FAYETTEVILLE -- Washington County Circuit Judge Mark Lindsay on Wednesday heard a full day of arguments for and against a special election on the city's Civil Rights Administration ordinance.
Lindsay said he won't rule on the case until today.
At A Glance
Election Lawsuit
Closing arguments are scheduled to begin at 9 a.m. today in Washington County Circuit Judge Mark Lindsay’s courtroom, Room 400 in the Washington County Courthouse, 280 College Ave.
Source: Staff Report
The judge's decision will determine if and when an election will be held as well as what will appear on the ballot.
Washington County's Election Commission approved ballot language Oct. 9 suggested by the group Repeal 119. Commissioners also authorized ballots to be printed containing language approved by the City Council, in case Lindsay rules in favor of that version.
Jennifer Price, election coordinator, said the commission must have guidance on which ballot to use.
State law requires absentee ballots be mailed no later than 47 days before a special election. Ballots are due today in the County Clerk's office, Price said. If the deadline isn't met, the election could be held Jan. 13.
Jeff Priebe, a Little Rock attorney representing Fayetteville resident Kristin Higgins, presented a range of arguments against the special election.
Priebe called Repeal 119's ballot language confusing. A "for" vote would be for repeal of the ordinance and an "against" vote against its repeal. He said the approved ballot title doesn't match the language on petitions Repeal 119 representatives circulated and doesn't give voters a clear indication of what they would be voting on.
Priebe questioned if a full copy of the final ordinance the City Council approved was attached to all petitions, as required by law, and he argued the ordinance, when it was attached, was illegible. Priebe also cited several irregularities with the petition drive: signed canvasser affidavits that weren't in the proper form; signatures from people who live outside the city and signatures dated after the date shown on a notary seal.
"All these irregularities support ... Ms. Higgins' claims that she was misled," Priebe said.
Higgins, a professor of counselor education at the University of Arkansas, said Wednesday that Robert Johnson, a canvasser, came to her house and asked her to sign a petition. Higgins said she didn't read the petition or see an ordinance attached. When she asked Johnson if her signature was in support of the ordinance, Higgins said Johnson told her it was.
When Higgins found out her name was among more than 4,100 signatures calling for a special election, she said she was appalled.
"My name being on that petition goes against everything I believe in and value," Higgins, who teaches a course on sexual orientation and gender identity issues, said.
"I don't believe the civil rights of another individual should be a voting matter," she added.
Johnson, a Springdale resident who manages a heating and air-conditioning company in Fayetteville, said he never told anyone a signature was in support of the ordinance.
"I told them that this was going to put it to a public vote ... so they were going to have a chance to accept or reject it," Johnson said.
Travis Story, general counsel for Repeal 119, also countered some of Priebe's claims.
"More than 4,095 residents of the city of Fayetteville signed this petition, because they know what they wanted to have done," Story said. "They wanted to repeal this ordinance passed by the Fayetteville City Council.
"We think they were able to understand that the repeal language doesn't render the ballot title confusing or misleading and therefore it's appropriate and should be what remains on the ballot to be voted on Dec. 9," he said.
City Clerk Sondra Smith said an ordinance was attached to all 802 petitions submitted to her office Sept. 20. Smith said the attached ordinance may have contained slightly different wording than what the City Council approved, but she said those changes -- described by City Attorney Kit Williams as "scrivener's errors" -- didn't substantially change the meaning.
The submitted petitions contained more than 5,700 signatures. Employees in the clerk's office certified about 4,300. They stopped certifying once they were sure they crossed the 4,095 threshold to refer the ordinance to a public referendum.
As to Priebe's argument the attached ordinance was illegible, Smith said, "I wear no-line bifocals, and I could read it."
Smith said multiple signatures from people living outside the city were invalidated. She also said 11 full petition pages were culled, because a canvasser didn't sign them or they weren't notarized.
While Story said the "for" repeal language was clear, Williams argued a "for" vote should be for the ordinance in question and an "against" vote should be against it, as outlined in Arkansas law for referendums.
Washington County Attorney George Butler advised election commissioners they should defer to the language petitioners requested.
"We're not in the ballot-writing business," Butler said Wednesday.
Also at issue was if the ordinance City Council members approved should be included on the ballot.
An initial request for ballot language from Repeal 119 only included the ordinance number and Chapter 119, the section of city code that would be added. It made no mention of the ordinance title, "Civil Rights Administration," or what the ordinance would do.
Price noted a full copy of the ordinance would be available for voters to review at polling sites.
NW News on 10/23/2014