## Facts

- Ten elected Washington county assessors brought an original action against the Director of the Washington Department of Revenue.
- Voters approved Referendum 47 (1997), which altered how real property was assessed for ad valorem taxation by adopting a “value averaging” method.
- The value-averaging formula limited annual increases in assessed value for rapidly appreciating property, effectively capping assessment growth in certain circumstances.
- The referendum required that the total tax levy amount remain unchanged, so reducing assessed value growth for capped properties shifted the tax burden to other property owners.
- Washington’s constitution treats all real property as a single class for purposes of uniform taxation, requiring uniformity within that class.

## Issues

1. Whether Referendum 47’s value-averaging provisions, which cap assessment increases for certain properties and shift tax burdens to other real property, violate article VII, section 1 of the Washington Constitution requiring uniform taxation within a class of property.

## Decision

- The Washington Supreme Court held the challenged value-averaging provisions unconstitutional.
- The court concluded the scheme violated the uniformity requirement of article VII by creating different effective assessment ratios within the single class of real property.
- The court invalidated the value-averaging mechanism.

## Legal Principles

- For Washington ad valorem property taxes, all real property is a single class and must be taxed uniformly.
- Constitutional uniformity requires equality in both tax rate and valuation (assessment ratio) across property within the class.
- A valuation method that intentionally produces disparate assessment ratios within the same class violates the uniformity clause, even if adopted to moderate tax increases.
- Tax exemptions or preferential treatment must be expressly authorized; relief cannot be justified as an implied exemption derived from an assessment formula.
- Cyclical revaluation systems may be permissible when applied in a systematic manner aimed at overall uniformity, but deliberate, continuing disparities in assessment ratios are not.

## Conclusion

The court struck down Referendum 47’s value-averaging assessment caps because they shifted the property tax burden by imposing non-uniform valuation within the constitutionally single class of real property, contrary to Washington’s strict uniformity mandate for ad valorem taxation.


Belas v. Kiga, 959 P.2d 1037 (Wash. 1998)