Bill requiring a permit for gun purchase advances
A “permit to purchase” bill is closer to passage than ever before in Washington state after passing the Senate this week.
The bill would require prospective gun buyers to take a safety training course and apply to the Washington State Patrol for a permit to buy a firearm.
Many legislative Republicans called it an infringement on the Second Amendment, and Tom Nihoul of the Spokane Gun Club said he agrees.
"If you turn around and make that rule and say, ‘You've got to prove that you can shoot’ — if you can't get your hands on a gun, how can you prove you can shoot?" he told SPR News. "Therefore, you're not able to keep and bear arms."
Nihoul said he agrees that safety rules and training are important but thinks this is a badly written bill.
He said trying to buy a gun in Washington was already cumbersome, with the state’s 10-day waiting period and background checks.
"Now they're going to say, 'Oh, yeah, but you’ve got to have that permit before you can even go in and buy it.'" Nihoul said. "And that could take 30 days or more, depending on how long it takes it to get through the system. So it's just — it's ridiculous."
Other states have already passed similar laws, which have so far withstood legal challenges.
Democrats in the legislature like Sen. Marko Liias (D-Edmonds) say policies like these are reasonable safety restrictions.
"Where this policy has been adopted in 12 other states it's been shown to reduce gun violence," he said during floor debate this week. "It also has curbed illegal gun trafficking, and it makes sure that our firearms in this state are in the hands of responsible gun owners”
The bill had previously passed the House but must now go back to reconcile amendments made in the Senate before it can go to Governor Bob Ferguson.
Without state money, infant detox facility says it could close
The Spokane infant nursery Maddie’s Place says it faces closure unless it can get $2 million in the next state budget.
The nursery was launched as a pilot program with about $5 million in state money two years ago.
Its mission is to help babies born to mothers with substance use issues through the detox process.
Maddie’s Place CEO Shaun Cross told SPR the nursery has proven its worth by helping more than 130 infants.
Also important, he said, is that the nursery supports many of their parents as they undergo addiction treatment.
"We have six peer support folks that come alongside and help the moms through their recovery, the families through their recovery, to keep them together," Cross said. "Four of those six people are in recovery themselves and were patients at Maddie’s Place and are now full-time employees."
The facility’s initial funding runs out at the end of June.
Without an additional infusion from the state, Cross said the nursery will have to reduce its operations or close until it can convince legislators to allocate more money.
He said Maddie’s Place is also battling to keep its federal funding at a time when the need for its services is growing.
The number of opioid and fentanyl overdose cases in Spokane continues to increase.
Cross said Spokane County has been a strong supporter, contributing about $2 million .
He’s scheduled to meet Spokane Mayor Lisa Brown to talk about the potential for city funding.
Could Washington state be on the brink of fully funding special education?
The House on Wednesday passed Senate Bill 5263, which boosts special education funding multipliers for students in pre-K through 12th grade and eliminates the state's 16% cap on special education funding.
That cap means that even if over 16% of a district's student body is identified as needing special education services, that district doesn't get any extra state funding — but it's still required by state and federal law to provided these services.
Proponents of the cap say it's a safeguard to prevent the misuse of public funds and over-identification of students needing special education services.
But it's forced many districts to shell out millions of dollars from general funds and levies to make up the difference. In Seattle Public Schools, the funding discrepancy resulted in a $74 million gap last school year — a key factor in the district's ongoing financial challenges.
For years, state Superintendent Chris Reykdal, school district leaders, and education advocates across the state have been pushing the Legislature to increase how much money districts can get for special education.
The Legislature has made progress on the cap over the last several years, boosting it from 13.5% in 2017 to 15% in 2023, to the current 16% cap.
Public education advocates celebrated the Legislature taking another step forward this week.
"This is a positive step in not just addressing some of the immediate financial challenges of districts — but also a step towards an education funding system that is more rooted in meeting the needs of students," said Jacob Vela, chief policy officer at the non-partisan League of Education Voters.
Vela said there's no research to back up claims that districts would over-identify students for special education services without the cap. Instead, he said, it's created an "arbitrary barrier" to districts getting the funding they need, "therefore making it harder and harder for them to actually meet the needs of their students."
Jana Parker, president of the Seattle Special Education PTSA, said Thursday that removing the cap is "long overdue." For years, Parker said, the cap has hurt kids and prevented financially strapped schools from adequately serving students.
"When you have high caseloads, whether it's a special education teacher or a case manager or evaluators, then we see how the quality of work and supports go down," Parker said. "And that hugely impacts our kids and their access to services."
Funding constraints have also limited districts' capacity to evaluate students for special education services, Parker said — and that especially hurts low-income families who can't afford private evaluations or don't have time to fight for services for their child while juggling multiple jobs.
"We've been living in a system that feels like survival of the fittest — where access to services depends on how loud or resourced you are," she said. "And that's not equity."
While Parker welcomes the funding boost, she believes greater changes are needed in special education so that students get the services they need regardless of where they live or their district's financial situation.
She hopes districts use this opportunity to lower caseloads, expand inclusionary practices, bolster mental health and behavioral supports, and increase paraprofessional support.
"Funding alone isn't enough," Parker said. "We need to really change how the system works."
The bill is not yet set in stone: To move forward, it needs to be included in the state's final budget.
Ferguson says Dems' tax proposals are 'unsustainable'
Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson has said his party’s proposals that would raise $12 billion in tax revenue aren't feasible.
"At a time of great economic uncertainty and assaults by the Trump Administration on core state services for working families, raising $12 billion in taxes is unsustainable, too risky and fails to adequately prepare Washington state for the crisis that looms ahead," he said in a statement Thursday.
With the state facing a $16-billion budget shortfall, Ferguson praised lawmakers for finding places to cut spending and looking for ways to raise revenue besides a wealth tax.
"The Legislature has made progress on key issues in its updated revenue proposals. Legislators are working hard and putting in long hours," he said. "They have moved away from their reliance on an untested wealth tax and made progress on addressing our regressive tax system."
However, he said the state shouldn’t lean too heavily on taxing residents who may face higher costs from the Trump administration’s tariffs.
Legislative Democrats this week had proposed a raft of new or expanded taxes after the governor shot down a proposed tax on the state’s wealthiest companies and residents.
These include increases to the capital gains, estate, and business and occupation taxes, as well as greater property tax collections and a surcharge on corporations with more than $250 million in annual revenue.
- - -
Reporting contributed by Owen Henderson, Doug Nadvornick and Sami West.