Measure M Foes Dealt Another Legal Setback

In a second legal setback in a month for two groups who oppose Measure M, the 4th District Court of Appeal on Tuesday declined to hear a challenge to the half-cent sales tax increase for transportation improvements that voters approved in November.

Ten days ago, the state Supreme Court refused to hear a challenge to Measure M filed by Drivers for Highway Safety and Citizens Against Unfair Taxation.

The two groups contend that, among other defects, the sales tax is unconstitutional because it was subject to passage only by a majority and not by two-thirds of the voters.

Measure M foes, undaunted by the court rebuffs, said Tuesday that they will now petition the Orange County Superior Court to stop the tax’s taking effect April 1.

“We’re not going to stop,” said Bill Ward, a spokesman for Drivers for Highway Safety. “It’s just too important to let drop.

“If we don’t stop it now, there will be more of these little special-purpose taxes coming up, and they’ll be wasting money on everything,” Ward said.

County officials called the continuing litigation a “terrible waste” of time and taxpayers’ money.

“They’re grasping at straws,” said Dana W. Reed, chairman of the Orange County Transportation Commission. “It seems highly unlikely that a Superior Court judge is going to grant a restraining order when the Supreme Court and the appeals court have already refused to do it.”

Measure M is expected to raise $3.1 billion over the next 20 years for transportation projects that include the widening of Interstates 5, 57 and 91. It was passed by a margin of 54.4% to 45.2%.

“The people want these projects built,” Reed said.

In a reversal of the usual legal procedure, the Measure M foes bypassed the lower courts and took their challenge directly to the Supreme Court. Their attorney, Mark Rosen, said he had hoped that the Supreme Court would hear the Measure M challenge because it had already agreed to hear a similar challenge to a San Diego special half-cent sales tax for law enforcement.

At the heart of both challenges are disagreements over whether Proposition 13 and Proposition 62, which broadened the applicability of Proposition 13, require agencies such as the Transportation Commission to get two-thirds votes before they may levy taxes.