Article by Erik Smith. Published on Wednesday, June 09, 2010 EST.

Big Money for Signatures – Will They Get Off the Ground in Time?

By Erik Smith

Staff writer/ Washington State Wire

UPDATED 8 a.m. June 9 to reflect Beverage Association decision on 1-1107.

OLYMPIA, June 8.—How crazy can this year’s initiative campaigns get?

            Well, in the last couple of days, some $1.7 million has been dumped into a pair of campaigns that haven’t even begun, whose prospects are iffy because of the late start, and which will need to set an all-time record for signature-gathering in order to get the job done.

            That’s $400,000 for I-1105, a liquor-store privatization measure that is favored by liquor distributors. And there’s another $1.3 million for I-1107, a pop-tax rollback favored by the state’s soda-pop distributors. 

            Both campaigns are tied up in court. Challenges to their ballot titles must be resolved before they can begin collecting signatures.

If either one of them actually gets out of the starting gate, they’ll have to set a record for signature gathering. Like every other initiative campaign in the field right now, they face a July 2 deadline to present signatures to state elections officials. No Washington state campaign has ever collected so many signatures in so short a time.

            Big War-Chests

            The big donations reported over the weekend at least signal that the campaigns have a fighting chance. To gather 241,000 signatures in just three weeks, the campaigns will have to rely on paid signature gatherers. That takes big money – $400,000 or more in ordinary times. It may be higher in a year when five other campaigns already in the field are paying for signatures as well.

            “It’s going to be a pretty tough challenge, but the people working with us don’t believe it’s insurmountable,” said Tim Martin, president of the Washington Beverage Association. 
            Martin said it’s all a matter of the number of available signature gatherers and the amount they’re paid. And he said the million-dollar kickoff may just be the beginning.

            The filings with the state Public Disclosure Commission also identify the business interests behind the campaigns. In the case of I-1105, the disclosure is particularly notable. No campaign-committee paperwork had been filed until this weekend.

            Liquor Distributors Behind I-1105

            In case there was any doubt, the campaign disclosure documents make it clear that liquor distributors are behind I-1105. Young’s Market Company, a Los-Angeles-based liquor distributor, kicked in $300,000. The Odom Corporation, a Pacific Northwest beverage distributor based in Bellevue, contributed $100,000. In this state Odom is a beer and wine wholesaler, but it distributes liquor elsewhere.

            The measure is actually one of two competing liquor initiatives this year. Both would junk the state liquor system and allow sales in retail stores. But 1105 would require retailers to buy from distributors.

            The other measure, Initiative 1100, is backed by big retailers and would likely cut out the middleman. It would allow retailers to buy directly from manufactures. It is already collecting signatures and is getting a big push from Costco stores, which has contributed $350,000 in cash and is using employees to circulate petitions in its stores.

            I-1105 has its day in Thurston County Superior Court on Wednesday. Two challenges have been filed to the ballot title, one of them by the I-1100 campaign.

            Big Bucks for Pop Measure

            If $400,000 sounds like a lot, how about three times that amount?

            The American Beverage Association of Washington, D.C. is financing the pop-tax rollback campaign to the tune of $1,256,725. A little over $1 million of that is cash that presumably might be paid to signature gatherers. The remainder is called an “in-kind expenditure,” meaning assistance in preparing the measure for the ballot. The only other contribution is $25 from pop industry lobbyist David Michener.

             Until this week, the beverage association had been trying to decide between two initiatives it had filed in May. Both aimed to repeal what have been called this year’s “7-Eleven taxes” — a series of tax increases on goods frequently sold in convenience stores. Those items included soda pop, candy and bottled water. But there was one big difference between the industry’s I-1106 and I-1107. Initiative 1106 also would have repealed the state’s tax increase on beer.
              Martin’s group had been looking for financial support from beer manufacturers, but when it was not forthcoming, decided to go it alone. 
              The Beverage Association is challenging the ballot title written by the state attorney general’s office and is scheduled for a hearing Thursday in Thurston County. If the group hadn’t challenged the title, the campaign could have been ready to go on June 3, a week ago.
              Was a change in wording worth a week’s delay?
              “You always want to get these things just so, and if it costs you a little more to get signatures, it’s worth it,” he said.

Your support matters.

Public service journalism is important today as ever. If you get something from our coverage, please consider making a donation to support our work. Thanks for reading our stuff.