JUDGE SCHEDULED TO HEAR ARGUMENTS ON MARCH 31
A hearing in front of the judge is on the docket in the matter of a lawsuit against the Platte County Commission in regard to the voter-approved–but not implemented by the county commission–children’s mental health services tax.
A docket entry indicates Platte County Circuit Court Judge Megan Benton will listen to arguments in the case at a hearing set for Monday, March 31. It is not known whether the judge will issue a ruling on that day or whether she’ll take the matter under advisement and announce a ruling at a later time.
The docket entry made on March 11 indicates parties are to file replies by Monday, March 24. The judge did request both sides to provide proposed orders by the scheduled hearing on March 31.
Last fall, Platte County voters approved a quarter cent sales tax for children’s mental health services. Voters approved the question by a wide margin, with more than 56% in favor to 44% opposed. Voter turnout at that November election was one of the highest in recent history, with turnout of 81.4% of registered voters.
Several weeks after the election, the Platte County Commission consisting of Scott Fricker, Joe Vanover and Dagmar Wood voted unanimously not to impose the tax, citing the wording of a state law on the topic that uses the word “may” and not “shall.”
Two Platte County residents–Greg Plumb and Tara Fickle Bennett–filed the lawsuit on Feb. 19, asking the court to overturn the commissioners’ decision and for the county to levy the sales tax as approved by voters. The suit asks the court to impose the sales tax and for the Missouri Department of Revenue to begin collecting the tax as early as April 1.
Rob Redman, legal counsel for the county commission, on March 7 filed a motion asking for the case to be dismissed. But the judge on March 11 ordered the case to continue, telling both sides to file replies to arguments made. Redman also filed a motion for the county’s attorney fees to be covered by the opposition.
County commissioners had opposed the tax from the start, and had declined to place the measure on a ballot despite a petition drive that acquired sufficient number of voter signatures to place the measure on a ballot.
Eventually, proponents of the tax were successful in getting the Platte County Circuit Court to order the Platte County Board of Elections to place the tax question on the November ballot.
In the lawsuit filed by Plumb and Bennett in circuit court on Feb. 19, their attorney Charles Hatfield states that “desperate for a way to avoid levying a voter approved children’s services tax, commission respondents have said they rely on the use of ‘may’ in the first sentence of Section 67.1775.1 to justify their refusal to implement the will of the people.”
The petition goes on to say that commissioners “apparently adopted the advice of the Platte County counselor.” The petition states the county counselor said that “it is discretionary and it’s up to the commission after being authorized by the public, pursuant to the initiative petition, now it is up to the commission to decide whether or not to levy that tax and in our, my, legal opinion as the county counselor.”
Hatfield, the attorney for the petitioners, goes on to argue that the use of the word “may” at the beginning of Section 67.1775 “simply identifies the pre-conditions for a county to have authority (emphasis added) to levy a children’s services tax. It does not (emphasis added) vest commissioners with discretion to do what they want after a vote of the people.”
Hatfield argues that “several Missouri statutes use similar language to that found in Section 67.1775 to grant a governing body authorization to impose a sales tax and similarly require the governing body to levy the tax after voter approval.”
Hatfield argues that language in state statute “authorizes Platte County to adopt the children’s services tax through a vote of the people, which is exactly what the Platte County voters did.”
“So the word ‘may’ is just a prelude to how the children’s services tax may be adopted. Focusing on the word ‘may’ in the beginning of the statute ignores what happens after a majority vote in favor of the children’s services tax occurs,” Hatfield writes in the lawsuit against the county commission and DOR.
“The word ‘shall’ appears 24 times in Section 67.1775,” Hatfield adds. “Generally, the word ‘shall’ connotes a mandatory duty.”
RELATED LINKS:
