I’m not sure what the East-Kingston and Kenisington School Boards want to keep hidden so badly, but they are spending a lot of tax dollars on legal fees to keep it that way.
Taxpayers proposed a warrant article to create a non-taxpayer-funded committee to explore ways to save taxpayers’ money. The school budget is out of control. Cost per student is higher than even the already ridiculously high state average. There is an opportunity to consolidate infrastructure, and that’s more or less it.
- The petition Warrant Article.
- School Boards reject it, and why.
- The law as written.
- Why the courts may not provide relief.
- What to do about it.
The Taxpayers submitted the proposed petition warrant on the first Tuesday in January as required by law. Everyone agrees that the law, as written, does not specify a time; it only requires delivery, in this case, by January 13th. It was electronically submitted before midnight on that date.
Petition Denied
The petition was denied for failing to be delivered in a timely manner. Taxpayers asked for reconsideration. No. Taxpayers took it to court. No. There have since been a series of legal demands and responses which, if you didn’t follow the story, can be found here (you will notice this is not their first rodeo in pursuit of transparency or financial responsibility). [Related – MACDONALD: Public Education Funding Deck Chairs]
East-Kingston and Kensington School Boards keep paying lawyers to convince a more than willing court that the absence of a specific time deadline means they can invent one. The goal seems obvious. Force the taxpayers to pay the price of taking this to the State Supreme Court, where they would likely get a win, but not before.
It could happen sooner, but that is not what the history of these things tells us. We have documented numerous cases involving school districts and cities that have resulted in two of our contributors winning free speech awards (Donna Green and Laurie Ortolano). The system is the punishment, and all three branches of government are in on it; read up on Dan Richard’s years-long fight to get the government to follow its own constitution on the matter of election rights and integrity. Dan has had to take his case to the US Supreme Court in search of relief, but in the case of East-Kingston and Kensington School Boards, I think the State Supreme Court might be enough.
Long-time readers will remember a case we reported on (I can’t find the link) in which the state Supreme Court had to acknowledge that a firearm next to a loaded magazine was not a loaded firearm. Prior to this ruling, if you stored your mag and unloaded gun together, you could get arrested for violating the law. But absent the common sense reading of the law, unless the mag is in the firearm or a round is in the chamber, the gun isn’t loaded.
Chapter 40 – Section 40:13 does not expressly state a time certain, nor does the law empower any subdivision to invent one at its convenience.
I’m not saying the legal case as presented by taxpayers cannot fail on other grounds or even get a day in the High Court. Here is the Defendant’s latest response [Defendant’s Objection to Plaintiff’s Motion]. The legal system is crafted to prevent upstarts from understanding the Rube-Goldbergian system it has erected to protect its monopoly on interpreting law and justice.
The court must also be legally able to provide relief. If it can’t, then there is nothing to be done, and the matter becomes a problem for the legislature, which has no obligation to do anything and is more than capable of demonstrating that skill.
The Only Solution
The law needs to be clarified.
It either needs to state a specific time deadline or clarify that the end of the day is submission in any form submitted and received before 11:59 PM ET on the day/date required by law.
I would like Al and his tenacious cadre of taxpayer advocates to win, but it is unclear what that looks like at this point. They aren’t going to invalidate a ballot or the election that has already occurred. They won’t demand a new election that includes the warrant or a special election over that specific issue. And Kensington and East Kingston will always waste tax dollars to prevent transparency, accountability, or common sense from disrupting the senseless rise in the costs of a public-school education, regardless of the outcomes.
The petition should not have been denied, but I do not see how the courts can undo that or provide relief. The best possible outcome appears to me to be a post-it note to the legislature to clarify the language in Chapter 40 – Section 40:13.
As for all the other issues in Kensington and East Kingston, there are many, and the District has no interest in the greater problem:” It’s abuse and mismanagement of taxpayers’ money is driving people out of the district and out of their homes. It is unsustainable, and this latest outrage is just another example of the system abusing the system to avoid accountability.
Correction. The original version of this named Dan Richards when it should have been Dan Richard’s. I know them both, but that’s no excuse for missing the apostrophe.
