Washington Off Highway Vehicle Alliance v. State
176 Wash. 2d 225
| Wash. | 2012Background
- This case asks whether the 2009 NOVA fund appropriation to Parks for maintaining state parks constitutes a refund under Washington Constitution article II, section 40(d).
- Historically, 1% of motor vehicle fuel tax revenues was refunded to ORV, nonmotorized, and nonhighway users in a form that benefits affected taxpayers rather than direct cash transfers.
- NOVA funds are allocated with distributive restrictions and administered by agencies like DNR, DFW, and Parks, typically as grants for ORV, nonmotorized, and nonhighway recreation facilities.
- A 2003 study showed non-ORV users accounted for about 80% of the refund revenues, broadening the benefit to affected taxpayers.
- In 2009, due to budget shortfalls, the NOVA excess balance was appropriated to Parks and other agencies to pay salaries and benefits for state park employees, effectively subsidizing park operations.
- WOHVA challenged the appropriation as unconstitutional; the trial court granted summary judgment for the State, the Court of Appeals issued a split decision, and the Supreme Court granted review on mootness with public-interest considerations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the 2009 appropriation a refund under art. II, §40? | WOHVA argues it is not a refund because benefits do not target affected taxpayers. | State contends the appropriation benefits affected taxpayers (80% non-ORV) and thus constitutes a refund. | Yes; the appropriation is a refund. |
| Is the case moot and does it present continuing public interest warranting review? | WOHVA contends mootness bars review and no ongoing impact exists. | State argues mootness exception for public interest applies and review is appropriate. | Case presents continuing public interest and merits review; not withdrawn from consideration. |
Key Cases Cited
- Northwest Motorcycle Ass’n v. Interagency Comm. for Outdoor Recreation, 127 Wn. App. 408 (2005) (upheld NOVA-type refunds for nonhighway purposes as refunds under art II, §40(d))
- Island County v. State, 135 Wn.2d 141 (1998) (judicial interpretation of constitutional provisions; deference to legislative findings)
- In re Pers. Restraint of Matteson, 142 Wn.2d 298 (2000) (recognizes retroactive effect of legislative clarifications)
- City of Tacoma v. O’Brien, 85 Wn.2d 266 (1975) (judicial interpretation of constitutional provisions is a judicial function)
- Cooper v. Dep’t of Insts., 63 Wn.2d 722 (1964) (mootness and standing in relation to expired statutes)