Opinion ID: 2639085
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Plan Submitted to the Voters Pursuant to Statute Unequivocally and Unconditionally Promised a Light-Rail Line From the University District to Sea-Tac in 10 Years.

Text: The eight-page document identified itself as [a] proposal to the citizens by the Regional Transit Authority, Clerk's Papers (CP) at 297 (emphasis added), representing itself as the citizen's guide to the Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority's proposal to increase our transportation system capacity by offering new choices for getting around the region. Id. The document specifically referenced itself as the document required by RCW 81.104.140(8). The brochure unequivocally and without qualification promised 25 miles of light-rail with 26 stations within walking distance of major regional destinations. CP at 300. [4] Some of the major destinations expressly included:  Educationthe University of Washington, the UW Tacoma Campus, Seattle Central Community College, Seattle University and potentially North Seattle Community College.  Health carethe UW Medical Center, Swedish Hospital, Harborview and Virginia Mason.  Cultural, convention and sports facilitiesthe Seattle Art Museum, the Tacoma Theater District, the new Washington State History Museum, Husky Stadium, the Kingdome, the Tacoma Dome, the Washington State Convention & Trade Center, Seattle Center (via Monorail connection) and Benaroya Hall (the new Seattle Symphony hall).  Other transportationSea-Tac Airport, Colman Dock (the Washington State Ferries), King Street Station (commuter rail and Amtrak), the Monorail, Seattle's Waterfront Streetcar and a Tacoma Dome regional transportation terminal. Id. Sound Transit expressly assured voters in this brochure the light-rail would run from downtown Seattle to the University District (the second largest employment center and transit market in the region) through First Hill and Capitol Hilltwo of the largest transit markets in the region. CP at 301. The brochure was represented by Sound Transit as a Ten-Year Regional Transit System Plan, CP at 297, made on express representations that Sound Transit was committed to completing [the project] within ten years of voter approval, CP at 303. Yet in a shocking turn of events those voters in the University District, First Hill, Capitol Hill, and Sea-Tac who voted in justified reliance on the statutory brochure to be taxed for Sound Transit to construct a means of traveling to and from the expressly listed destinations were betrayed. They are now faced with the reality these destinations are not to be served at all. Nothing in the mailed brochure self-identified as the proposal to the citizens, CP at 297, alerted them to this possibility in any way, shape, or form. Moreover, the brochure expressly stated exactly the opposite. Indeed, a voter examining the eight-page brochure would see that Sound Transit would service the area designated without qualification. Even the financing was guaranteed: An independent expert review panel appointed by the governor and the state Legislature has stated that Sound Move ridership and cost estimates are conservative. Project costs and revenues for Sound Move have been carefully estimated to provide a cushion in case there are unforeseen expenses or changes in revenues. . . . . Sound Move ten-year estimates include all costs to build and run the system including community planning, engineering, design, environmental mitigation, full accessibility, safety features, station amenities, and a contingency for unforeseen expenses. CP at 303 (emphasis added). There was no hint of shortfalland there were express representations to the contrary! Nowhere did the eight-page brochure state or imply Sound Transit's service plan would or could be scaled back at all, much less by one-third. Relying on this brochure, no voter could possibly have suspected Sound Transit had a hidden agenda to scale back the project and extend its time of completion should it run out of money, an eventuality which was expressly disclaimed in and of itself. The plan described in this brochure unequivocally, unconditionally, and categorically promised the voters Sound Transit would have more than enough money to build 21 miles of light-rail from the University District to Sea-Tac in 10 years. There was no mention of Resolution 75 in fact, form, or substance. That Sound Transit elected to withhold any hint of its now asserted discretionary power from the voters in the eight-page brochure means that alleged discretionary power was neither submitted to nor possibly approved by the voters. The failure to include this purported reserved discretion precludes its existence as a matter of law as the voters could not approve a power that was never submitted to them, and one which could substantially change the whole system submitted for approval. Louthan, 94 Wash.2d at 430, 617 P.2d 977. Voters simply could not, and did not, approve something substantially different than what was expressly and without qualification represented in the statutory plan brochure. Necessary to the majority's holding is its claim the voters pamphlet and the eight-page brochure were not sufficient to inform the voters of the detailed aspects of a multi-billion dollar transportation and financing plan, and could not be considered enabling legislation. Majority at 352 (emphasis added). If we were speaking only of details the majority might have a point. But, to the contrary, we are talking about direct and unqualified representations that go to the heart of the plan, i.e., [t]he plan includes 25 miles of light-rail, CP at 300, and that Sound Transit would complete the project within ten years of voter approval, id. at 303. These were the very features that distinguished it from the prior plan rejected by the voters. In sum, the legislature mandated the regional transit authority to submit to the voters a description of the system it proposed to build. RCW 81.104.140(8). Sound Transit did just that, and the voters were entitled to rely upon the unconditional, unqualified, and unequivocal promises Sound Transit made for a north-south light-rail system running from the University District to Sea-Tac, CP at 300, that would be complet[ed] ... within ten years of voter approval, id. at 303. If Sound Transit had a secret agenda, that agenda was never submitted to, much less adopted by, the electorate. This should end the case.