BREAKING: Court strikes down Eyman’s I-747!

King County Superior Court Judge Mary Robert’s has tossed out Tim Eyman’s 2001 property tax initiative, I-747, ruling it unconstitutionally deceptive.

I-747 had been Timmy’s most wide-reaching victory, generally limiting increases in state and local property tax revenues to one percent a year… well below the rate of inflation. The fiscal impact has been catastrophic, particularly for rural taxing districts, with many now on the verge of insolvency.

Prior to 2000, local property increases were generally capped at six percent. In November of that year voter’s passed Eyman’s I-722, which amongst other things lowered that cap to two percent a year. I-722 was immediately challenged, and on November 30, 2000, the Thurston County Superior Court ordered a preliminary injunction barring implementation and enforcement.

In a concise, six-page decision, Judge Robert’s explains what happened next:

On January 11, 2001, after I-722’s implementation was halted, I-747 was filed with the secretary of state. By its language, I-747 sought to amend I-722, by decreasing the cap on property taxes from two percent to one percent, unless the voters approved a higher cap.

Amendatory legislation such as I-747 is subject to article II, section 37 of the state constitution, which requires that,

No act shall ever be revised or amended by mere reference to its title, but the act revised or the section amended shall be set forth at full length.

Wash. Const. art. 2,

Comments

  1. 6

    wayne spews:

    BIAW Supreme Court Justice James Johnson acted as Timmy’s attorney on a number of his initiatives. So many have been thrown out as unconstitutional, his competence is called into question. Nevertheless, if he was involved in drafting I-747, he will likely have to recuse himself from hearing the appeal, making it more likely Judge Roberts’ ruling will be upheld.

  2. 7

    REP Pat Kennedy [D-Bitchslap the Black Security Guard At LAX] spews:

    “This is great news, as all taxes are good and need to be higher to “redistribute” other’s wealth.” Karl Marx and Hillary Clinton

  3. 9

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    8

    If I were worried about being taxed out of my burrow, Tim Eyman is the LAST person I would hire to write an initiative to protect my burrow!

    His track record speaks for itself.

    Asking Tim Eyman to write an initiative to protect your bank account from the tax man is like asking a used car salesman to remove your appendix.

  4. 12

    Animal Control Officer spews:

    Mr. Silly Guy, our department will pay you $75 if you get your machine to fly and you drop that damned rabbit into the ocean.

  5. 13

    BushWentAWOL spews:

    Anytime a rightie gets his ass kicked it’s a good day. The broader point here is that the decision proves righties are liars, deceivers and no-goodnicks!

    If the right ever just had to sell their ideas using honesty rather than trickery, they’d looooose every time. Their character is so corrupt, it never occurs to them to be honest and consequently, they looooose.

    HE HE!

  6. 14

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    Hey sillyguy, I’ll pay you $77.50 if you get your ornithopter to fly and drop that fascist pig animal control officer into a sewage treatment pond.

  7. 15

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    11

    Libliar — do you have a problem with the PEOPLE deciding how much to tax themselves for local government?

  8. 16

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    I would guess the decision won’t be retroactive, that is, the judge won’t allow counties and cities to demand that taxpayers pay the back taxes they would have collected but for I-747.

    Anyone can put a properly drafted initiative on the ballot, and if the PEOPLE want to reduce the property tax limit from 6% to 1% and starve local governments, it will pass.

    However, I would suggest those who want to limit property taxes get someone besides Timmy to handle the initiative for them. In other words, get someone COMPETENT.

  9. 17

    Libertarian spews:

    Roger, who’s a liar? All I did was make a comment.

    What part of the First Ammendment do you not like?

  10. 18

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    It occurs to me the idiots who donate to Eyman’s salary fund would serve themselves better if they spent that money on a good lawyer instead.

  11. 19

    proud leftist spews:

    Mystified @ 8
    The judge struck down the initiative as failing to comply with a state constitutional provision for how laws may be amended. You likely don’t know this, but the state constitution trumps initiatives in the hierarchy of our state’s laws. Imagine that. The judge’s opinion does not pass on the wisdom of the public policy embedded in I-747. The judge simply says that if Timmy wants to change the law, he needs to follow the procedural rules for doing so. I’m sure for someone like you that would seem like an overly onerous requirement, but, fortunately, you don’t make the rules.

  12. 20

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    17

    Response to first question: Yeah, you’re a liar. The judge’s ruling doesn’t mean “individuals don’t matter.” It only means property taxes can go up 6% instead of 1%.

