Judge rejects most of legal challenge to Eyman's I-976

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Last edited Thu Feb 13, 2020, 01:05 AM - Edit history (1)

By Gene Johnson / Associated Press

SEATTLE — A King County Superior Court judge on Wednesday rejected most of a legal challenge to Tim Eyman’s Initiative 976, a measure that would steeply discount the price of car registrations while gutting transportation budgets across the state.

Judge Marshall Ferguson said King County and a coalition of Washington cities had failed to carry the heavy burden of demonstrating that the $30 car tab measure was unconstitutional on most of their claims. Those claims included that the description of the initiative on the ballot was misleading and that the measure violated the Washington Constitution’s rule that initiatives be limited to one subject.

However, the judge declined to rule yet on two other issues: whether the initiative unlawfully impairs the contracting authority of the city of Burien, and on whether a requirement that car valuations be based on Kelley Blue Book values illegally favors a private company.

I-976 will remain blocked from taking effect while the sides gather information and make arguments to the court about those issues, Ferguson said. The case is expected to wind up before the state Supreme Court.

https://www.heraldnet.com/news/judge-rejects-most-of-legal-challenge-to-eymans-i-976/

Judge initially rules in favor of I-976 as court battle continues to play out

A King County Superior Court Judge issued an initial ruling on the ongoing I-976 court battle Wednesday, rejecting the core arguments that claim it’s unconstitutional.

Judge Marshall Ferguson struck down all but two issues with I-976 presented by the City of Seattle, King County, and other plaintiffs. An injunction currently in place against I-976 will continue to be in effect while additional discovery is completed on those remaining two claims.

One of the main arguments presented by plaintiffs against the $30 car tabs measure was that it violates the “single subject” rule. Single subject rules exist to prevent a practice called “log-rolling,” when single initiatives contain multiple topics that are not necessarily related to each other.

That claim was roundly rejected by Judge Ferguson.

https://mynorthwest.com/1717376/i-976-initial-ruling-king-county/

The mynorthwest article has a link to the judge's decision. Maybe someone who has a better legal mind than I can read it. The legalese gave me a headache.

Lawsuit against I‑976 to continue as judge rejects most claims of unconstitutionality

A very short while ago, King County Superior Court Judge Marshall Ferguson released his ruling on the cross motions for summary judgment in the Initiative 976 legal challenge. The I‑976 legal challenge is the action that the Garfield County Transportation Authority, King County, and the City of Seattle brought against Tim Eyman’s most recent initiative, which sought to repeal billions of dollars in transportation funding at the state, regional, and local levels.

Judge Ferguson had been asked by the plaintiffs and a group of intervenor-plaintiffs to find the initiative unconstitutional on multiple grounds and strike it down; but he declined to do so, finding instead that the plaintiffs had not proved the measure to be unconstitutional beyond a reasonable doubt.

While Ferguson rejected most of the plaintiffs’ constitutional claims, he did not dispose of all of them. Two claims will continue to be litigated, owing to the defendant and the defendant-intervenors’ desire for discovery:

Does I‑976 violate article I, section 23 by impairing bond obligations?
Does I‑976 violate article I, section 12 by conferring a special privilege on a private corporation by requiring DOL [Department of Licensing] to use the Kelley Blue Book valuation product?

https://www.nwprogressive.org/weblog/2020/02/lawsuit-against-i-976-to-continue-as-judge-rejects-most-claims-of-unconstitutionality.html

[LisaM]

1. Interesting, though as a Seattle resident, I don't know that I support free ORCA for young people

unless there is financial need, of course. I don't recall voting on that at all.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

2. The only free ORCA card I can find is

the LIFT program. That is based on financial need.

I heard there was talk of giving Seattle School District students free cards in lieu of school buses. Don't know if that was implemented.

[LisaM]

3. They've been putting students on Metro buses for years, and it's not a great fit.

First, I remember going to a district Dems meeting years ago, where a union guy stood up and gave an impassioned speech about how the school district should be sticking to its own buses and union drivers who were trained for the type of things that occur on school buses. The district does seem to have some buses, but they did put high school kids on Metro and chaos ensued. They had done nothing to account for regular commuters waiting for buses that were now full of schoolkids. You'd hear stories of commuters standing in Fremont while full buses packed with students kept bypassing the stops, sometimes for a full hour, so they'd all be late for work.

I remember riding a bus home one day - I'd left early - that stopped at Roosevelt High, and high school students stormed on and, although they were basically acting like high school kids, just took over the bus, yelling, tossing things back and forth, while the regular commuters were shrinking farther back into their seats. This lent a lot of credence to the union guy's speech about drivers trained to handle school kids, though!

It's like everything else they do in Seattle, these pie-in-the-sky things that sound great to everyone who's not affected. "Let's give all the kids free bus cards!" "Yeah!" from people who haven't ridden a bus in years. It's like those pro-density people who live in three-bedroom houses with yards and think that density is just so peachy keen, even though it's been shown to cause stress and depression.

Rant over, sorry!!!