Petitioners seek appeal for Highland bond case

AINSWORTH — A group of Highland school district residents has filed for an appeal in a case that could overturn the schools’ narrowly-passed bond referendum approved by voters in November. The move earlier this month extended a tense legal battle after a contest court ruled 2-1 in January that the bond issue should be upheld despite polling place mishaps.

Petitioners had argued that 96 improper ballots with the bond question, which poll workers in Ainsworth mistakenly gave to voters who didn’t live in the district on Election Day — and therefore lacked any stake in the race’s outcome — should nullify the bond’s passage by 22 votes.

Petitioner Attorney Sasha Fimke said the appeal would make similar arguments.

  Buy Photo

“The gist is, everyone acknowledges that ballots with the bond measure were distributed to non-district voters, and based on how those ballots are collected, we are unable to determine whether the ballots given to non-district voters impacted the result of the election,” she said. “The essence of the appeal is that a new election is required.”

The challenge was first heard by a “contest court” last month, a group of three representatives assembled specifically to assess the legality of a challenged election’s result. That panel was composed of petitioner Ron Greiner, Highland school board Vice President Dan Ruth, and retired attorney Richard Gaumer, who a judge appointed as a neutral third member.

After hearing arguments from lawyers on either side, the group voted 2-1 to uphold the election’s outcome, citing a section of Iowa Code which authorizes contest courts to overturn a result only if disregarding every vote in a disputed precinct would change the overall result. In this case, it would not: ballots at every other precinct would still add up to a passing margin for the bond issue, with or without the inclusion of Ainsworth’s in-person voters.

While legal documents filed with the District Court Feb. 5 didn’t state the grounds of the appeal, Fimke said it was statutory, meaning petitioners believe the contest court’s members misinterpreted or misapplied relevant laws.

“I can’t speak for the individual residents who joined the petition … but I think the general thought is, an election should be based on proper votes,” Fimke said. “And to the extent the district cannot establish that the election result is based on proper votes, it should be redone.”

Schools lament the setback

Highland plans to fight the appeal in court, according to Superintendent Ken Crawford who said the $15 million bond issue had “passed every legal test” and should be upheld, adding that mistakes on Election Day stemmed from poll worker errors beyond the schools’ control.

While a timeline on the case isn’t yet clear, Crawford said he worried the appeal process could delay the planned $15 million bond sale until after July 1, when legal authority for the current $2.70 debt service levy will come to an end.

The district plans to ask a judge to expedite the case once it’s accepted by the court, but Crawford said decision-makers expected even a relatively quick case to last into the summer.

“While it may be a speedy process for the courts, I don’t know if a speedy process for the courts is speedy enough for the school district, that’s the thing that we do not know right now,” he said. “We cannot sell the bond until this is done … we still have two budget public hearings, and we have to kind of guess what the tax rate will be.”

There would be a number of implications to that kind of setback.

  Buy Photo

For one thing, school advocates pitched the latest $15 million bond referendum to voters as a major improvement to facilities that wouldn’t raise residents’ current taxes. If the debt service levy disappears overnight and the district loses the appeal in court, convincing voters to pass the same measure in a do-over election may prove challenging, especially if it doesn’t share a date with 2024’s turnout-boosting presidential race.

For another, Crawford said the planned renovations to Highland’s high school commons, construction of a multipurpose facility, addition of new classrooms, security upgrades to elementary school doors and other planned improvements may all grow more expensive than a $15 million bond can afford, as the schools await a legal resolution.

A similar case at the Avoca-Hancock-Shelby-Tenant Community School District in 2007 — which was cited as precedent during Highland’s contest court hearing — took two years to reach a conclusion, following a series of appeals that eventually reached the Iowa Supreme Court.

“We all know that costs on construction, cement, all that kind of stuff, don’t go down,” he said. “The longer this is, the less we’re going to be able to buy with our $15 million … we’re going to basically get less for our money, and that’s what’s going to hurt kids, and that’s what’s going to hurt families.”

Comments: Kalen.McCain@southeastiowaunion.com