NPI's Cascadia Advocate

Offering commentary and analysis from Washington, Oregon, and Idaho, The Cascadia Advocate is the Northwest Progressive Institute's unconventional perspective on world, national, and local politics.

Wednesday, November 27th, 2019

VICTORY! Injunction granted to prevent Tim Eyman’s destructive I‑976 from taking effect

Tim Eyman’s dis­hon­est, incred­i­bly destruc­tive scheme to slash bil­lions of dol­lars in bipar­ti­san, vot­er-approved trans­porta­tion invest­ments at the state, region­al, and local lev­els will not go into effect on Decem­ber 5th as sched­uled, King Coun­ty Supe­ri­or Court Judge Mar­shall Fer­gu­son ruled this morn­ing.

“In bal­anc­ing the equi­ties, inter­ests, and the rel­a­tive harms to the par­ties and the pub­lic, the Court con­cludes that the harms to Plain­tiffs result­ing from the imple­men­ta­tion of I‑976 out­weigh the harms faced by the Defen­dant State of Wash­ing­ton and the pub­lic of imple­men­ta­tion is stayed,” Judge Fer­gu­son wrote.

“if the col­lec­tion of vehi­cle license fees and tax­es stops on Decem­ber 5, 2019, there will be no way to retroac­tive­ly col­lect those rev­enues if, at the con­clu­sion of this case, the Court con­cludes that I‑976 is uncon­sti­tu­tion­al and per­ma­nent­ly enjoins its enforce­ment. Con­verse­ly, refunds of fees and tax­es impact­ed can be issued if the State ulti­mate­ly pre­vails in this mat­ter, albeit at some expense to the State.”

We have pub­lished a state­ment over at NPI’s Per­ma­nent Defense prais­ing the deci­sion and thank­ing Judge Fer­gu­son for uphold­ing our Con­sti­tu­tion.

This is great news to go into the Thanks­giv­ing hol­i­day with… tru­ly great news.

Fer­gu­son’s order declares that is:

ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Plain­tiffs’ Motion for a Pre­lim­i­nary Injunc­tion is GRANTED. It is fur­ther

ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the effec­tive date of I‑976 is STAYED pend­ing fur­ther order of this Court. While this stay is in effect, Defen­dant State of Wash­ing­ton, its offi­cials, employ­ees, agents, and all per­sons in active con­cert or par­tic­i­pa­tion with Defen­dant, are enjoined from imple­ment­ing or enforc­ing I‑976. Defen­dant shall con­tin­ue to col­lect all fees, tax­es, and oth­ers charges that would be sub­ject to or impact­ed by I‑976 were it not stayed, and shall dis­trib­ute those funds to local munic­i­pal­i­ties and polit­i­cal sub­di­vi­sions as appro­pri­ate pur­suant to exist­ing laws, reg­u­la­tions, con­tracts, oblig­a­tions, poli­cies, and pro­ce­dures. Any munic­i­pal­i­ty or polit­i­cal sub­di­vi­sion that accepts such funds while this Order is in effect, includ­ing those that are not par­ties to this law­suit, do so sub­ject to the like­li­hood that refunds of over­pay­ments may be required should the State ulti­mate­ly pre­vail in this action.

Read the full rul­ing:

Rul­ing grant­i­ng pre­lim­i­nary injunc­tion against I‑976

The plain­tiffs — Garfield Coun­ty Trans­porta­tion Author­i­ty, the City of Seat­tle, King Coun­ty, the Asso­ci­a­tion of Wash­ing­ton Cities, Wash­ing­ton State Tran­sit Asso­ci­a­tion, Inter­ci­ty Tran­sit, Port of Seat­tle, Amal­ga­mat­ed Tran­sit Union Leg­isla­tive Coun­cil of Wash­ing­ton, and Michael Rogers — are not required to pro­vide any secu­ri­ty as a con­di­tion of the pre­lim­i­nary injunc­tion, the rul­ing states.

While this pre­lim­i­nary injunc­tion will pre­vent I‑976 from being imple­ment­ed in the near future, it is not the courts’ final word on I‑976. Judge Fer­gu­son empha­sized the plain­tiffs must still prove that the ini­tia­tive is uncon­sti­tu­tion­al beyond a rea­son­able doubt. While he has found they are like­ly to be able to do that, a prop­er judg­ment con­cern­ing I‑976’s con­sti­tu­tion­al­i­ty won’t come till next year.

King County Superior Court Judge Marshall Ferguson

King Coun­ty Supe­ri­or Court Judge Mar­shall Fer­gu­son hears oral argu­ments in Garfield Coun­ty et al v. State of Wash­ing­ton (Pho­to: Andrew Villeneuve/Northwest Pro­gres­sive Insti­tute)

Fer­gu­son — who clear­ly pos­sess­es crit­i­cal think­ing and long term think­ing skills, unlike some oth­er peo­ple I could think of — also had the fore­sight to end his order with a plan for next steps. His rul­ing directs the par­ties to dis­cuss sched­ul­ing mat­ters togeth­er and to pro­vide him, no lat­er than noon on Thurs­day, Decem­ber 5th, a pro­posed time­frame for future motions, brief­ing, and hear­ings.

That is, of course, if they can reach agree­ment on one.

It did­n’t take long for reac­tion to Judge Fer­gu­son’s deci­sion to begin pour­ing in.

