MISSOULA – Two landowners in the Seeley Lake Sewer District (SLSD) have petitioned the Fourth Judicial District Court in Missoula for a Writ of Mandamus regarding the Missoula County Elections office’s denial of a pair of citizens’ petitions. Attorney Colleen Dowdall filed the Petition for Writ of Mandamus on behalf of Don Larson and Tom Morris.
If the Writ is issued the Court would order the SLSD attorney to complete the ballot language as laid out in state law and force the Missoula County Elections Administrator to approve the pair of previously denied citizens’ petitions to move forward with signature collection.
In the court filing Dowdall argues that SLSD attorney Jon Beal and Elections Administrator Dayna Causby failed to perform a clear legal duty to review and accept or decline the petitions as to form. Dowdall accused Beal and Causby of exceeding their jurisdiction and authority in denying the citizens’ petitions.
The two citizens’ petitions were filed separately in 2019 with one filed by SLSD resident Franny Trexler and the other filed by Dowdall. Dowdall also represents Larson and several dozen landowners in a separate lawsuit from 2018.
The Trexler petition filed Sept. 3, 2019 was seeking to put to a vote the repeal of SLSD Resolution No. 08152019A which mandated properties connect to the sewer.
The citizens’ petition filed by Dowdall Nov. 1, 2019 would repeal SLSD Resolution No. 12212017. This resolution by title approves levies of special assessments, which would not be subject to citizens’ initiatives, but Dowdall argues that the text of the resolution is actually authorizing the Board to levy special assessments at a later date, which Dowdall feels is subject to initiatives.
Causby rejected both citizens’ petitions after the legal review done by Beal determined the petitions were resolutions that were not subject to citizens’ initiatives among other reasons.
In the petition for the Writ, Dowdall argues that Causby has a clear legal duty to review the petition only to its form, not to the contents of it. If the form was rejected then details as to why should be provided.
Neither petitions’ rejection notice made any comment on what was wrong with the form but pointed to Beal’s review as to the reason for rejection.
Dowdall explains that Beal’s job as the District’s attorney was to review the petitions for form, compliance with Montana Code Annotated 7-5-131 and 132, write the ballot language and statements of implication for yes and no votes.
Dowdall argued that Beal doesn’t have the authority to review the petitions the way he did. Legal review is reserved for the courts after a petition is approved for circulation. The District has a set amount of time to file suit for a judge to determine if the proposed action would be valid and constitutional.
Dowdall concludes that the petitioners are entitled to a Writ of Mandamus and legal fees because there are no other provisions for appeal or judicial review of the decision of the Elections Administrator to deny the petitions. If the petitions are approved for circulation, the SLSD does have a process to challenge the legality of the petitions by bringing suit in district court.
Deputy County Attorney John Hart confirmed that he was working on this action for the County. He declined to comment on the case.
Reader Comments(0)