EVERETT – The presence of state initiative guru Tim Eyman didn’t sway the judge to rule in favor of a Mukilteo group that wants to get an initiative on the ballot.
Snohomish County Superior Court Judge Anita Farris on Wednesday postponed a decision until next week on whether to send to voters a measure opposing Mukilteo’s decision on where to put a new city hall.
Kevin Stoltz, an unopposed candidate for City Council, and others sued the city earlier this month because of the council’s decision neither to approve the initiative nor to put it on the ballot.
The initiative is based on a petition signed by more than 1,500 registered voters calling for the council’s March decision to build city hall in Old Town to be rescinded and for it to be built instead next to the police station on 47th Place W. in Harbour Pointe.
The council in August acted on the first part of the petition, voting to eliminate the site next to the Rosehill Community Center and to investigate buying another piece of property in the central part of the city.
The judge’s postponement appears to be a blow to the petitioners’ request to get a measure on the Nov. 8 ballot. The deadline to submit a measure to the county auditor for that election is Friday.
Farris said she wouldn’t have a decision until Sept. 30. She said the case came up in the middle of a judicial conference and there are too many cases pending for her to make a quick decision.
“There is no way I’m going to make this decision in 48 hours,” Farris said.
“I think it’d be nice if we had a decision in time to get it on the ballot,” Stoltz said afterward. “I understand the judge being overwhelmed, but I think we’ve done everything by the book.”
Eyman, a Mukilteo resident, said he was interested in the case because “it involves the initiative process, and it’s local.” The petitioners said he is not affiliated with their group and they did not know he planned to attend.
Mukilteo City Attorney Jim Haney told the judge the City Council could kill the petition, because the proposal went beyond the scope of initiative’s authority.
“Clearly, this is an administrative action when it asks the city to stop making expenditures and stop making any effort to locate City Hall on the Lincoln Avenue site,” Haney said.
The petitioners’ attorney, Dick Stephens of Bellevue, said initiatives are valid unless specifically prohibited from making a certain type of decision, and such is not the case here.
Eyman, who has led many statewide initiative measures, was upset by Farris’ delay of a decision.
“Especially when they fight to keep it off the ballot, it just drives me nuts,” he said. “Anything is possible if the voters approve it.”
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
