We lost this battle, but I’m hopeful we’ll win the war with voters approving I-1185 in November

by | Aug 27, 2012

 On Friday in Thurston County Superior Court, I was the attorney in the lawsuit called “Eyman v Marty Brown, OFM.”  After Judge Dixon issued his ruling and during a brief lull while paperwork was being finalized, I said to Judge Dixon “I just want to say that this was a nerve-racking, challenging, and enormously enjoyable experience.”  With a smile, he replied:  “Thank you for saying so, Mr. Eyman.”  And so ended my legal challenge to OFM’s I-1185 Fiscal Impact Statement. 
 
     For details, here’s a Spokesman Review news story about it:  Court denies Eyman’s challenge to I-1185 fiscal impact study — http://theolympiareport.com/court-denies-eymans-challenge-to-i-1185-financial-impact-study/
 
     Here are a few observations:
 
 
*   We lost this battle, but I’m hopeful we’ll win the war with voters approving I-1185 in November.
 
*    It was important to make clear what I-1185 requires (which I-960 required and I-1053 also required).  As I wrote in my sworn affidavit:  “The only way a fee can be imposed or increased, the Legislature must introduce a specific bill that proposes a specific increase so that the OFM can do, as the law requires, a 10-year cost projection on it (which they can only do if the increase is specific).”  Even though this was required by I-960 and I-1053, the Legislature has, on several occasions in recent years, delegated fee-raising authority to state agencies which is totally contrary to what I-960 and I-1053 required.  As a result, if voters approve I-1185, the Legislature will have to revote on these increases but we hope, this time, they will pass them correctly by following the clear procedure mandated by the voters.  For more on this, please read my reply brief:  http://www.voterswantmorechoices.com/pdf/1185writofmotion.pdf
 
*    I have no regrets for doing the legal challenge and no regrets doing it myself (based on the judge’s ruling, it seems the system is rigged where no one can successfully challenge a fiscal impact statement for an initiative).  An attorney would have charged thousands of dollars; I lost the case for free.  🙂
 
*    The voters understand this issue backwards and forwards because they’ve voted on it and approved it so many times, so I don’t think there’s a big negative fallout for OFM’s hysterical and inaccurate Fiscal Impact Statement being in the voters pamphlet – I think most voters are rightly skeptical about what the government says about our initiatives.
 
*    It’s Monday so I’m at the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Florida as a guest of one of the delegates.  I’m a hardcore political junkie and activist so for me, it’s like being at Woodstock.
 
      When it comes to compensation for our political efforts, we only earn what our supporters are willing to give.  Please help us keep fighting.