    Response to second question: Who’s against the First Amendment? Not me! I didn’t say you can’t lie. I merely observed that you’re lying.

  13. 22

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    sillyguy — how are the flying experiments coming along? hoo hee haw haaa har de har har har har (raucous rabbit laughter in background)

  14. 23

    Over Taxed spews:

    High electric bill, High gas bill, High cable bill, High phone bill, High food bill, Already high property taxes…Stagnant wages, reduced health insurance coverage… My “wealth” is being redistributed all right, to greedy corporations and mismanaged government. I guess I’ll have to quit saving for retirement.

  15. 25

    ArtFart spews:

    Re: the “Update item….Let’s try and remember this (and point it out to others) when Johnson and McKenna are up for re-election.

  16. 26

    Another TJ spews:

    We need to get Roger Rabbit and Over Taxed into a conversation. They can re-enact the “Airplane” cockpit sequence.

    As for the ruling, it’s common sense. If I-747 claimed to change I-722, but I-722 did not exist, then I-747 cannot stand. Eyman should have waited after the injunction was issued in November 2000 and especially after the February 2001 Superior Court ruling, but Eyman had to run another initiative to keep the income flowing.

    Someone with a little time on his or her hands could have a little fun finding all the times Eyman has been quoted in news reports claiming that “This initiative has been carefully worded, and we’re confident of its constitutionality” or something very close to this, only to have that initiative struck down by the courts.

  17. 27

    D Huygens spews:

    It is amazing how facts and laws so often get in the way of the fantasy world today’s Republicans try to create – let’s fix transportation while cutting the gas tax! Let’s pour money into the Iraq rathole while cutting the estate tax! Pure lunacy, but we all have to live in this fouled sandbox they’ve created.

  18. 28

    Richard Pope spews:

    27.3% TAX INCREASE AUTHORIZED WITHOUT A PUBLIC VOTE FOR ALL GOVERNMENT ENTITIES!

    That’s what I get from everything. Under the law prior to I-722, local governments could increase property taxes by 6% a year without a public vote. Under I-747, that was reduced to a 1% per year limit effective December 2001. Under all versions of the law, government could forego a tax increase and use their banked tax increase authority in a later year.

    1.01 to the fifth power is 1.0510100501

    1.06 to the fifth power is 1.3382255776

    The resulting fraction is 1.2732757193641225676800975815902

    So basically this means that all governments will be able to increase their property taxes by at least 27.3% without a vote of the people, based on what I-747 limited them to doing, compared with what they were allowed to do under prior law.

    And if Judge Mary Roberts is really nice, she may even allow local governments the ability to get back taxes — i.e. the extra amount they could have collected in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006, but didn’t assess due to the apparent limits imposed by I-747.

  19. 29

    For the Clueless spews:

    I’ll never forget the time the county council got back at McKenna for I-747 by yanking his lollipop fund money.

    It was hilarious. There was bi-partisan support on that one!

  20. 30

    JDB spews:

    John Carlson has long said that the secret to a good intiative is keeping it simple, and having a good lawyer review it. Apparently Tim Eyman has never learned this.

  21. 31

    wayne spews:

    McKenna is charged with defending the initiative as AG so there is no conflict of interest due to his co-authorship of the statute. BIAW Justice Johnson should definitely recuse himself if he helped write it.

  22. 32

    Richard Pope spews:

    If Eyman has to do this all over again, he might as well make things DAMNED EFFECTIVE.

    I would suggest the following for an initiative to file in 2007, which could only affect property taxes starting in 2008:

    1. The dollar amount of 2008 property taxes shall be 107% of the dollar amount levied in 2001, plus any voter approved increases since 2001, MINUS an adjustment amount as figured in Paragraph 2

    2. The adjustment amount shall be the amount (if any) by which the dollar amount of 2007 property taxes exceed (106% of the dollar amount levied in 2001 plus any voter approved increases since 2001)

    3. Property taxes levied in 2009 shall be equal to the dollar amount calculated in Paragraph 1, unless a higher dollar amount is approved by the voters in a general election

    4. Property taxes levied in 2010 and later years shall be equal to the dollar amount levied in the previous calendar year, unless a higher dollar amount is approved by the voters in a general election

    5. All elections to increase the dollar amount of property taxes shall be held on the November general election date only

    To avoid the so-called constitutional problem, simply append a copy of the full text of every single law passed on the subject since Washington became a state, rather than merely rely upon act numbers. This will greatly increase the cost of printing the voter pamphlet (which will means dozens of pages of normal point type), and make the text on the reverse of the petition perhaps 0.5 to 1.0 points, so that voters won’t even be able to read the fine print on the other side.

