« Ind. Gov't. - "IPS Board member says he will resign over felony" | Main | Ind. Courts - Fix protective orders, writes Fort Wayne newspaper »
Wednesday, October 04, 2006
Ind. Decisions - More on: "Court clouds schools' plans"
Yesterday the ILB quoted a Fort Wayne Journal Gazette story that reported:
The Northwest Allen County Schools board voted Monday to ask the Indiana Supreme Court to examine a decision by a lower court that said the current system of dueling petition drives to determine construction projects is unconstitutional.Today the Journal Gazette has an editorial on the matter, titled "A futile legal fight." Some quotes:
Northwest Allen County Schools board members voted Tuesday to defend an indefensible process and committed the school district to participate in a legal fight it has little chance of winning.The board voted to join another Indiana school district in asking the Indiana Supreme Court to hear an appeal to a ruling that declared unconstitutional the “dueling petitions” procedure to determine whether contested public works bond issues should proceed. Current law allows supporters and opponents of a proposed major government bond issue to collect the signatures of owners of property within the affected district. If proponents gain the most valid signatures, the project proceeds; if opponents win, the project is dead for at least a year.
The Indiana Court of Appeals rightly ruled that such a procedure is essentially a referendum that unconstitutionally excludes renters and other non-property owners. Indiana Attorney General Steve Carter, who is responsible for representing the state and defending current state law, will not appeal the decision, an indication he agrees that it was correct. “The upcoming legislative session will provide an opportunity for lawmakers to address the constitutional weakness of the statute,” Carter said in a news release.
If the man legally responsible for defending state law essentially says it cannot be defended, why does the NACS board continue to defend it? * * *
By omitting any petition drives that began before the legislature adjourns next spring, the ruling clearly does not apply to those now under way, including the one concerning expanding NACS’ Carroll High School.
Yes, a renter upset with the outcome could sue NACS on the same grounds, but the school system would be better off waiting to see whether such a legal battle even begins than to try to persuade the state Supreme Court to uphold a process that is clearly wrong.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on October 4, 2006 07:32 AM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions