Headington v. North Winneshiek Community School Dist., in Winneshiek County

• Decision Date: 13 November 1962
• Docket Number: No. 50725,50725
• Citation: 254 Iowa 430,117 N.W.2d 831
• Parties: Wayne HEADINGTON, Truman Tollefsrud, Paul Thingvoid, Palmer A. Anderson, Harlan Whitney, Obert D. Sacquitne, George F. Kruse, Jr., Merlin G. Snell, Forest Little, John Lenz, Loren Amundson, and Bernard H. Horgen, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. NORTH WINNESHIEK COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT, IN the COUNTY OF WINNESHIEK, State of Iowa; Board of Directors of Community School District in the County of Winneshiek, State of Iowa, Mrs. Vincent Henry, Curtis Marlow, William Sexton, Edgar Peterson, Chester Thune, Members of said Board; Mrs. Edna Stromseth, Secretary of said Board, and, Mrs. Inez Shuros, Treasurer of North Winneshiek Community School District in the County of Winneshiek, State of Iowa, Defendants-Appellees.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

Page 831

117 N.W.2d 831

254 Iowa 430

Wayne HEADINGTON, Truman Tollefsrud, Paul Thingvoid, Palmer A. Anderson, Harlan Whitney, Obert D. Sacquitne, George F. Kruse, Jr., Merlin G. Snell, Forest Little, John Lenz, Loren Amundson, and Bernard H. Horgen, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. NORTH WINNESHIEK COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT, IN the COUNTY OF WINNESHIEK, State of Iowa; Board of Directors of Community School District in the County of Winneshiek, State of Iowa, Mrs. Vincent Henry, Curtis Marlow, William Sexton, Edgar Peterson, Chester Thune, Members of said Board; Mrs. Edna Stromseth, Secretary of said Board, and, Mrs. Inez Shuros, Treasurer of North Winneshiek Community School District in the County of Winneshiek, State of Iowa, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 50725.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

Nov. 13, 1962.

Miller, Pearson & Melaas, Decorah, for plaintiffs-appellants.

Elwood, Anderson & Elwood, Cresco, for defendants-appellees.

SNELL, Justice.

This is an action in equity challenging the declared result in a school bond election.

Plaintiffs-Appellants are taxpayers and electors residing in North Winneshiek Community School District in Winneshiek County.

The school district, its directors and officers are defendants.

In April, 1961, the district held an election and submitted the following proposition to the voters:

'Shall the following public measure be adopted?

'Shall the North Winneshiek Community School District in the County of Winneshiek, State of Iowa, issue School Bonds in a sum of not to exceed $400,000.00 for the purpose of building and furnishing a new school building and procuring a site therefor?'

The Election Judges reported the returns as follows:

740 votes cast

442 affirmative votes

287 negative votes

11 spoiled ballots

On the basis of this count the proposition received an affirmative vote of more than 60%.

In the trial court plaintiffs contended that the election was not conducted as required by law in several particulars and that certain affirmative votes were improperly counted and negative votes improperly rejected. The facts and exhibits were introduced by stipulation and deposition.

The trial court in a careful analysis of the evidence and the law found that the election was lawfully conducted and that the public measure carried by the 60% required by law.

For reversal plaintiffs urge seven propositions. These will be considered in order.

. I. It was stipulated that there were 4 precincts and voting places within the district in the last general election. At the election now under attack there was only one polling place. Plaintiffs contend this makes the election illegal and void.

Burr Oak is a village within the district.

Section 277.5 Code of Iowa, I.C.A. provides:

'Precincts for voting. School corporations other than city, town, or village independent, or community districts shall constitute a voting precinct, but the voting precincts at all school elections in corporations in whole or in part in cities, towns, and villages shall be the same as for the last general state election except that the board may consolidate two or more such precincts into one unless there shall be filed with the secretary of the board at least twenty days before the election, a petition signed by twenty-five or more electors of any precinct requesting that such precinct shall not be consolidated with any other precinct. To such petition shall be attached the affidavit of a qualified elector of the precinct that all the signers thereof are electors of such precinct, and that the signatures thereon are genuine.'

Section 277.7 Code of Iowa, I.C.A. provides:

'Polling place. In all school corporations the board shall determine a suitable polling place in each precinct, which polling place shall be, when practicable, the same place used by the last city or state election.'

Page 4 of the minute book of the Board of Directors shows in pen written form the proceedings of a regular meeting on March 14, 1961. Page 5 continues with the minutes of a special meeting immediately following. From these minutes, we quote:

'March 14, 1961--Special Meeting

'At the conclusion of the regular meeting, a special session was called to order at which time the necessary petitions for a bond election were presented to the Board with a total of 338 signatures.

