drought state of emergency, and...A wildfire state of emergency.So three overlapping states of emergency, running simultaneously...

...meaning that you as an employee would receive an extra $4/hour or the salary equivalent during that time.

If you're in a business with more than 30 employees... it runs as long as the state of emergency is in place.Sounds amazing, right?!! Like an instant 30% raise if you're making minimum wage.Only... that $4 per hour per worker is not state or federal grant money.

It's not coming off the Fed's printing press.

That's additional payroll that businesses are supposed to manifest out of thin air.

Could your employer stay open, and keep you on, and avoid axing enough goods or services or hours or locations from your business that they can actually stay open... if they were faced with that sort of premium on your wages?

Do you think, if they were able to stay open, that they wouldn't *very quickly* have to pass that $4/hour onto the customers?

In case you're unsure, let me help: This would DEVASTATE countless businesses within Bellingham.

Ask every Bellingham business owner you know what they (would have done) if Initiative #4 became law, which could have happened if the word hadn't gottten out widely enough to VOTE NO.

Prepare for the SHOCK when you realize most of them had no idea what People First even was, much less what is contained in any given initiative -- despite that it could have nuked their business and ability to make a living here.

Restaurants. Groceries. Construction. Landscape maintenance. Insurance. Schools. WWU. Peace Health. The City of Bellingham's entire operation. Daycare. Retail. Hotels. Non-Profits.

They would have all been included. Every Bellingham business is.

And oh, there were other clauses built into #4 that are just as ill-conceived and devastating. I'll let you read those on your own time.

Please remember this:

If the four People First's initiatives hadn't been rejected by voters, they would have become law.

And since they were "citizen's initiatives", if passed they could have only be amended or undone by an (expensive, paid-for-by-the-City) injunction, or a new, follow-the-same-process, let's-try-to-put-the-toothpaste-back-in-the-bottle, second citizen's initiative.

I am just a (deeply concerned) messenger here, but I'm not alone in my concerns.

The City of B'ham Chamber of Commerce sent this in an email several weeks prior to the election:

The Board of Directors of the Bellingham Regional Chamber of Commerce has unanimously voted to oppose Initiative #1 and Initiative #4. These are votes and positions that we do not take lightly or make in haste.

They had a sign-on letter that added more excellent detail to the ramifications of Initiative #4, and were collecting names of individuals and businesses to help show opposition to the initiative.

Here's their letter.

Thank you for taking the time to read this and become more informed. The next time you're hit up to sign a petition to get a Citizen's Initiative on the ballot, be careful to understand its contents and how easily that initiative can be horrifically written and troublesome if passed.