|
|
| |
| Sun, Nov. 23, 2008 |  |
 |
|
||
| |
Supreme Court hears Dollarway school district millage case Friday, Jun 20, 2008 By Rob Moritz Arkansas News Bureau LITTLE ROCK - State Supreme Court justices struggled Thursday with the idea that someone can claim a millage increase approved by voters is an illegal tax without challenging the election results. "I'm trying to understand this lawsuit," Justice Don Corbin commented during oral arguments in a lawsuit in which opponents of a millage increase approved last year for the Dollarway School District in Jefferson County are seeking a refund. The plaintiffs are not challenging a vote by residents this spring to reduce the levy. The school district is asking the high court to affirm a circuit judge's ruling that dismissed the lawsuit. "This is really nothing more than an election challenge," Dan Bufford, the school district's lawyer, told the Supreme Court, adding that the case was properly dismissed because the lawsuit was filed 100 days after the March 2007 election. State law requires election challenges to be filed within 20 days of balloting. "The thrust of the lawsuit is merely that the plaintiffs are contesting the election, they want it to be held null and void ... and they want the court to order a new election," Bufford said. "Why is this lawsuit not frivolous?" Corbin asked the attorney for the group challenging the 2007 millage increase. "I thought it was clear," responded Eugene Sayre, attorney for Dollarway Patrons for Better Schools, the group that filed the lawsuit. "This is an illegal tax. It's clear that we are maintaining the increase in this tax is illegal." Sayre said the ballot proposal voters saw when they entered the voting booths was accurate, but that the school district misrepresented by 50 percent the impact of the millage hike to voters in a flyer circulated before the election. "We're not challenging the election," Sayre said. "The entity imposing the tax misled. That in itself goes back to the ballot and makes the ballot incorrect." In 2006, the former Altheimer Unified School District was annexed into the Dollarway district. Following the merger, the new school board asked voters to approve a millage hike to fund school improvements, including construction of a new middle school. By just 21 votes, voters in March 2007 voted to raise the millage rate in the old Dollarway district from 40.8 mills to 42.3 mills, and in the former Altheimer district from 32.6 mills to 42.3 mills. Residents in the former Altheimer district filed a lawsuit in Jefferson County Circuit Court arguing they were misled by false revenue projections that understated the cost of the higher millage. Circuit Judge Rob Wyatt later dismissed the lawsuit, ruling that it was not filed in a timely manner. In May, school district residents voted a 1.5 mill reduction. Sayre told justices Thursday the lawsuit does not affect the May vote, and that the group he represents hopes the nearly $500,000 raised by the 2007 millage increase can be refunded to residents. "We have held many times that facts inside the ballot can show that the ballot is incorrect," Justice Anabelle Clinton Imber said near the end of the 45-minute oral arguments. "What you are doing is turning that around, saying something outside the ballot can make the ballot incorrect." Sayre said the entity that called for the vote was obligated to present truthful information. The high court did not rule on the case Thursday. After the arguments, Dollarway Superintendent Thomas Gathen said he was responsible for putting the misleading information into the pamphlet and said he has admitted the error previously. He said he misunderstood some information provided to him by the school district's financial adviser. Felix Smart with Patrons for Better Schools said he was not entirely happy with the way the oral arguments went because of the number of questions asked by the justices. "In my opinion, this is just a case of right and wrong," Smart said. "A government entity that has the power to call for a tax should have the responsibility and should have clean hands in the deal. Right is right and wrong is wrong, and we're being taxed in an ill-gotten way." |