Marlow made a motion that the bond election be held on April 17, 1961, this motion seconded by Peterson. Carried.

'The Van Vliet school house--formerly Hesper #4 was designated as the voting place.' * * *

'Also attached hereto and officially made a part of these minutes is a typewritten transcript of the official minutes, resolutions and proceedings of the Board of Directors held on March 14, 1961.' The attached record is typed and signed. It sets out the proceedings, resolutions and directions incident to the election. The resolution provides for an election for the submission of the proposed bond issue. It provides, among other things:

'WHEREAS, the entire School District constitutes one voting precinct for School Election purposes: * * *

'BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the voting place for said Election shall be as follows:

'Van Vliet School, formerly Hesper No. 4.'

The record shows the aye and nay vote and the adoption of the resolution by unanimous vote.

There is no contention that there was any petition signed by 25 voters and filed with the secretary opposing consolidation of voting precincts as authorized by Section 277.5 of the Code, I.C.A.

No discussion of applicable law is necessary. Consolidation of voting precincts is authorized by statute in the absence of a statutory protest. The pen written minutes and the typed and signed resolution effectuated a legal consolidation of voting precincts.

II. Plaintiffs contend that the judges of election were not selected in the manner required by Section 277.10, Code of Iowa and the departure was such as to render the election void.

Section 277.10 of the Code, I.C.A. provides in part:

'Judges of election. In corporations consisting of one voting precinct the president and the secretary of the board, with one of the directors shall act as judges of the election. If any such judge of election is absent or refuses to serve, the voters present at the polls shall appoint one of their number to act in his stead.'

As we have held in Division I, supra, that there was only one voting precinct we quote only the provision relative thereto.

The minutes of the board meeting on March 14, 1961 show the selection of 4 judges, 2 substitute judges, 3 clerks and 1 substitute clerk. None of those selected was a member or secretary of the board.

The poll books show that 3 of the selected judges and the 3 selected clerks qualified as such, served and signed the official returns. The record is silent as to the 4th person selected to serve as judge. Apparently she did not appear. One of the ladies selected as substitute judge did not appear. Her husband appeared, took the required oath, served and signed the poll books as one of the 4 judges.

It is apparent that neither the selection nor the serving of the election officials was in strict compliance with the statute.

As to one precinct districts there is no provision in section 277.10 for more than 3 judges or for any clerks. Neither is there any limitation. There being no statutory prohibition and no showing of fraud or prejudice extra help at the polls by qualified electors duly sworn does not vitiate an election.

In Mack v. Independent School District of Corning, 200 Iowa 1190, 1191, 206 N.W. 145, the entire board, in addition to the president and secretary were chosen as judges of the election. On appeal we said:

'By reason of this fact, the appellants urge that the election was void. To our minds this is merely an irregularity, at most, and would not invalidate the election unless prejudice is shown to have resulted therefrom.

'In so far as the submission of this question to the voters is concerned, and the results determined, there is nothing in the record to show that any prejudice whatever resulted from the fact that all of the members of the board acted at different times as judges of the election.' * * *

This case is cited with approval in Poor v. Incorporated Town of Duncombe, 231 Iowa 907, 912, 2 N.W.2d 294.

In Chambers v. Board of Directors, 172 Iowa 340, 345, 346, 154 N.W. 581, 583, it is said:

'While the law seems to provide that the president and secretary and one of the board shall act as judges of election (Code, § 2746), the judges who were selected were at least de facto officers, and the election should not be invalidated because of irregularities in the manner of their selection. The rule universally adopted is that irregularities in the selection of election judges will be disregarded unless prejudice be shown. (Citations) If this were not the rule, substance would be subordinated to shadow, and mere technicalities would thwart the will of the people.'

Section 277.10 Code of Iowa, I.C.A. provides for the appointment of a substitute if a judge is absent. It appears that one of the selected judges must have been absent. The substitute previously selected was also absent. An elector who was present was sworn and served.

The statute clearly contemplates that there may be vacancies in election personnel and that vacancies should be filled.

There is no claim that the persons who served as election officials were not qualified electors of the district. They were properly sworn. No prejudice is shown. The irregularities in the selection and serving of the election officials were not such as to affect the validity of the election.

III. Plaintiffs claim, as separate propositions, first, that ballots not initialed at all, and second, that affirmative ballots not properly initialed should not be counted. We will consider these propositions together.

Section 49.82 Code of Iowa, I.C.A. provides:

'Voter to receive one ballot--indorsement by judge....