CLEAN v. State

• Decision Date: 13 January 1997
• Docket Number: 63843-8,Nos. 63842-0,s. 63842-0
• Court: Washington Supreme Court
• Parties: CLEAN [Citizens for Leaders with Ethics and AccountabilityNow!], a nonprofit corporation, and Jordan Brower, individually and as a member of CLEAN, Appellants, v. The STATE of Washington, Respondent. Frank RUANO and John Scannell, Appellants, v. The STATE of Washington, King County, and Ralph Munro, Respondents.

Page 782

130 Wn.2d 782

928 P.2d 1054

CLEAN [Citizens for Leaders with Ethics and AccountabilityNow!], a nonprofit corporation, and Jordan Brower, individually and as a member of CLEAN, Appellants, v. The STATE of Washington, Respondent.

Frank RUANO and John Scannell, Appellants, v. The STATE of Washington, King County, and Ralph Munro, Respondents.

Nos. 63842-0, 63843-8.

Supreme Court of Washington,

En Banc.

Argued May 15, 1996.

Decided Dec. 20, 1996.

As Amended Jan. 13, 1997.

Shawn Newman, Olympia, Stephen Eugster, Spokane, Kris Sundberg, Mercer Island, for Appellant CLEAN, Jordan Brower

Shawn Newman, Olympia, for Appellant Frank Ruano.

John Scannell, Seattle, for Appellant John Scannell.

Norm Maleng, King County Prosecutor, Susan Slonecker, Deputy, Quentin Yerxa, Deputy, Appellant Unit, Seattle, for Respondent King County.

Christine Gregoire, Attorney General, Narda Pierce, Solicitor General, William Collins, Jeffrey Even, Assistants, Olympia, for Respondent State and Ralph Munro.

Montgomery, Purdue, Blankinship & Austin, John Blankinship, Seattle, for amicus curiae John D. Blankinship and Citizens for More Important Things.

Preston, Gates & Ellis, Paul Lawrence, Eileen Weresch-Doornink, Seattle, for amicus curiae Washington State Major League Baseball.

ALEXANDER, Justice.

We granted review of an order of the Thurston County Superior Court dismissing two separate The Seattle Mariners, one of 28 major league baseball clubs, has been playing its home games in Seattle's domed stadium, the Kingdome, since 1977 when it first became a major league team. In recent years, the management of the Mariners has, on several occasions, expressed concern about the viability of the Kingdome as a facility for major league baseball. On these occasions, it indicated that in order for the Mariners to achieve financial stability and to become financially competitive with other major league baseball clubs, the Mariners needed a state of the art outdoor baseball facility as its home field.

challenges to an act of the Legislature that provides a means of financing the construction of a publicly owned major league baseball stadium in King County. One of the challenges to the measure is by Frank Ruano and John Scannell (jointly referred to as Ruano). The other is by Jordan Brower and a non-profit corporation called CLEAN, Citizens for Leaders with Ethics and Accountability Now, (jointly referred to as CLEAN). CLEAN contends that the aforementioned act violates several provisions of Washington's constitution. Specifically, it contends that the act: (1) funds a private project contrary to Wash. Const. art. VII, § 1; (2) constitutes a gift or lending of the State's credit to a private enterprise, thereby violating Wash. Const. art. VIII, §§ 5, 7; (3) invests public funds in a private enterprise in violation of Wash. Const. art. VIII, § 7; and (4) violates Wash. Const. art. II, § 28 as "special" as opposed to "general" legislation. CLEAN and Ruano both assert that what they claim is the act's invalid emergency clause wrongly circumvents the people's right to referendum as provided by Wash. Const. art. II, § 1 (amend. 72). We conclude that the act survives all of these challenges and, consequently, affirm the trial court's order dismissing both lawsuits.

In 1995, in an apparent effort to address the problem identified by the Mariners and to enhance the survival of major league baseball in the Seattle area, the Washington State Legislature adopted legislation that authorized King County to impose, subject to voter approval, a 0.1 percent Following defeat of the proposed tax increase, John Ellis, the Mariners' Chief Executive Officer, sent a letter to King County Executive, Gary Locke, in which he stated that without a new stadium, the Mariners would "offer the team for sale" after October 30. Clerk's Papers at 20, Appellants' Am.Br. at 69.

addition to the sales and use taxes imposed in King County. Laws of 1995, 1st Spec. Sess., ch. 14, §§ 6, 7. The money obtained from such a tax increase was to be used by the county to finance the construction of a new county owned major league baseball stadium. Following passage of that legislation, the King County Council sought approval by King County's voters of an increase in the sales and use taxes imposed in King County. By a narrow margin, the proposed tax increase was rejected.

