dmp
Senior Member
why?
Because in HER opinion, VOTERS DIDN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY WERE ASKING FOR!
Here's the bottom line:
It's BECAUSE of that difference she tosses out the voter-approved measure. Because instead of reducing tax increases from TWO percent, voters REALLY reduced it from SIX percent.
Judge Mary Roberts? You're an idiot.
Because in HER opinion, VOTERS DIDN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY WERE ASKING FOR!
http://www.soundpolitics.com/archives/006344.html
I'm confused by the reference to the State Supreme Court. The linked ruling was issued by King County Superior Court Judge Mary Roberts.
I should let the legal minds weigh in here, but it appears that the main argument is that the text of the initiative (which had to have been reviewed by the Code Reviser and AG's office before it went to the voters) did not contain the entire text of the statute that was to be amended, so voters would have been misled that they were changing the cap on property tax increases from 2% to 1% when in fact the previously approved reduction from 6% to 2% had been recently voided by the courts and the reduction was from 6% to 1%. In the grand scheme of things, our state courts seem to believe that it's impermissible to omit inconsequential information from a ballot measure to lower taxes even if the end result is clear, but it's fine and dandy to conceal as much criticial information that one wants to conceal when the goal is to raise taxes.
Here's the bottom line:
Roberts said that while voters believed they were lowering the limit on property tax increases from 2 percent to 1 percent, they were really lowering it from 6 percent to 1 percent.
It's BECAUSE of that difference she tosses out the voter-approved measure. Because instead of reducing tax increases from TWO percent, voters REALLY reduced it from SIX percent.
Judge Mary Roberts? You're an idiot.