  23. 33

    LeftTurn spews:

    I have a better idea Pope-A-Dope, act like a fucking conservative for once and stop wasting taxpayer money with all these referendums. Elect leaders that represent your point of view. If your side loooooses, get over it or fucking move someplace where they think like you do (Old USSR perhaps?).

    I am going to contact all my state representatives and ask them to start legislation to stop this madness once and for all. No more referendum or initiatives. Period!

  24. 34

    BushWentAWOL spews:

    By the way, I don’t like paying taxes to send troops to Iraq. Think we can get THAT tax cut?

  25. 35

    skagit spews:

    #23 Overtaxed

    I’m with you. I consider myself very liberal but I can’t afford to pay for everybody. Not all property owners are wealthy. Some of us have been around for a while, purchased our homes when they were cheaper, and will likely get taxed out of our homes. Thanks very much.

    The rich get richer and now they will even be able to invest in second, third and fourth homes which they will rent back to us at inflated rent prices. Maybe tent city has an opening . . .

  26. 36

    skagit spews:

    BTW, I’m not an Eyman fan. But, the property tax issue is complex and needs to be reconsidered somehow.

  27. 37

    Mark The Redneck Kennedy spews:

    Uh huh… usual librul tripe… the voters are stoopid when we tell gummint to keep their greedy fucking hands out of our wallets. This was a stoopid technicality… she really had to work to find a way to make this judgement.

    This is why it’s so important to elect grown-ups as judges. This is a slap in the face of voters.

    Let’s hope SSC has adults on duty when this is heard.

  28. 38

    sillyguy spews:

    10

    Your jpg is merely a reflection of you, your thoughts, your delusions, and your politics. You need to ferment more carrots for your diet so you can appreciate life and you also need visit the Wizard of Oz to get a brain that is not delusional.

  29. 39

    sillyguy spews:

    10

    Roger:

    If you care to discuss the facts, please do so, otherwise; your ignorant ranting and delusions about being a rabbit only reflect adversely on any perception that your intelligence is more than a rabbit.

  30. 40

    rightwinger spews:

    Typical lib logic. The voters thought 2% was too high and voted to lower it to 1%, but they wouldn’t have believed 6% was too high. Liberalism is a mental disorder.

  31. 41

    eponymous coward spews:

    Wow, Richard, you truly are insane. Apparently you believe the state and local governments are the only entities in the known universe immune to the effects of inflation.

    As for complaining about property taxes…cry me a river. There’s an awful lot of people who’d be THRILLED to own property that can be taxed, because it would mean they had something of value. There are a huge number of people in this country with net worths below 50,000- even negative if you toss in stuff like student loans and credit card debt.

    The fact is there are exemptions/deferments for senior citizen property taxes… and to be honest, these sorts of taxes are exactly the ones that tax wealth as opposed to penali. Last I checked, poor people don’t live in megamansions in Medina, but they DO pay

    Ask a Californian the kind of mess legislating by initiative and idiotarian hijinks with property taxes (Prop. 13) has left them in.

  32. 42

    Mark The Redneck Kennedy spews:

    Hey coward…. just wondering… are you one of the people in the bottom half who gets a free ride at the expense of The Producers?

    Here’s an idea: Get a fucking education. Get a job. Show up every fucking day for 4 decades or so. Spend less than you make and invest the difference.

    Look, if you want what I’ve got, do what I do. If you lack the intelligence or moral character to do so, then shut the fuck up.

    I hate fucking freeloaders like you…

  33. 43

    proud leftist spews:

    37
    Violating the state constitution is not a “technicality.” You buttfucks have no respect for the rule of law.

  34. 44

    Tree Frog Farmer spews:

    Hitching your political hopes to a dimbulb like Timmyboy is as foolish as paying two million dollars for attorneys so incompetent as to introduce only evidence that contradicts their own thesis. Oh, that’s right, you’ve already done that!
    ‘Course there is another school of thought that Timmyboy is more cynical than dumb, and purposely writes defective initiatives to milk the rubes of more money.

  35. 45

    skagit spews:

    Coward . . . I think it is really too bad when people talk issues about which they know nothing. Opinions from you are a mile wide and a pixel deep.

  36. 46

    daCascadian spews:

    Mark The Redneck Kennedy >”…fucking freeloaders…”

    Well now, pot meet kettle

    “Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact….Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.” – newshog@gmail.com

  37. 48

    David Wright spews:

    While it’s difficult to argue with the technical correctness of the verdict, it would be difficult to argue that any voter might have been misled in a way that might have altered his vote. Also, the decision appears to create a nearly insurmountable barrier to revising any law via initiative.

