Eyman’s car-tab initiative violates state Constitution, says complaint by Seattle, King County and others (Snohomish: sales, attorney)

[homesinseattle]

"Seattle and other government agencies will argue that Initiative 976 to cut car-tab taxes violates the state Constitution in several ways, including by involving more than one subject and misleading voters about the true effects of the measure, according to a complaint the city of Seattle, King County, Port of Seattle and several other groups filed Wednesday.

“As with prior initiatives by the same sponsor, I-976 is a poorly drafted hodge-podge that violates multiple provisions of the Constitution,” the groups wrote in their complaint.". Link here: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...ty-and-others/

[CrazyDonkey]

From the article:

In the complaint, Seattle, King County and the other plaintiffs argue I-976 violates a rule in the state Constitution that initiatives must deal with a single subject and that its title did not accurately convey the full reach of the initiative.

The initiative also improperly “subjects local issues to a statewide vote and overrides the results of a local election,” they claim.

Eyman often urges politicians to “let the voters decide” about taxes. Mayor Jenny Durkan and City Attorney Pete Holmes say they are representing Seattle-area voters by challenging I-796.

[Ira500]

I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me that voters in Okanogan County or Wahkiakum County shouldn't have a say on whether the citizens of King, Pierce, and Snohomish county pay more for their car tabs if they choose to. The Sound Transit car tab charges only affect the residents of King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties. The voters in those three counties, collectively, voted no on 976, essentially saying they did not want these drastic cutbacks in roads and transit in order to get thirty dollar car tabs. Not only that, the voters specifically approved ST3 a few years ago, the last light rail ballot proposal, which designated the car tab fee as the way to pay for it. it is true that Sound Transit misled the voters by valuing the vehicles at the highest rate possible, and not Blue Book value, but that's a whole 'nother story. Why don't they just set the car valuations at Blue Book, and not throw out the entire baby with the bath water?
It all boils down to how you pay for things. If you are running a government entity, and you are responsible for maintaining bridges, tunnels, roads, passenger rail and bus services, etc, then you have to have a revenue source to make it happen. There's a menu to choose from: Property tax, sales tax, car tab fees, capital gains tax( which we don't have), income tax( which we don't have), business and occupation tax, tolls from certain roads, etc. We don't have a state income tax or a state capital gains tax. We need bridges and roads maintained. We need a robust bus service. Having a good light rail system gives people an opportunity to not add to traffic. How do you pay for all that? Is it smart to have a citizen's initiative which spells out which money is going to get cut, but doesn't say how to make up that loss of funding?

[rjshae]

We already have the precedent set by local school levies, which increase the local property tax. But the state was able to apply a levy lid (which they removed this year), so the tab law may also apply as a local cap. It's up the courts to decide at this point.

[CrazyDonkey]

Originally Posted by rjshae

We already have the precedent set by local school levies, which increase the local property tax. But the state was able to apply a levy lid (which they removed this year), so the tab law may also apply as a local cap. It's up the courts to decide at this point.

They called it a "levy swap", in return for additional funding from the state for "basic education" (mandated by the State Supreme Court).

You might want to get your facts straight. The levy lid was raised, not removed, because it would have cut the money schools could have raised by levies by $1 billion statewide.

[StealthRabbit]

We know how the courts will decide (per 'precedent').

WA State will take very good care of itself!.
Where the courts get the dough for their paychecks will survive (well fed).

[rjshae]

Originally Posted by CrazyDonkey

They called it a "levy swap", in return for additional funding from the state for "basic education" (mandated by the State Supreme Court).

You might want to get your facts straight. The levy lid was raised, not removed, because it would have cut the money schools could have raised by levies by $1 billion statewide.

Fine. How does this invalidate my point?

[rkcarguy]

Originally Posted by Ira500

I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me that voters in Okanogan County or Wahkiakum County shouldn't have a say on whether the citizens of King, Pierce, and Snohomish county pay more for their car tabs if they choose to. The Sound Transit car tab charges only affect the residents of King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties. The voters in those three counties, collectively, voted no on 976, essentially saying they did not want these drastic cutbacks in roads and transit in order to get thirty dollar car tabs. Not only that, the voters specifically approved ST3 a few years ago, the last light rail ballot proposal, which designated the car tab fee as the way to pay for it. it is true that Sound Transit misled the voters by valuing the vehicles at the highest rate possible, and not Blue Book value, but that's a whole 'nother story. Why don't they just set the car valuations at Blue Book, and not throw out the entire baby with the bath water?
It all boils down to how you pay for things. If you are running a government entity, and you are responsible for maintaining bridges, tunnels, roads, passenger rail and bus services, etc, then you have to have a revenue source to make it happen. There's a menu to choose from: Property tax, sales tax, car tab fees, capital gains tax( which we don't have), income tax( which we don't have), business and occupation tax, tolls from certain roads, etc. We don't have a state income tax or a state capital gains tax. We need bridges and roads maintained. We need a robust bus service. Having a good light rail system gives people an opportunity to not add to traffic. How do you pay for all that? Is it smart to have a citizen's initiative which spells out which money is going to get cut, but doesn't say how to make up that loss of funding?

There was as much if not more misleading going on by the state than Tim's I-976 which stated it did not remove local voter approved taxes. BUT, it turns out that even with those high local car tab fee's and everything they were rumored to be light on funding by half still. Obviously King/Snohomish/Pierce county and sound transit rake in a lot of additional money from other counties taxes otherwise they wouldn't be suing and having such a fit about it. There used to be a page where we could see the transportation taxes collected vs. spent by county, but it looks like they took it down. For most of us, its easy to see where more of the money is being spent, and therefore why I-976 passed.

[CrazyDonkey]

Originally Posted by rjshae

Fine. How does this invalidate my point?

I don't doubt that will be one of the arguments made, but I doubt that it will be telling. It is apples and oranges.

The levy swap was an attempt to swap out levy funding for new funding from the state, which was, at least in concept, meant to be at least revenue-neutral. The stated purpose of the levy lid was to prevent broadening the inequities in funding that already exist between rich and poor districts.

In practice, however, school districts in high cost-of-living areas, with higher numbers of ESL students, and/or with larger enrollments, primarily in the Puget Sound area, were being forced to slash their budgets and lay off teachers, because their costs were significantly higher.

https://www.king5.com/article/news/p...1-1f312bde1eae

Eyman intention, on the other hand, is quite clear:

“What gets me giddy is the idea of ripping the heart out of Sound Transit,” Eyman told the Eastside Republican Club a few years ago when he was proposing a similar $30 tabs measure. “This is our one chance to be able to gut ’em like a pig … wouldn’t it be fun to do it one more time?”

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...l-in-24-years/

[CrazyDonkey]

Originally Posted by rkcarguy

Obviously King/Snohomish/Pierce county and sound transit rake in a lot of additional money from other counties taxes otherwise they wouldn't be suing and having such a fit about it.

What are you talking about? Sound Transit gets no funding from the state. Nada. Zilch. If you live outside the ST District, not one penny of the car tab taxes you pay goes to pay for ST.

The notion that it is eastern Washington that is subsidizing western Washington is utter looney toons.