Judge: MSD can collect levy money
February 25, 2008
School district receives $1.97 million increase passed by voters in March, doesn't have to pay Weitz's legal fees
Second District Court Judge John Bradbury ruled Thursday that the Moscow School District can collect tax money generated from its March 2007 supplemental levy election.
Bradbury also ruled that the school district doesn't have to pay legal fees incurred by Moscow dentist Weitz, who filed a lawsuit against the school district in May. Weitz argued that the supplemental levy increase amount was invalid because the total amount certified wasn't included on the ballots.
Bradbury previously ruled in favor of the district in four of five allegations made in the lawsuit, but said the way the election ballot was framed did not meet the legal standard, and needed to be reworded so the levy amount was specifically requested so "voters will know what the consequence of their vote is."
Bradbury deferred his written ruling at an October hearing and gave the district six weeks to correct the language on its 2007 supplemental levy ballot - to include both the increase ($1.97 million) and the total amount ($7.6 million) certified - and re-run the election.
The Moscow School Board reran the election Nov. 13, and 57.7 percent of voters supported the increase.
Meanwhile, the Idaho State Tax Commission billed MSD patrons for the $1.97 million increase to the district's indefinite supplemental levy that passed in March, but it was unclear until Thursday when - or if - the district would see any of the money after Bradbury declared the March election "null and void" in his initial written judgement, filed in November.
The taxes collected for the school district's March levy election were withheld from the district by the Latah County Treasurer's Office subject to Bradbury's final ruling.
"This is a case of first impression," Bradbury wrote. "The statutory scheme is complex. The school district did what it thought was right. Dr. Weitz provided a valuable service of clarifying a statute much in need of clarity.
"Given the novelty of the issues and the mixed result for both parties, I conclude neither party prevailed."
Moscow School District Superintendent Candis Donicht said the district is happy with the judge's final decision.
"Of course the district is pleased with the ruling," Donicht said. "I admit I had to read the document several times to fully comprehend the issues that the judge went over in his discussion."
Donicht said it's important to remember that this was a complex legal case because there are few legal guidelines regarding what to do in an indefinite supplemental levy lawsuit.
"We didn't have good language to identify how one goes about doing an increase to an indefinite supplemental levy," she said.
Donicht said it's unfortunate the Moscow School District had to be involved in one of the first lawsuits regarding indefinite supplemental levies, but that it was a problem waiting to occur.
"It was bound to happen somewhere, sometime, and it happened here," Donicht said.
Neither Weitz or his attorney, Brian Thie, returned calls seeking comment before press time.
Latah County Treasurer Connie Jain Ferguson said the district received a check for its tax money this morning.
"They got their taxes today, because by law Jan. 25 is the apportionment date," she said. "We had collected the money ... we were just waiting for the judge to rule. This is such an unusual case."
Ferguson said her department feels relieved after being at a legal standstill for so long.
"It's a very nice thing to have taken care of. We're grateful," she said. "We hope it turned out well for people. We just needed to know what the law was going to tell us to do. The school now has that money to keep their operations flowing."
Donicht said it's important to note that there were no winners or losers in the suit.
"No one prevailed. We got (what) we need to provide the services we need," she said. "This case has been so complicated that I didn't know what to expect.
"The judge has been sensitive to the fact that this issue has divided acommunity, and (he) stated a number of times in this case that both sides were well-meaning and good supporters of public education."
Donicht said she still believes the lawsuit was a necessity to reach a resolution, and the district hopes it can maintain a congenial relationship with Weitz.
"We needed a court ruling in order to validate what we believed (to be) right was right, and as it turned out we needed correct ballot language to properly do so," she said.
Donicht said Bradbury ruled with compassion and looked beyond technicalities.
"The judge has clearly looked at both sides of this issue," she said. "It's always unfortunate when we have to get answers through a lawsuit. Now it's over and we can move forward.
Originally published by the Moscow-Pullman Daily News