    Presumably only the people who think property taxes should increase less than 1%/year voted for this initiative (and apparently more than 50% of the voters thought that). If a voter thinks that property taxes should increase less than 1%/year, why would knowing that property taxes are currently allowed to increase 2%/year, 6%/year, or 26%/year change that opinion?

    Furthermore, when the initiative was filed, apparently the 2%/year number was correct. Only after the initiative was filed was I-722 overturned, bringing the 6%/year number into effect. How, exactly, where the I-747 supporters supposed to respond? Should they have presciently known that I-722 would be overturned and written I-747 with that in mind? Should they have withdrawn their initiative and waited until the courts sorted out I-747? And suppose after they had filed their revised initiative, the courts or the legislature had revsied the law again? And all to add insult to injury, none of these changes by the legislature or the court address the fundamental issue of the initiative. (In this case, “should property taxes be allowed to rise at more than 1%/year?”)

    If this decision stands, it creates a mechanism whereby the legislature can effectively prevent any initiative from ever altering a law. Wait until the initiative is filed. Then, shortly before the election, make some non-material change to the text of the law it wants to alter. Then claim the initiative is invalid because it fails to accurately quote the law it tries to change.

  38. 49

    skagit spews:

    Some people think the initiative process presents more problems than it helps. While I think it has become an abused strategy . . . I’d hate to see it become ineffective or abolished.

    Is this a case of “activism” by a judge who thinks he knows better than the people?

    Finally, even if we had to go through what CA went through, I’d be willing. Some sort of fairness has got to be put back into the WA state tax code. Hey, I teach! I don’t want that but something has to be done.

    My taxes increased from $690 in 1993 to over $4000 in 2006. . . prop values have gone up, it is true. But, inflation has stayed fairly stable till recently. What the hell are they doing with all that extra money?

  39. 50

    Richard Pope spews:

    So how many LIBERALS out there think that a 6% per year, compounded annually, property tax increase is reasonable — especially without the people ever being able to vote on it?

    By the way, 6% per year, compounded annually, is a LOT MORE than what inflation has been.

    The Consumer Price Index (with 1982-84 = 100) was 154.4 in January 1996 and 198.3 in January 2006. This represents an increase of 28.4% in the 01/2006 level over the 01/1996 level.

    By contrast, increase something at 6% every year over the previous year (which is called compounded annually), and you end up with an increase of 79.1% over the original amount in 10 years — over two and a half times as fast as the rate of inflation for the last 10 years.

    Thanks to Judge Roberts, local governments can immediately increase our property taxes by 27.3% without the people voting on it (the difference between 1% compounded annually and 6% compounded annually over the last five years).

    And starting from this level — 27.3% higher than today — another 79.1% increase is possible in the next 10 years, which results in an property taxes being 128.0% higher in 10 years than they are right now, and being 308.4% higher in 20 years than they are right now.

    So basically our property taxes can now more than quadruple in the next 20 years. By contrast, the inflation index (CPI) is just under twice what it was 24 years ago.

  40. 51

    Misty spews:

    I do hope that everyone in WA reads this blog, so they can be very clear that Democrats are very much in favor of raising property taxes, the more the better. And so they can see that you are celebrating that taxpayer-approved limits on increases got thrown out. Will you all please write a letter to the editor and maybe take out some TV and radio ads explaining the Democrats’ delight at higher property taxes?? I’m sure that the citizens would be happy to know exactly where you stand. Sure makes our job easier on the right.

  41. 52

    Richard Pope spews:

    If this decision stands, it creates a mechanism whereby the legislature can effectively prevent any initiative from ever altering a law. Wait until the initiative is filed. Then, shortly before the election, make some non-material change to the text of the law it wants to alter. Then claim the initiative is invalid because it fails to accurately quote the law it tries to change.

    Commentby David Wright— 6/13/06@ 6:42 pm

    YOU ARE BRILLIANT! Are you an attorney? If so, you might just qualify for a judicial appointment by Governor Gregoire. I am surprised that no one has ever thought of doing this before.

  42. 53

    howcanyoubePROUDtobeanASS spews:

    Yup, heard the good news earlier. -Commentby Mount Olympus Hiker— 6/13/06@ 1:55 pm

    Good good good GOOD news! =). -Commentby Gerald— 6/13/06@ 2:01 pm

    Anytime a rightie gets his ass kicked it’s a good day. The broader point here is that the decision proves righties are liars, deceivers and no-goodnicks!

