> not for Sound Transit to charge whatever they want because they lost some grant money

I really, really, really wish the residents of the Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority who are pissed off about this would get the message:

SOUND TRANSIT DID NOT SET THE DEPRECIATION SCHEDULE, THE STARTING POINT FOR THAT SCHEDULE, OR WHEN THE SCHEDULE SHOULD BE USED.

For the love of all that is good and wonderful, go read the Revised Code of Washington (the bit of law that is passed by the legislature and signed by the governor or that citizens can amend themselves through the initiative process).

RCW 81.104.160 [link 1] clearly states: "Regional transit authorities that include a county with a population of more than one million five hundred thousand may submit an authorizing proposition to the voters, and if approved, may levy and collect an excise tax, at a rate approved by the voters, but not exceeding eight-tenths of one percent on the value, under chapter 82.44 RCW..."

160 also states, "Notwithstanding any other provision of this subsection or chapter 82.44 RCW, a motor vehicle excise tax imposed by a regional transit authority before or after July 15, 2015, must comply with chapter 82.44 RCW as it existed on January 1, 1996, until December 31st of the year in which the regional transit authority repays bond debt to which a motor vehicle excise tax was pledged before July 15, 2015."

Sound Transit is legally obligated to use the old depreciation schedule instead of the one that was updated in 2003. Again, the legislature wrote that law.

RCW 82.44.035 [link 2] sets out how the valuation for the motor vehicle excise tax is to be calculated: "For the purpose of determining any locally imposed motor vehicle excise tax, the value of a vehicle other than a truck or trailer shall be eighty-five percent of the manufacturer's base suggested retail price of the vehicle when first offered for sale as a new vehicle, excluding any optional equipment, applicable federal excise taxes, state and local sales or use taxes, transportation or shipping costs, or preparatory or delivery costs, multiplied by the applicable percentage listed in this subsection (3) based on year of service of the vehicle."

On this bit:

> This is also why Washington State voters keep passing a cap on the car tab fee.

That is a false equivalence. Those votes are statewide, unlike the votes on the Sound Transit propositions which happen solely in the Sound Transit district. The car tab fee cap keeps failing in the western Puget Sound counties--notice how Tim Eyman can't seem to muster up the signatures for his latest three attempts, because people in Snohomish, King, and Pierce counties aren't signing the petitions and that's where the people mostly live--because voters here don't want to kick the legs out from underneath our transit (AND FERRY!) authorities a second time.

Also, I think it's pretty damn shitty that our "democratic initiative system" gives people in the entire rest of the state veto power over what the legislature tells part of the state it can do with its own tax money. People in Walla Walla, Grant, and Spokane counties don't get to vote for or against Sound Transit propositions and don't pay any of the tax dollars that support them. Why should they get a statewide veto? At what point is a vote "settled law" and the relevant authorities can get on with doing "the will of the people?"

1: http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=81.104.160

2: http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=82.44.035