“This is good news for tran­sit, safe­ty, and equi­ty in Seat­tle,” said Emer­ald City May­or Jen­ny Durkan. “The Court rec­og­nized the severe and irrepara­ble harm to our res­i­dents that would have occurred with­out this injunc­tion. The City of Seat­tle
will con­tin­ue to fight this uncon­sti­tu­tion­al ini­tia­tive.”

“We believe the court is cor­rect in rec­og­niz­ing that I‑976 is like­ly uncon­sti­tu­tion­al and rul­ing that the ini­tia­tive would cause irrepara­ble harm,” said King Coun­ty Exec­u­tive Dow Con­stan­tine in a state­ment released by his office.

“The City of Seat­tle has com­mit­ted that it will not cut Metro ser­vice hours fund­ed by the vot­er-approved Seat­tle Trans­porta­tion Ben­e­fit Dis­trict, so that res­i­dents can con­tin­ue to depend on fast, reli­able tran­sit.”

“Despite today’s rul­ing, Metro con­tin­ues to face the prospect of reduced state and region­al fund­ing for bus­es, RapidRide, van­pool and oth­er ser­vices, includ­ing Access para­tran­sit, a life­line for res­i­dents with dis­abil­i­ties.

“We will con­tin­ue to fight to ensure this region – where I‑976 was defeat­ed by a near­ly twen­ty-point mar­gin – will face as few ser­vice dis­rup­tions as pos­si­ble.”

“It is crit­i­cal that the Leg­is­la­ture act to pro­vide bet­ter, more pop­u­lar rev­enue alter­na­tives to the cur­rent vehi­cle fees, and main­tain the state’s com­mit­ment to fund its share of trans­porta­tion projects until the Supreme Court has ren­dered a final deci­sion on the con­sti­tu­tion­al­i­ty of I‑976.”

“This is not a final judg­ment, and this case is far from over,” said Attor­ney Gen­er­al Bob Fer­gu­son in a state­ment issued after a review of the rul­ing.

“We will con­tin­ue work­ing to defend the will of the vot­ers,” Fer­gu­son added.

“This case will ulti­mate­ly wind up before the State Supreme Court. We are work­ing now to deter­mine our imme­di­ate next steps. As my solic­i­tor gen­er­al, Noah Pur­cell, said yes­ter­day, Tim Eyman’s out­burst in court was wild­ly inap­pro­pri­ate, and it hurt our chances of suc­cess­ful­ly defend­ing the people’s ini­tia­tive.”

Mean­while, of course, Seat­tle and King Coun­ty and lawyers for Inter­ci­ty Tran­sit will con­tin­ue work­ing to defend the will of *their* vot­ers. I‑976 failed over­whelm­ing­ly in King Coun­ty. It also failed in five oth­er coun­ties, includ­ing Thurston Coun­ty, home to Inter­ci­ty Tran­sit, one of the oth­er plain­tiffs in the case.

No coun­ty vot­ed more strong­ly against I‑976 than San Juan Coun­ty, where 71% of vot­ers emphat­i­cal­ly reject­ed the mea­sure. Offi­cials there are eager to sup­port the law­suit, as they should be. On Novem­ber 18th, the San Juan Coun­ty Com­mis­sion met and autho­rized Coun­ty Pros­e­cut­ing Attor­ney Randy Gay­lord to file an ami­cus brief in the Garfield Coun­ty case sup­port­ing the plain­tiffs.

Adjacent posts

  • Donate now to support The Cascadia Advocate


    Thank you for read­ing The Cas­ca­dia Advo­cate, the North­west Pro­gres­sive Insti­tute’s jour­nal of world, nation­al, and local pol­i­tics.

    Found­ed in March of 2004, The Cas­ca­dia Advo­cate has been help­ing peo­ple through­out the Pacif­ic North­west and beyond make sense of cur­rent events with rig­or­ous analy­sis and thought-pro­vok­ing com­men­tary for more than fif­teen years. The Cas­ca­dia Advo­cate is fund­ed by read­ers like you: we have nev­er accept­ed adver­tis­ing or place­ments of paid con­tent.

    And we’d like it to stay that way.

    Help us keep The Cas­ca­dia Advo­cate edi­to­ri­al­ly inde­pen­dent and freely avail­able by becom­ing a mem­ber of the North­west Pro­gres­sive Insti­tute today. Or make a dona­tion to sus­tain our essen­tial research and advo­ca­cy jour­nal­ism.

    Your con­tri­bu­tion will allow us to con­tin­ue bring­ing you fea­tures like Last Week In Con­gress, live cov­er­age of events like Net­roots Nation or the Demo­c­ra­t­ic Nation­al Con­ven­tion, and reviews of books and doc­u­men­tary films.

    Become an NPI mem­ber Make a one-time dona­tion

3 Comments

  1. Please put me on your mail­ing list, thanks!

    # by Patricia St. August :: December 1st, 2019 at 12:45 PM
  2. Whoa! Vic­to­ry? Not so fast, tiger!

    Wash­ing­ton State Attor­ney Gen­er­al Bob Fer­gu­son has filed a motion to over­turn the injunc­tion against I‑976.

    # by Cobia :: December 3rd, 2019 at 7:39 AM
    • A motion that was denied. The injunc­tion stands; I‑976 will not take effect tomor­row.

      # by Andrew Villeneuve :: December 4th, 2019 at 11:09 PM

Post a Comment

By submitting a comment using the form below, you acknowledge that you understand and accept the terms of the Northwest Progressive Institute's User Agreement, and you agree to abide by our Commenting Guidelines. We will not publish or share your email address. See our Privacy Promise for more information. Your comment must be submitted with a name and email address as noted below. *

*
*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>