    If the right ever just had to sell their ideas using honesty rather than trickery, they’d looooose every time. Their character is so corrupt, it never occurs to them to be honest and consequently, they looooose.

    HE HE! -Commentby BushWentAWOL— 6/13/06@ 3:19 pm

    Interesting that the left takes glee in screwing their fellow citizens. One more example of how liberals a D’RATS only stand against things, never for them and certainly never with an idea.

    And by the way, stop with the moronic ‘HE HE’.. no matter what your political stripe is, you sound like a drunk, skinny old whore or a mindless 3 yr old. Try a manly HAH! or an eye rolling ‘{snicker}’, a great big ‘GAFFAW’ or a plain old ‘LMAO’, but ‘HE HE’ is just plain creepy from what presumably are adults.

  43. 54

    skagit spews:

    Interesting that you think dems are all celebrating. Where’s the proof of that? I’m a liberal/progressive (whatever in ‘ell we call ourselves now) and I’m not celebrating. That is precisely why American government, politics and society is in such third-world chaos! Think about the issues and make sense!

    Try to use your brain to think for a change.

  44. 55

    Misdeed spews:

    I do hope that everyone in WA reads this blog, so they can be very clear that Republicans are very much in favor of raising deficits and making future generations pay for our fiscal irresponsability, the more fiscally irresponsible the better. And so they can see that Republicans are denouncing that constitutionally invalid initiatives designed to put our kids into massive debt got thrown out. Will you all please write a letter to the editor and maybe take out some TV and radio ads explaining the Republicans’ delight at higher debt and higher taxes on future generations so that we can avoid paying for what we use? I’m sure that the citizens would be happy to know exactly where the Republicans stand. Sure makes our job easier on the left.

  45. 57

    skagit spews:

    Tim Eyman screwed himself over by taking on everything having to do with taxes and having no ability to differentiate campaigns. He became a one-note johnny and people either loved the tune or hated it and look where we’ve ended up. No thoughtful ability to solve problems at all. Geez!

  46. 58

    HowcanyouBEPROUDtobeaCON spews:

    Interesting that the right takes glee in screwing their children and grandchildren. One more example of how conservatives and R’CONS only stand against fiscal responsibility, never for them and certainly never with an idea other than irresponsible greed and deficits.

  47. 59

    sgmmac spews:

    I like my house and I don’t want to lose it because of an idiot judge in Seattle. I will squeal with delight when her property taxes shoot through the roof.

    My property taxes go up every year. Every year they raise the value my house by thousands. Inflation hasn’t risen 6% every year, so why the hell should taxes raise by that amount?
    We need to throw out every damn tax and spend Democrat in our legislature this November.

  48. 60

    sillyguy spews:

    Richard

    You are only leasing your property from the county. To save paperwork costs the county should hold all of the deeds to all private lands.

  49. 61

    Democracy - love it or leave it spews:

    “Inflation hasn’t risen 6% every year, so why the hell should taxes raise by that amount?”

    Indeed! And why should it artificially be capped at 1%?

    Seems that is why we vote for representatives. And why if you do not like the way your representative votes, you can always hire a van and move to Kansas.

    P.S. Take your children with you. We can’t afford more freeloaders.

  50. 62

    skagit spews:

    “Democracy” is no liberal because we don’t talk like that. “Democracy” is just as bad as the right-wing in that “Democracy” is a one-note.

  51. 63

    Democracy - love it or leave it spews:

    Hi, I am skagit! Look at me! I am the only real liberal! All liberals are luke-warm toast like me! I play a cocaphony of notes! All of them as luke warm as the last! Te He!

  52. 64

    skagit spews:

    Yeah, it is called “thinking.” Most of us true liberals are able to do it. You might need a refresher course. Te He aw shit!

  53. 65

    pbj1 spews:

    And yet he still have passed way more intiatives than Goldstein. Oh that’s right. Goldstein couldn’t even get an initiative on the ballot. Nothing like a jealous nut from the nut gallery taking shots at someone who actually tries to make a difference.

  54. 66

    sgmmac spews:

    Democracy – love it or leave it,

    I don’t happen to be a “freeloader,” nor have I EVER used any of the fucking social services that local, state and federal governments like to give away.

    I have paid taxes for over 35 years and I served my country in the military for 30 years/

    My name isn’t Dorothy – it’s Dana and I don’t like fucking Kansas either.

