State to appeal ruling against Eyman's I-776

The state Attorney General's Office will appeal the King County Superior Court ruling last month that found Initiative 776 unconstitutional.

The $30 car-tab measure, passed by voters in November, was tossed out by Judge Mary Yu, who said it violated state law limiting initiatives to one subject. She found I-776 not only limited license tabs to $30 but also called for a revote on Sound Transit's light-rail system.

It was the third time in four years that an initiative sponsored by anti-tax advocate Tim Eyman has been ruled unconstitutional for pertaining to more than one subject.

Eyman's fourth initiative, I-747, passed by voters in 2001, is in effect and has not been challenged. It limits property-tax increases not approved by voters to 1 percent each year.

In announcing the appeal, Attorney General Christine Gregoire said Yu's ruling raised issues that have never been addressed by the state Supreme Court.

While Yu acknowledged that a revote on light rail was not mandated in the initiative, she said the fact voters might have been confused into thinking it did mean I-776 violated the single-subject rule.

The Attorney General's Office is required by law to defend laws passed by voters.

In defending the initiative before Yu, the state's attorney, Jim Pharris, argued the measure did not violate that law because a revote was not legally binding. The Supreme Court has never addressed the issue of whether nonbinding language in a ballot measure can constitute a second subject prohibited by the Washington constitution, Gregoire said.

"We hope the court can provide further clarification on what constitutes a second subject," Gregoire said. "This would provide valuable guidance for those who draft future initiatives, and hopefully reduce the number of expensive lawsuits arising from disputes over the wording of ballot measures."

Yu also found I-776 violated state law because it impaired a contractual relationship between King County and the owners of county-issued bonds, which were backed by a $15 vehicle-license fee that would have been eliminated under the initiative. She said the bonds constituted a legally protected contract.

The state, and Eyman, argued the contract was not impaired because King County told bondholders they had other revenue to repay the bonds should I-776 become law. The Supreme Court has never considered whether bond obligations are impaired under these circumstances, Gregoire said.

Eyman said he was pleased that the attorney general is appealing Yu's decision.

"We agree with the AG that this judge made an unprecedented interpretation of the single-subject rule, essentially saying that nonbinding language constitutes a second-subject," Eyman said. As for joining the appeal, Eyman said no final decision has been made.

Courts have struck down Eyman's previous Initiatives 695 and 722 on grounds they violated the single-subject rule. I-695 called for $30 car tabs and also tried to impose a public vote on every fee and tax increase. Initiative 722 would have limited the growth of property-tax levies and also would have eliminated a variety of local fees and taxes.

Susan Gilmore: 206-464-2054 or sgilmore@seattletimes.com