On Thursday, September 5, the motion by the State of Idaho to dismiss the lawsuit filed by Oneida School District #351 against the Idaho Department of Education and the State of Idaho was heard in 4th District Court before Judge Jason Scott.  Judge Scott refused to dismiss the suit.

Representatives of Idaho Attorney General Raul Labrador’s office claimed the state has sovereign immunity from such lawsuits. (Sovereign immunity means the government cannot be sued without its consent.) The attorney for the State suggested that Oneida School District has other ways to pursue its money, including going before the State Board of Examiners, which reviews claims against the State and makes funding recommendations to the Legislature. Then the State Legislature would have to allocate money to Oneida School District.

Judge Scott ruled that the School District has two weeks to file a defense motion, using Idaho case law regarding the sovereign immunity claim.

Then the State will have two weeks to respond to the District’s claims. These motions by Oneida School District and the State will be in writing, not heard in the courtroom. Therefore, no decision will be made for another month.

Judge Scott has said that the District should be eligible to receive at least part of the State funding promised in the now defunct Bond Levy Equalization program. However, he must abide by case law.

According to Superintendent Jon Abrams, who was present in court during this latest hearing, “It is encouraging that the judge did not dismiss the case.  The District still has a chance to get at least some of the money we were expecting.” 

In response to rumors circulating that Oneida County taxpayers will now have to pay for the new elementary school, Mr. Abrams said, “All conjectures are premature because nothing can be planned until the lawsuit has been finalized. A bond would have to be passed before taxpayers would have to pay for the building and that is not likely to happen.” The most likely scenario is that payments for the new building would be spread over a longer period of time. Instead of the building being paid off in three years, it may take longer because payments would have to come only from School District’s funds.  

Mr. Abrams emphasized that should the lawsuit not be decided in Oneida School District’s favor, public meetings will be held to inform the public about options.