    And you can believe that I won’t be voting for any tax and spend irresponsible idiot. I recently voted to raise my property taxes for a school bond, it may just be the fucking time too!

    Have a nice night!

  55. 68

    Misty spews:

    So, misdeed, I’ll be looking for that letter to the editor describing you and your fellow Dems’ utter delight at higher property taxes being just around the bend for the masses.

  56. 69

    Democracy - love it or leave it spews:

    “nor have I EVER used any of the fucking social services that local, state and federal governments like to give away.”

    Never use the streets or Highways? Hospitals? Water Supply? etc..

    Good to know, Dana. A fucking liar like you behind the wheel would be a real danger to the honest public.

  57. 70

    Democracy - love it or leave it spews:

    People like sgmmac are exactly why initiatives can be dangerous. She is so completely deluded about Democracy and social contracts and her CONSTANT DEPENDANCY on them, that she thinks she doesn’t having anything to do with them.

    She is the poster child for “FREELOADER”. And she is too stupid to realize it.

  58. 71

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    42

    “I hate fucking freeloaders like you…” Commentby Mark The Redneck Kennedy— 6/13/06@ 5:57 pm

    You’re freeloading on this web site … you still owe Goldy $100.

  59. 74

    skagit spews:

    And you are the poster child for all the republican wins . . . my god, act like you have some intelligence at least. You make us all look bad!

  60. 75

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    59

    “We need to throw out every damn tax and spend Democrat in our legislature this November.” Commentby sgmmac— 6/13/06@ 7:43 pm

    That’s pretty global, Mac. Will you settle for throwing out one judge?

  61. 76

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    66

    “I don’t happen to be a “freeloader,” nor have I EVER used any of the fucking social services that local, state and federal governments like to give away.”

    I’m glad you were never an abused child, Mac. Truly. I am.

  62. 77

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    70

    Oh, I wouldn’t call Mac a “freeloader” — unless she’s lying about her military service, and I don’t think she is. Trust me on this, there’s no freeloading in the Army, you WORK for a living in that occupation. Unless you’re an officer.

  63. 78

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    70 (continued)

    Like Bush, for example. Now there’s a FREELOADER. Got the pilot training, collected the pay, calls himself a veteran — but didn’t show up for duty.

  64. 79

    skagit spews:

    And still doesn’t show up for duty! Takes more vacations than a tour-boat operator! He looks more like a beach bum than a pres!

  65. 80

    howcanyoubePROUDtobeanASS spews:

    Only an asshole liberal would consider Robin Hood an altruistic hero, when if fact he was a common THIEF “redistributing” what he only stole, never earned… today, he’d be a D’RAT.

  66. 82

    Proud To Be An Ass spews:

    @80: Save it. Tell me the bedtime stories about Fisk & Gould. They are my favorites.

    Conservative (noun, old stupid): One who enacts law to legalize theft.

  67. 83

    Liberal Police spews:

    And still doesn’t show up for duty! Takes more vacations than a tour-boat operator! He looks more like a beach bum than a pres!

    Commentby skagit— 6/13/06@ 9:31 pm

    Grow up, skagit! This is post is like a 5 year old child!

    Think! You can do better than this rubbish!

  68. 84

    RennDawg spews:

    Never mind that people like my Grandparents may no longer afford the property taxes on there house next year. never mind that hard working families are able to keep more of what they earn. Sticking it to Eyman that is what is important.

  69. 85

    Bush Economy spews:

    “Never mind that people like my Grandparents may no longer afford the property taxes on there house next year. never mind that hard working families are able to keep more of what they earn. ”

    Yeah, I REALLY suck!

  70. 86

    sgmmac spews:

    I’ve never used a civilian hospital, I pay for my water – very high rates, I might add, and let’s not talk about the damn gas taxes, I would rather forget them!

  71. 88

    sgmmac spews:

    Roger, I am glad I wasn’t either. I was an abused wife which probably explains why I am divorced and you say I need to get laid.

    I think I probably just need to beat on something or someone for a long while to release some anger and lower my blood pressure.

    It does seem that the daily news gets my temper on fire. Last week, it was some idiot in the VA who decided to take home a laptop with over 26 million names on it. I’m waiting for a letter, but it seems the VA can’t even afford to notify anyone.

  72. 91

    skagit spews:

    Oh teach me oh wise liberal police . . . but first see if you can clean up your grammar so that I can understand what you say – okay? BTW, your typical of police – low IQ. That’s why they need to bully – goes with the job!

  73. 92

    George W. Bush spews:

    I am tired of vetrenarian’s whining. We are fighting a war on terroristism. And our strategery does nto include holding Veterinian’s hands. The free market will take care of you.

