By JAN LARSON McLAUGHLIN
BG Independent News
A suit has been filed in the Ohio Supreme Court accusing the Bowling Green Board of Education of dragging its feet on the latest petition to secede from the school district.
But an attorney for the school district said the board acted promptly on the petition – and shouldn’t be blamed for the delays caused by the initial filing of a defective petition.
The lawsuit was filed Friday on behalf of Jamie Cook, one of the Milton Township residents who signed the revised petition asking that properties in the township be transferred from Bowling Green City School District to Patrick Henry School District.
The petition failed to make the Board of Elections’ deadline to appear on the August special election ballot.
The suit is blaming the school board for the missed deadline, and is asking that the Wood County Board of Elections be ordered to accept the petition for the August election.
The new petition, which was submitted to the school district on April 24, covers acreage in Milton Township, much of which had been part of a previously submitted petition.
The first petition had been rejected because it created an island of acreage in the Bowling Green district. The petition was resubmitted, this time without cutting out an island.
Seven other petitions from rural areas of the school district were approved earlier and will appear on the August special election ballot. The new petition met the criteria to appear on the ballot – but missed the deadline for the August ballot. It can appear in the November election.
Attorney Quintin Lindsmith said the school board acted promptly on the new petition. A special meeting was held Friday, May 1, at 4 p.m., during which the board voted to send the petition to the Wood County Board of Elections, which is charged with making sure petitions have adequate signatures.
The petition was delivered to the board of elections on Monday, May 4. The board of elections reviewed the signatures and on Tuesday, May 5, confirmed there were enough valid signatures.
Bowling Green City Schools Superintendent Francis Scruci picked up the petition from the elections office the same day and delivered it to title agent Diane Huffman, who reviewed the map of the property proposed to withdraw from BG school district.
On Wednesday, May 6, Huffman reported to school officials that the map did comply with requirements.
The school board then sent out public notice, as required by law, for a special meeting held Friday, May 8. That meant the board action missed the May 6 filing deadline.
Scott Zurakowski, attorney for Cook, said in his filing to the court that the school board is “clearly in violation” of the Ohio Revised Code since the board failed to promptly forward the petition to the Wood County Board of Elections.
Zurakowski called it an “intentional delay and refusal to abide by the mandatory, ministerial requirements” of the school district transfer statute. “The petition clearly requests the matter be placed on the August 4, 2020 special election ballot,” he wrote.
Zurakowski said in an email Monday that the Ohio Revised Code statute has no definition of “promptly.”
“However, promptly means immediately and Bowling Green did not act immediately in our opinion,” Zurakowski said.
But Lindsmith said public bodies cannot act as quickly as individuals. The school board could have waited until its next regularly scheduled meeting, but held a special meeting earlier instead, he added.
“The school board can only do what the statute requires,” Lindsmith said. “We complied with the law.”
In a letter, Zurakowski stated the school board has a “mandatory, ministerial duty to immediately forward the revised petition to the Wood County Board of Elections in order to verify the sufficiency of the signatures. There is no need for the Bowling Green City School District Board of Education to hold a meeting (regular or special) to take the next steps.”
However, Lindsmith said the notion that the board could take action on the petition without holding a public meeting is just wrong.
“The law has been settled for decades that all actions of a deliberative public body, including school boards, can only be taken through a duly convened public meeting and only through resolution,” Lindsmith wrote.
Lindsmith agreed the Ohio Revised Code requires the school board to act “promptly” once the petition was certified and returned from the board of elections. He said the board complied with that requirement.
Lindsmith also challenged the assertion that the new petition is the same as the previous petition – so it didn’t require board action. The new petition had new signatures, was signed on new dates and verified by circulators on new dates, he stated.
He pointed out that despite written assurances that all the prior petitions complied with the Ohio Revised Code, the local expert title agent found several petitions did not.
A total of 13 petitions have been submitted by residents in the rural areas of the Bowling Green school district, asking to change to other districts including Patrick Henry, McComb, Elmwood, Eastwood and Otsego. Five of the petitions were disqualified either for not having adequate signatures or by not being adjacent to the school district they were requesting to move to.
“It is not the board’s fault that your clients presented a defective petition,” Lindsmith wrote to the attorney representing the petitioners. And it’s not the school board’s fault, he continued, that the new petition was not delivered to the board until April 24 – just eight days before the election deadline.
“Any urgency for action is fabricated solely and completely from the delayed actions of your clients,” Lindsmith wrote.
Wood County Board of Elections official Terry Burton said the election filing deadlines are firm, but courts have allowed exceptions in the past.
“Our board does not have the authority to change that deadline,” Burton said.
Zurakowski said delaying the petition until the November election “absolutely” creates a hardship for the petitioners who requested the issue appear on the August ballot. He did not elaborate on the hardship that is expected.
