Photo by Matt Ehnes

The city has filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit regarding the June 6 library election.

The city’s attorneys filed the motion on Aug. 25 in response to a lawsuit filed Aug. 4 stating that the plaintiffs, Beth Cummings and Dena Johnson failed to make any legally recognizable claims.

They asked the court to void the library levy election, in which voters approved a city charter amendment increasing the allowable mills for the library from two up to 17.

Cummings and Johnson filed suit, nearly two months after the election and about six weeks after the county certified the election.

Lawsuit filed over library levy election

In the suit, Cummings argued that “just days before the election” she contacted some city officials over concern that the estimated amount of the levy was incorrect.

The language used for the June 6 library election was discussed in a public hearing at a February City Commission meeting and was publicly available.

The suit should be dismissed, the city argues, because “Cummings and Johnson’s claims of confusion or impropriety are supported by neither the alleged facts or clear Montana law. There is no cognizable legal basis to undue a valid election upon such baseless speculation.”

Cascade County updating voter rolls; elections staff attends Chico conference

Cummings and Johnson argue in their pro se lawsuit that errors in the resolution, ordinance and ballot language violated state law and confused voters.

“Cummings and Johnson incredulously assert these alleged language errors ‘would make it nearly impossible for most voters, including themselves, to make an informed decision when voting in the library election,'” according to the city’s motion to dismiss. “A plainly and publicly communicated proposal to increase a particular mill levy from two to 17 mills cannot be contorted, in good faith, into some mathematically or grammatically incoherent proposition.”

The city’s motion points out that Cummings and Johnson’s suit fails to state a legal claim in part “because of the petitioner’s fundamental failure to understand that a mill levy is not a bond,” and misunderstands property tax collection.

Library receives election invoice

Cummings and Johnson argue that the estimated value of 15 mills was overstated in the election language by $45,000, causing confusion for voters. The city’s motion to dismiss argues that the claim is not supported by Montana law as the resolution, ordinance and ballot language complied with legal requirements.

In their suit, Cummings and Johnson argue that commissioners violated their duty to serve the public by allowing a city mill levy election when those living outside the city also use the library and should also pay more in taxes.

The claim “advances an incoherent, nonjusticiable political question,” according to the city’s motion.

The city cannot levy taxes against those outside its jurisdiction and “it would be illogical and illegal to obligate the city to attempt to impose a mill levy on property outside its boundaries, or to overturn an election for what amounts to an alleged failure to violate the law,” according to the city’s motion.