I would add that in normal circumstances you have the principle of a judge should not be a judge in his or her own cause. Clearly, the reference asks the court to interpret matters that will have an effect on it.
However, the exception to that rule is the doctrine of necessity: when there is no other place to go, then there is no other place that the government could have directed this reference to. There is no substitute court in this circumstance.
There are circumstances where judges, under the doctrine of necessity, have no choice but to rule on matters that affect them, and this is certainly one of those cases.