Keyes v. Class "B" School Dist. No. 421 of Valley County
| Decision Date | 09 October 1953 |
| Docket Number | No. 421,No. 8001,421,8001 |
| Parties | Page 811 261 P.2d 811 74 Idaho 314 KEYES et al. v. CLASS 'B' SCHOOL DIST. NO. 421 OF VALLEY COUNTY et al. Supreme Court of Idaho |
| Court | Idaho Supreme Court |
Kibler & Beebe, Nampa, for appellants.
Willis C. Moffatt, Boise, for respondent.
On March 21, 1952, a school district bond election was held in Class 'B' School District No. 421 of Valley County, Idaho. The proposal submitted to the voters was for authorization of the issuance and sale of school district bonds in an amount not exceeding $275,000. The proposal carried by more than the necessary two-thirds majority, 648 voters having cast ballots 'for bonds' and 275 voters having cast ballots 'against bonds'.
Appellants brought this action seeking to enjoin the issuance and sale of the bonds so authorized. Their complaint in substance alleges that the initial action by the board of trustees of the school district in calling the election was illegal and not in accordance with the governing statutes; and that all further proceedings thereafter in giving notice of the election and holding the same were a nullity and of no effect. Respondents by their answer and cross-complaint deny that the initial call for the election was illegal and seek to have the election approved and the bonds validated.
Appellants, Robert M. Keyes and Laurel Hansen, and respondents, Warren H. Brown, Kenneth Wilde and Ira Rutledge, constituted the members of the board of trustees and respondent, Bill Kirk, was the clerk, of respondent school district at the time of the call for such bond election.
At the trial of the action the parties stipulated that the facts disclosed by the complaint of plaintiffs, with the exception of Paragraph IX thereof with which we are not now concerned, and the facts set out in the answer and cross-complaint and attached exhibits were true and correct; that there were no facts to be found by the trial court and that the cause was to be decided upon questions of law. The trial court decided the cause in favor of defendants; denied any relief to plaintiffs and entered judgment approving the election and validating the bonds.
The first contention of appellants is that the meeting of the board of trustees at which the election was called was not held in compliance with Section 33-706, I.C., amended by Session Laws of 1949, Ch. 101, p. 176. This section provides that the regular meetings of the board of trustees of a Class 'B' School District shall be held on the second Monday of each month; and special or adjourned meetings may be called by the chairman or by any two trustees from time to time, notice of the time and place thereof being given by personal notice to the members, or notice in writing left at the residence of said members at least twelve hours prior to said meetings. The meeting at which the election was called was held on February 19, 1952. The regular meeting date was February 18. At such meeting all members of the board of trustees were present except Robert M. Keyes. It is pleaded by the answer and admitted by the stipulation of the parties that the meeting was postponed from February 18 to February 19 by Warren H. Brown, the chairman of the board, at the request of appellant Keyes. All the trustees being present except Keyes and he having personal notice of the meeting, the same constituted a postponed regular meeting with authority to transact business. Gale v. City of Moscow, 15 Idaho 332, 97 P. 828; Sommercamp v. Kelly, 8 Idaho 712, 71 P. 147; Botts v. City of Valley Center, 124 Kan. 9, 257 P. 226.
Appellants next contend that a majority of the board of trustees did not approve the submission of the question of the issuance of bonds to the electors as required by Section 33-909, I.C. The part of such section material herein reads as follows:
'The board of trustees of any school district in the state of Idaho upon approval of a majority thereof, may submit to the qualified electors, who are resident taxpayers of the district the question as to whether or not the board shall be empowered to issue negotiable coupon bonds of the district in an amount and for a period of time to be named in the notice of election.'
The resolution and the action thereon as shown by the minutes of the meeting of February 19, 1952, were as follows:
'Hansen requested that he be put on record as being in favor of a full Board before the above action be taken.' It thus appears that only two members of the board of trustees voted for such resolution and that Brown, the chairman of the board, did not vote. The statute uses the words, 'upon approval of a majority thereof'. In the answer of defendants we find the following allegations of fact which under the stipulation of the parties we must deem to be true, to-wit:
'* * *; that the chairman, defendant Warren Brown, who had presented the question to the Board for consideration, did not vote, but that at said meeting, as well as upon numerous occasions during the preceding years at Board meetings and elsewhere, defendant Brown, as chairman of said Board of Trustees and as a voter within the District, had approved and favored the said bond issue and had expressed himself as favoring the said election; and that at said meeting the chairman fully approved the submission of the matter to the electors, and expressed himself in agreement with the motion, but, as presiding officer, did not feel he should vote on said question since a majority of the trustees present, excluding the chairman, had voted favorably on the question; * * *'. (Emphasis supplied.)
In Boise City v. Better Homes, 72 Idaho 441, 243 P.2d 303,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Penrod v. Crowley
...Lewis v. Woodall, 72 Idaho 16, 236 P.2d 91; Boise City v. Better Homes, 72 Idaho 441, 448, 243 P.2d 303; Keyes v. Class 'B' School Dist. No. 421, 74 Idaho 314, 320, 261 P.2d 811; People ex rel. Elder v. Sours, 31 Colo. 369, 74 P. Judgment affirmed. No costs allowed. SMITH, KNUDSON, McQUADE ......