Initiative 776 questions and answers

By Seattle Times staff

E-mail this article Print this article Search archive

A. If you live in King or Pierce counties, you'll save $15 on the annual vehicle-licensing fees. Initiative 776 became law last December but was immediately challenged in court. While the matter was in legal limbo, the $15 fee was collected but put into a special fund, and you'll get that back. In all, about $15 million has been held in King County and $6 million in Pierce County.

Q. When will I get my money back?

A. That's unclear. State Department of Licensing officials say it will take several weeks to refund the money because it may require some reprogramming of computers.

Q. But they'll stop collecting it now, won't they?

A. Also unclear. Part of the initiative lawsuit was sent back to King County Superior Court, and until that's resolved the state may continue to collect the fee. "If you pay too much, rest assured you'll be refunded the money," said Licensing spokesman Brad Benfield.

Q. Are just the counties losing money?

A. No. The state expects to lose about $18 million a year in truck-license fees that will now be lowered to $30 a year. The previous fees had been based on the weight of the truck and ranged from $37 to $55.

Q. Will this affect Seattle's monorail tax?

A. No. Seattle's voter-approved monorail proposition did not pass until last November, in the same election where voters approved I-776. The ballot title for I-776 was written before the monorail was a reality.

Q. How does King County use its revenue from the vehicle-license fee?

A. The $4.8 million in revenue each year goes into the capital-improvement program for roads and bridges. Starting this year, the first priority for the money was to pay debt service on bonds that are speeding up construction of projects to reduce traffic congestion. The license fee recently helped fund construction of Highlands Drive in the Issaquah Highlands and is now widening South 277th Street in the Auburn area.

Q. But didn't you say that $15 million has been collected in King County?

A. Yes. About a third of the amount goes to King County government, one-third to the city of Seattle and one-third to the county's other cities. Seattle used the money for road enhancements, specifically concrete and asphalt. But it didn't include the money in last year's or this year's budget because of uncertainties over the lawsuit.

Q. How will the county deal with the loss of these funds?

A. That will be decided by the Metropolitan King County Council as it works out details of the 2004 budget. The county can either slow its road-building program or transfer money from other areas. The unincorporated-area property tax, now used for road maintenance and construction, could be directed more toward construction, but that could mean deterioration of existing roads. Officials are talking about canceling a planned $40 million bond sale this year. That cutback would jeopardize projects such as expansion of Coal Creek Parkway and Novelty Hill Road on the Eastside, and an improved intersection of Benson Road and Carr Road near Renton.

Q. So what does this mean for Sound Transit?

A. Sound Transit charges a car-tab tax of 0.3 percent annually — or $30 per $10,000 of vehicle value — in urban areas of Snohomish, King and Pierce counties. If all this is lost, that would reduce local revenues by one-fifth. The agency believes it can keep collecting the tax and deliver planned projects, including Seattle light rail.

But the tax may well be reduced to 0.1 percent (to pay off existing bondholders) or eliminated. The first 14 miles of light rail could be built, but there would be less money to extend it to the University District and Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. Some express-bus projects would be delayed or scrapped.

Q. Will the state stop collecting the motor-vehicle tax that finances the light-rail project?

A. It has been collected this year, but there is a strong chance the state will either cut the rate or end the tax long before Sound Transit's target of 2028. This issue could be decided in court proceedings soon.

Q. Are there parts of the I-776 lawsuit still undecided?

A. The Supreme Court didn't rule on the legality of the Sound Transit motor-vehicle tax, and that could go back to King County Superior Court. Further, attorneys for the Salish Village Homeowner's Association, which intervened in the lawsuit on the state's side, have raised separate legal issues that assert Sound Transit is not legally formed. That, too, could go back to Superior Court.

Q. I thought four counties collected the vehicle-license fee? Why are we just talking about King and Pierce?

A. Snohomish and Douglas, the other two counties affected by I-776, revoked the fee after the initiative's passage.

Q. We know two of Tim Eyman's initiatives have been thrown out because they violated the state's single-subject rule. Why wasn't this one too?

A. Eyman said he had better legal advice in drafting this initiative, but the state's attorneys, who defended the initiatives in court, said the earlier measures that were found unconstitutional had more distinctive double subjects and were more susceptible to challenge.

Seattle Times staff reporters Susan Gilmore, Mike Lindblom and Keith Ervin contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2003 The Seattle Times Company