    You are either with us, or you are with the suiciders. And we support the soldiers to fight and die for the USA, but anymore is just not a thing we do.

    Buy oil stocks if you need health care.

  74. 93

    Liberal Police spews:

    “but first see if you can clean up your grammar so that I can understand what you say”

    I Think you meant: “but first see if you can clean up your grammar so that I can understand what you are saying

    Common mistake for an idiot

  75. 94

    Rick spews:

    Do you own a house? I can’t believe anyone would be happy about this. I know people who stand to lose their property because of increased property taxes. Taxation on unearned revenue is unfair an regressive for people who purchased houses years ago.

    You people amaze me.

  76. 95

    Bush\'s \"tax cuts\" resulting in increased Local taxes on the middle class spews:

    “Do you own a house? I can’t believe anyone would be happy about this. I know people who stand to lose their property because of increased property taxes. Taxation on unearned revenue is unfair an regressive for people who purchased houses years ago.”

    Yeah, I REALLY, REALLY SUCK!!!

  77. 96

    skagit spews:

    “Common mistake for an idiot”
    Commentby Liberal Police

    Well, gotta admit, you should know! Is there anything else on which you’re an expert? Besides bullying and idiots?

  78. 97

    Observer spews:

    Yeah-

    I mean, NO! Of course they don’t own houses. Nor have they any kids (gay, abortion, ugly, really wierd or all of the above). Alhough the older Goly’s kid gets, the more conervative he gets.

    De Nial- a river in Egypt, or Goldy’s increasing state of mind.

    I hope you’re not droiving home tonight, Davidddd, I mean my name is HS, I mean HA, I mean I didn’t mean you occifer.

  79. 98

    Liberal Police spews:

    “Well, gotta admit, you should know! Is there anything else on which you’re an expert? Besides bullying and idiots?”

    Well, I know you are not a bully, but you are truly an idiot. And a complete hypocrite.

  80. 99

    Observer\'s Mother spews:

    Observer, how many times have I told you not to post while masturbating to the New Republic.

    Now, I am going to observe your ass taking washing those soiled sheets!

    Stupid, lazy fucking freeloading moron! Get a Goddamn job and leave your parents in peace!

  81. 101

    Observer spews:

    Mother AKA JAxoff, RR, or womever-

    Rigghhhhht.

    Are your kids asleep, or are they in the park beating up Bob from Boeing?

  82. 102

    Richard Pope spews:

    I think that Mayor Nickels and the Seattle City Council should take full advantage of Judge Mary Roberts ruling striking down Initiative 747 and immediately raise property taxes in the City of Seattle by 27.3% (the compounded difference between 1% annually and 6% annually over the last five years) without a vote of the people.

    Worthwhile government projects that can be funded by the City of Seattle property tax increase:

    1. Tunnel to replace Alaskan Way Viaduct — i.e. the $2 to 3 billion or more of additional funding that is needed to finish the project beyond what the state allocated

    2. Extend Sound Transit light rail from downtown Seattle-ish to Northgate (all of this is within the City of Seattle) — $1 billion or more

    3. Build a state-of-the-art monorail system all throughout the City of Seattle ($2 billion for the original project, but fund it for $4 billion so a more extensive system can be built)

    4. Replace the Evergreen Point Floating Bridge (i.e. the $500 million or more that isn’t being covered by state funding)

    5. Build a brand new, practically rent-free, arena for the Seattle Sonics (at least $200 million)

  83. 104

    Richard Pope spews:

    Judge Mary Roberts’ ruling will create interesting legal battles.

    A given section of the RCW is often the result of 5, 10, 15, 20 or more different acts of the legislature amending the law. For example, RCW 84.52.010, an important law regarding levying property taxes, is the product of about 24 different acts which have been adopted over the last 113 years, to establish and amend its provisions:

    2005 c 122 § 2. Prior: 2004 c 129 § 21; 2004 c 80 § 3; 2003 c 83 § 310; prior: 2002 c 248 § 15; 2002 c 88 § 7; 1995 2nd sp.s. c 13 § 4; 1995 c 99 § 2; 1994 c 124 § 36; 1993 c 337 § 4; 1990 c 234 § 4; 1988 c 274 § 7; 1987 c 255 § 1; 1973 1st ex.s. c 195 § 101; 1973 1st ex.s. c 195 § 146; 1971 ex.s. c 243 § 6; 1970 ex.s. c 92 § 4; 1961 c 15 § 84.52.010; prior: 1947 c 270 § 1; 1925 ex.s. c 130 § 74; Rem. Supp. 1947 § 11235; prior: 1920 ex.s. c 3 § 1; 1897 c 71 § 62; 1893 c 124 § 63

    So, if you want to invalidate all property taxes in the State of Washington, you can start by going to the law library, and dusting off the old volumes that contain the text of each year’s legislative acts (i.e. session laws).

