Inhabitants of Town of North Berwick v. State Bd. of Ed.

Decision Date10 March 1967
PartiesINHABITANTS OF the TOWN OF NORTH BERWICK v. STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION et al.
CourtMaine Supreme Court

Simon Spill, Biddeford, Harry S. Littlefield, Wells, for plaintiff.

George C. West, Deputy Atty. Gen., John W. Benoit, Asst. Atty. Gen., Augusta, for State Bd. of Education.

Ward T. Hanscom, Sanford, for Town of Berwick.

James H. Titcomb, Sanford, for Town of Lebanon.

Before WILLIAMSON, C. J., and WEBBER, TAPLEY, MARDEN, DUFRESNE and WEATHERBEE, JJ.

DUFRESNE, Justice.

On report, upon the complaint, the writ issued and the agreed statement of facts and pertinent portion of the record with exhibits attached, for this Court to render such decision as the rights of the parties require.

The ultimate issue before us is whether we should quash the records of the State Board of Education wherein at a meeting held on August 29, 1966, it was voted as follows:

(1) '(T)hat the Board make a finding of fact that the Town of Berwick voted 150-10, the Town of Lebanon voted 270-249, and that the Town of North Berwick voted 160-122 to form a school administrative district and that each of the towns have properly elected directors and that all proceedings are in conformity with the law,' * * *.

(2) '(T)hat the towns of Berwick, Lebanon and North Berwick be issued a Certificate of Organization naming them District #60.'

(3) '(T)hat Order #4 and Form 7 be issued calling for an organizational meeting of District #60 to be held at Berwick High School on Monday, September 19, 1966 at 7:30 p. m.'

The issue was raised in the Sueprior Court by complaint for a review of the Board's proceedings and an order in certiorari to quash the same under Rule 80(b) of our Maine Rules of Civil Procedure. The case was reported to us under 72 M.R.C.P.

The factual background may be narrated as follows: The superintending school committees of the municipalities of Berwick, Lebanon and North Berwick respectively duly filed under 20 M.R.S.A. § 215 an application with the State Board of Education for its approval of the formation of a school administrative district consisting of the 3 reference towns. Upon joint meeting of the municipal officers and the members of the superintending school committees of the 3 towns legally called and attended, it was voted that the fair and equitable number of school directors to be elected by and to represent each of the towns of Berwick, Lebanon and North Berwick respectively was 3. Thereafter the State Board of Education (the Board), on May 27, 1966, ordered (Order #3, so-called) the municipal officers of each of the 3 municipalities to call separate town meetings for the purpose of voting upon 'the question of the formation of the proposed School Administrative District and other questions relating thereto' and specifically on each article in the following form:

'Article 2: To see if the municipality will vote to join with the municipalities of BERWICK-LEBANON-NORTH BERWICK to form a school administrative district.

Article 3: To see if the municipality will vote to approve the allocation of representation among the municipalities on the board of school directors as recommended by the superintending school committees and municipal officers as follows: The total number of directors shall be 9 and

the Town of Berwick shall be entitled to 3 directors,

the Town of Lebanon shall be entitled to 3 directors, and

the Town of North Berwick shall be entitled to 3 directors.

Article 4: To see if the municipality will vote to authorize the district to assume full responsibility for amortizing the following listed school indebtedness now outstanding in the municipalities and school districts comprising the school administrative district under consideration:

                -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Type                              Payment schedule on all
                 Obligated         of         Amount     Interest   outstanding school
                Municipality   Obligation     Unpaid       Rate     indebtedness
                -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Berwick        Bonds         $95,000    4%          Oct. 1 annually as follows
                                                                    $5,000 1966
                                                                    $6,000 1967-70
                                                                    $7,000 1971-73
                                                                    $8,000 1974-76
                                                                    $9,000 1977-78
                                                                    $3,000 1979
                Lebanon        MSBA          $55,680    2.5%        $4,640 annually Dec. 1
                  "            Bonds         $55,800    2.9%        $3,100 annually Sept
                North Berwick  Note          $ 2,000    3%          $2,000 annually
                  " "          Note          $25,000    3.75%       $5,000 annually
                -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                

Article 5: To choose 3 school directors to represent the Town on the

Board of School Directors of the School Administrative District."