On October 11, 1995, Governor Mike Lowry called the Legislature into special session solely for "the purpose of addressing matters related to stadium financing." Clerk's Papers at 146. At that session the Legislature considered Engrossed House Bill 2115, a bill sponsored by Representatives Van Leuven and Appelwick. This measure was designed to ensure the survival of major league baseball in King County. On the day following Governor Lowry's call for a special session, public hearings on the proposal were conducted in both the Trade and Economic Development Committee of the House of Representatives and the Ways and Means Committee of the Senate. Governor Lowry testified in support of the bill at both hearings. In addition, numerous citizens testified for and against the measure. ¹ Among those testifying in support of EHB 2115 were several Seattle business persons who indicated that the presence of the Seattle Mariners was essential to the success of their businesses, and that departure of the team The Governor also stressed what he described as a "true family value question" indicating that: "Everywhere I've gone in the State, every kid has come up [to me] and said 'save baseball.' " House Trade and Economic Development Committee meeting (House) tape 1 (Oct. 12, 1995). Other witnesses spoke to what they opined was the importance of major league baseball to the fabric of the community. For example, Vincent "New York Vinnie" Richichi, a Seattle sports radio talk show host, described the value of the Mariners to the community in this way: "We also have something that's an intangible here, that's our kids and a way of life. Baseball has something to do with all of that. It's a commerce for some people, it's a part of culture for some people, and for others it's a way of life." House tape 1 (Oct. 12, 1995).

                would adversely affect them. 2  Robbie Stern, Special Assistant to the President of the Washington State Labor Council, expanded on the view of the business persons, stressing the broader impact of the Mariners on the state's economy, saying, "Here is an opportunity to use tax money to create family wage jobs and some service jobs that have health care and pension benefits;  it's a good use of economic development funds."   Senate Ways and Means Committee hearing tape 2 (Senate) (Oct. 12, 1995).  Governor Lowry echoed these themes in his testimony before the committee of the House of Representatives, stating that the presence of the Mariners was of economic benefit to the entire state
                

As to the need for swift action by the Legislature, Governor Lowry was succinct, asking himself a seemingly rhetorical question, "Will the Mariners leave without action?" and answering it, "Yes." House tape 1 (Oct. 12, 1995).

The special session concluded on October 17, with the Significantly, the Stadium Act provided a means by which King County and the State of Washington could generate additional revenues to be allotted to the District in order to defray the major portion of the costs of constructing the new baseball stadium. ⁴ The act provided that moneys collected under it may only be used to pay on the bonds issued to construct the stadium. Laws of 1995, 3rd Spec.Sess., ch. 1, §§ 101(3) at 2, 103(3) at 3, 105(5) at 4, 201(3) at 5, 203(3)(a) at 9. It also stated that the "taxes authorized [by the act] shall not be collected after June 30, 1997" unless a major league baseball team has agreed to "[c]ontribute forty-five million dollars toward the reasonably necessary preconstruction costs" of the stadium and has contracted to "[p]lay at least ninety percent of its Governor Lowry signed the act into law within hours of its approval by both houses of the Legislature. Three days later, Ruano attempted to file a petition for referendum with the office of the Secretary of State in order to have the Stadium Act referred to a vote of the people. Secretary of State Ralph Munro declined to accept the petition, opining that an emergency clause in the legislation exempted the Stadium Act from the referendum process. ⁵

                Legislature adopting EHB 2115 (hereinafter referred to as the Stadium Act), by a vote of 66 to 24 in the House of Representatives and 25 to 16 in the Senate.  Laws of 1995, 3rd Spec.Sess., ch. 1.  The Stadium Act authorized the creation of a public facilities district (District) in "a county with a population of one million or more," and empowered it to "acquire, construct, own, remodel, maintain, equip, reequip, repair, and operate a baseball stadium[.]" 3  Laws of 1995, 3rd Spec.Sess., ch. 1, §§ 201(1) at 4, 201(4)(b) at 5.  The act also provided that three members of the governing board of the District would be appointed by the Governor with the remaining members appointed by the county executive, subject to ratification by the county legislative authority.  Laws of 1995, 3rd Spec.Sess., ch. 1, § 302, at 10
                home games in the stadium for a period of time not shorter than the term of the bonds issued to finance the initial construction of the stadium."   Laws of 1995, 3rd Spec.Sess., ch. 1, § 201(4)(a), (b) at 5.  The Stadium Act also required the major league tenant to share a portion of any profits generated by the baseball club from the operation of the franchise for a period equal to the term of the bonds issued to finance construction of the stadium.  Under this provision, shared profits were to be defined by an agreement between the stadium tenant and the District and these profits were to be used to help retire the bonds and thereafter were to go directly to the District.  While the Stadium Act

...