The voters have spoken, but some ballot
initiative tax breaks are being questioned
By Kay Bell • Bankrate.com

It's not just the presidential voting in Florida that's been questioned. Some tax break initiatives also are being scrutinized and, in some cases, taken to court.

In Washington and Louisiana, voters decisively voted themselves tax cuts. But whether those breaks will actually come about is up in the air.

The clear-cut ballot count in the Pacific Northwest hasn't stopped tax-break opponents there from heading to court to try to get the results nullified. And Louisiana voters who thought they would soon see the end of some sales taxes have learned that's not necessarily the case.

Washington tax initiative, take two
The most closely watched tax issue was in Washington, where tax protesters have been trying for years to reduce taxes via the voting booth.

The latest Evergreen State effort is Initiative 722, which would limit future increases in property taxes to the lesser of 2 percent or the rate of inflation. It also would require state governments to refund any tax or fee increase adopted between July 2, 1999, and the end of that year. Voters on Nov. 7 approved the measure.

Opponents, however, are hoping they can kill this tax-cut attempt just like they did one approved last year. The earlier ballot issue, Initiative 695, required voter approval of all tax increases, but the Washington Supreme Court last month overturned it because of the way it was presented to voters.

Unconstitutionality cited -- again
Two days after Initiative 722 passed, four Washington cities filed suit to overturn it, charging that the new measure is unconstitutional because, in part, it:

• Deals with multiple tax issues. This was the strongest argument against Initiative 695.
• Violates requirements of uniform property classes
• Requires refunds to taxpayers that are improper gifts of public funds.

The complaining cities are asking the state court to declare Initiative 722 null and void. Also joining in the suit are a King County homeowner and a nonprofit family services organization in Seattle.

Louisiana tax repeal declared invalid
Meanwhile, Louisiana voters who thought they voted themselves a tax cut have been told "no" by state officials.

On Nov. 13, Louisiana Secretary of State Fox McKeithen announced that although voters approved a constitutional amendment abolishing the state's 4-cent state sales tax on food and utilities, the taxes would not be repealed because a companion measure to raise the income tax to make up for lost sales taxes was rejected.

The sales tax repeal initiative passed 52 percent to 48 percent, while the income tax measure failed 62 percent to 38 percent. The income tax measure would have gone into effect Jan. 1, 2001. The sales taxes would have been repealed by July 1, 2002.

McKeithen's decision isn't sitting well with some Bayou State residents. At least one attorney is preparing a lawsuit to force the state to follow the vote and do away with the food and utility sales taxes.

Questions over linkage of ballot issues
Lawyer Glenn Soileau said his client, whom he would not identify, believes the state's action in denying the tax repeal is wrong because the two issues were not linked anywhere on the ballot.

"We can't find anything that says if a constitutional amendment passes, it is effective only if another amendment passes," Soileau said.

McKeithen said although there was no language on the ballot linking the two, the state placed newspaper ads pointing out the two were related. Literature noting the linkage of the two also was available at polling places.

And legislators pointed out that the actual language of the measures, although not printed on the ballots, clearly note that the repeal was dependent upon the tax hike. Lawmakers noted that when the issue was debated, it was decided to keep the two separate to avoid running afoul of the Louisiana constitution, which prohibits ballot initiatives from having more than one issue.

In a legal opinion requested by state officials, Assistant Attorney General Angie Rogers LaPlace said that although the two constitutional amendments were separate ballot items, the passage of one was linked to the passage of the other so if one failed, they both went down. Legal experts say that while an attorney general's ruling does not have the effect of law, it is generally regarded as the controlling legal guide until overturned by a court.

-- Posted Nov. 23, 2000