In duly called elections, each town on June 18, 1966 voted in the affirmative on each article submitted under the Board's Order #3 except the town of Lebanon where the question of the formation of the district was defeated by the narrow margin of 3 votes (137 yes-140 no) and the towns of Berwick and Lebanon elected their 3 school directors, but North Berwick did not. The clerks of the respective towns made true returns of the results of the June 18 election to the Board under 20 M.R.S.A. § 216, for Berwick and Lebanon on June 28, 1966 and for North Berwick on August 24, 1966. North Berwick's returns however included the results of the June 18 election, and also those of a second election held on August 20, 1966 on the very same articles as were submitted to the inhabitant-voters on June 18, 1966. Lebanon had also held a second election on the same articles on July 16, 1966, and its town clerk had filed the returns of that election with the Board on July 20, 1966. Lebanon, in this second election, voted in the affirmative on all articles and elected its 3 school directors the affirmative vote on the question of the formation of the school administrative district reversing by the score of 270 yes votes to 249 no votes the previous negative decision of the electorate. On July 22, 1966, at its regular monthly meeting, the Board had tabled the matter of the organization of the school administrative district of the 3 towns, undoubtedly because it then had not received the official returns of North Berwick. The North Berwick second election produced a resounding defeat for all articles submitted (Article 2: 89 yes to 288 no votes-Article 3: 105 yes to 190 no votes-Article 4: 122 yes to 231 no votes), but the voters inconsistently elected 3 school directors.

No issue is raised concerning the formality of notices and the posting of warrants for any of the special town meetings at which any of the elections were held, and it is admitted that the second town meetings held in Lebanon and North Berwick were called and held without any further application on the part of any of the 3 towns to the Board, and that the notice and warrant for the same did not expressly state that the election was for the purpose of reconsideration of the town's previous vote. The State Board of Education, on August 29, 1966 upon legal advice to that effect, chose to accept Lebanon's returns of its second election of July 16, 1966, but voted to accept North Berwick's returns of its first election of June 18, 1966 so far as articles 2, 3 and 4 were concerned, and that part of North Berwick's returns of its second election of August 20, 1966 respecting article 5 thereof wherein North Berwick elected school directors for the first time. The Board disregarded the overwhelming defeat of the question of the formation of the school administrative district and the other questions incidental thereto. North Berwick challenges the legality of the Board's action through these proceedings in certiorari.

The defendants preliminarily suggest that review of the Board's actions may not be had in certiorari proceedings.

The usual function of the writ of certiorari is to enable a party without remedy by appeal, exception or otherwise, to obtain the certification of the true record properly extended of an inferior tribunal, in proceedings judicial or quasi-judicial in nature, so that the superior tribunal ordering the certification may review the decision of the inferior tribunal on said record, and after inspection of the record determine whether material mistakes of law were made for which the record should be quashed, such as whether the inferior tribunal had jurisdiction of the parties and the subject-matter or whether it exceeded its jurisdiction, or otherwise proceeded in violation of law. Carter v. Wilkins, et al., 160 Me. 290, 203 A.2d 682 (1964); Toulouse et al. v. Board of Zoning Adjustment, City of Waterville, 147 Me. 387, 87 A.2d 670 (1952); Jellerson v. Board of Police of the City of Biddeford, 134 Me. 443, 187 A. 713 (1936).

Our Legislature did not provide for an appeal as such from decisions or rulings of the State Board of Education in proceedings for the formation of school administrative districts, and under such circumstances the only permissible review, if any, of the actions of the Board would be by the extraordinary writ of certiorari known to the common law, provided by statute, 14 M.R.S.A. 244, 194 A. 404 (1937). 80(b) of our Rules of Civil Procedure. See Carter, supra; Chavarie v. Robie, 135 Me. 244, 194 A.2d 404 (1937).

This power of the Superior Court by writ of certiorari to quash or affirm, or enter such judgment as the court below should have entered, or make such order, judgment or decree in the premises as law and justice may require, 14 M.R.S.A. § 5352, is available however only in proceedings of bodies and...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • Athens Sch. Dist. v. Vt. State Bd. of Educ.
    • United States
    • Vermont Supreme Court
    • July 10, 2020
    ...of public school affairs in any district" in state "independent of local government" interest); see also Inhabitants of N. Berwick v. State Bd. of Educ., 227 A.2d 462, 468 (Me. 1967) (stating that legislature has power "to divide or join towns into school districts as it pleases" by law "wi......
  • Athens Sch. Dist. v. Vt. State Bd. of Educ.
    • United States
    • Vermont Supreme Court
    • July 10, 2020
    ...of public school affairs in any district" in state "independent of local government" interest); see also Inhabitants of N. Berwick v. State Bd. of Educ., 227 A.2d 462, 468 (Me. 1967) (stating that Legislature has power "to divide or join towns into school districts as it pleases" by law "wi......
  • Buck v. Town of Yarmouth
    • United States
    • Maine Supreme Court
    • June 21, 1979
    ...of the cooperative district, the local district was bound by the act of validation). See also Inhabitants of Town of North Berwick v. State Board of Education, Me., 227 A.2d 462, 472 (1967).10 In recent years the United States Supreme Court has allowed important issues to be litigated by pa......
  • Msad 6 Bd. of Dirs. v. Town of Frye Island
    • United States
    • Maine Supreme Court
    • April 14, 2020
    ...districts by statute "without referendum to the people in the municipalities within the proposed district." Town of North Berwick v. State Bd. of Educ. , 227 A.2d 462, 468 (Me. 1967).[¶51] Because no fundamental right is implicated and L.D. 500 is reasonably related to the legitimate state ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT