City of Sequim v. Malkasian

¶88

Chambers, J.

(concurring in part/dissenting in part) — I concur with the analysis of the majority that this initiative was beyond the scope of the initiative power of the residents of Sequim. However, I agree with the trial court, the Court of Appeals, and the dissent that this action is not justiciable and should be dismissed. I write separately because I am not satisfied with the resolution of the justiciability issue articulated either by the majority or by the dissent.

¶89 Generally, I am of the view that courts should not interfere with elections. But I accept that there is a well…