    Look at every single one of the 24 session laws upon which RCW 84.52.010 is based, and examine it carefully.

    First of all, make sure that the existing law is accurately quoted each time it is amended. And also that the amendment makes clear which text is being added and which text is being deleted. If not, you have a violation of Wash. Const. art. 2, § 37 (the same basis that Judge Roberts struck down I-747), which provides:

    “No act shall ever be revised or amended by mere reference to its title, but the act revised or the section amended shall be set forth at full length.”

    Second, make sure that the title of each session law accurately reflects the overall subject of the session law (i.e. there are usually numerous sections of the RCW being created, amended, or repealed), and that the session law in question does not embrace more than one subject.

    If not, you have a violation of the single subject rule in Wash. Const. art. 2, § 19 (the same basis that the state Supreme Court struck down I-722) which provides:

    “No bill shall embrace more than one subject, and that shall be expressed in the title.”

    So if any of the numerous session laws upon which a given section of the RCW is based can be invalidated under either Wash. Const. art. 2, § 19 or Wash. Const. art. 2, § 37, then the entire RCW section is invalid with respect to any changes after that point in time — at least according to Judge Roberts’ logic.

    Once you do something unconstitutional, you break the entire chain. You can’t amend the RCW section any further after something is done unconstitutionally to change it, since it is unconstitutional to use the unconstitutionally changed language in legislation amending the RCW section.

  84. 105

    LeftTurn spews:

    So Pope proves he’s not a conservative. Misty proves she doesn’t care about “rule of law” and the rest of the knuckle-draggers on the right prove your mother and father should not be brother and sister. A very telling thread indeed.

  85. 106

    rhp6033 spews:

    Look, its simple. Eyeman put forth a badly drafted initiative capping property taxes at 2% (not even keeping up with inflation). He then put forth another initiative amending the first one, capping it at 1%. But even while he was drafting the new initiative, it was clear the first one wouldn’t stand up in court. So he made a major mistake by “amending” the first one, rather than “repealing” it and replacing it with a new one. I guess he did it because he didn’t want to admit he screwed upon the first one, while it was still being appealed in the court systems. Too bad for him, he ended up losing both ones. But I guess he made out well for himself, getting paid by his sponsors for two initiatives rather than just one.

    But don’t be decieved by Richard Pope’s discussion, and that of others, which argued that the decision “raises” property taxes. It does nothing of the kind. For the time being, it puts property tax issues back into the hands of the elected officials who were originally supposed to make these decisions in the first place. Making tax policy by initiative is stupid, its like trying to trim a sirloin steak with a hammer.

  86. 107

    Richard Pope spews:

    The only way you can be safe with initiatives under Judge Mary Roberts’ ruling is to REPEAL every section of the RCW that you want to have “amended”. Then adopt NEW sections to replace the “repealed” sections — even if you only want to change one word in an existing section.

    Otherwise, the legislature can simply amend one word in an existing RCW section that the initiative seeks to AMEND — and that section of the initiative has to be tossed since the language of the existing RCW section is not accurately stated.

  87. 108

    Kyle Broflovski spews:

    I’m sorry, but what the heck do we elect representatives for? If they’re not spending your money wisely, throw them out!

    I just don’t see the logic in thinking that if your electeds are spending money foolishly that cutting taxes ‘forces’ them to spend more wisely. It hasn’t happened yet.

    Anyway, this whole discussion is meaningless as Timmy will just get bankrolled for ‘son of 747′ and get rates down to 1%.

    Also, for those folks complaining about their property tax bill, what is the PERCENTAGE of tax on your declared value? I bet that figure hasn’t changed much, so I don’t see how these initiatives will help that much over time, given real estate inflation.

  88. 109

    Daddy Love spews:

    Richard Pope

    Wrong. What you mean is that someone could make an argument to the effect you propose, not that any judge would so rule. The case at hand was quite clear–the second initiative was BY DESIGN totally dependent on the first, which was in danger of being invalidated (which eventually it was). Your slippery slope is one down which our judges are damned unlikely to go.

    But if you don’t like property taxes (and I for one am happy to pay mine), elect representatives who will reduce them.