Industry group brought action challenging agreements under which Indian tribes agreed to buy taxed fuel and State agreed to refund portion of fuel tax receipts to tribes. The Superior Court granted summary judgment in favor of state. Industry group appealed.
The Supreme Court of Washington, en banc, held that:
- Fuel tax refund agreements between Indian tribes and State did not violate constitutional provision governing fuel tax receipts, and
- Agreements did not violate separation of powers provision of state constitution.
Agreements under which Indian tribes agreed to buy taxed fuel and the State agreed to refund a portion of the fuel tax receipts to the tribes did not violate state constitutional provision that limited use of state fuel tax receipts to highway purposes, where refunds were paid to tribal governments under contracts that limited their use to various government purposes, and governor was statutorily authorized to enter into such agreements.
Legislative authorization for executive to enter into agreements under which Indian tribes agreed to buy taxed fuel and the State agreed to refund a portion of the fuel tax receipts to the tribes did not constitute delegation of legislative authority in violation of separation of powers doctrine of state constitution, where legislature had provided fairly detailed standards and guidelines for such agreements, legislature defined objective of agreements, and legislature required regular audits and reports regarding agreements.