Court hears challenges to anti-tax campaign

Oklahoma Supreme Court justices expressed strong reservations Monday about whether a group seeking to repeal recent tax hikes had met the basic requirements for a referendum petition.

Referring to the petition now being circulated, Chief Justice Douglas L. Combs said, “At best, to me, this is sloppy. And at worst, it’s intentionally misleading. It’s deceptive.”

Combs’ comments came in the second of two challenges heard by the court Monday to a petition being circulated by Oklahoma Taxpayers Unite!, a group backed by former U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn, which wants to repeal the tax package to fund teacher pay raises. The tax package was approved by the Legislature and signed by Gov. Mary Fallin in March.

In the first challenge, brought by the Association of Professional Oklahoma Educators, some justices seemed

skeptical of arguments that the referendum process couldn’t be used for the tax bill because of the potential impact on education funding.

Blake Sonne, the attorney for the association, said the Oklahoma Constitution doesn’t allow the referendum process — which requires far fewer signatures than the more common initiative process — to be used in matters of “public peace, health or safety.”

Sonne argued that repealing the tax bill would put the state back into the crisis mode of two months ago in public education and that school funding qualified as a matter of public peace, health or safety.

Combs, the chief justice, noted that public education is not specified in the state Constitution’s provisions about referendum petitions.

Sonne said justices had the authority to carve out exceptions to the referendum process that weren’t specified. But Barrett Bowers, attorney for Oklahoma Taxpayers Unite!, said the court did not have “roving authority” to determine what is necessary for public peace, health and safety.

The Supreme Court is expected to rule soon on the challenges, both of which were lodged by education-related groups and individuals.

Oklahoma Taxpayers Unite! has until July 18 to collect about 42,000 signatures to place repeal of the tax bill on a statewide ballot.

Both challenges were

lodged by educationrelated groups and individuals.

If the court were to rule that the referendum process wasn’t appropriate for a revenue bill to fund teachers, that would kill the effort in its tracks.

If the court ruled in the second challenge that the petition itself was flawed, an amended petition could be submitted. However, organizers likely would have a month at most to collect the required signatures.

The second challenge, filed by the Oklahoma Education Association, the Oklahoma State School Boards Association and other groups, seemed to have a sympathetic audience at the court.

The groups contend the “gist,” or summary, of the petition being circulated was flawed and misleading since it only mentions three of the five taxes that were raised by House Bill 1010xx.

In addition, they argue that the backers failed to attach an “exact” copy of the legislation to the petition as required since neither the pages nor the sections of the legislation are numbered.

HB 1010xx raised taxes on cigarettes, motor fuels and some oil and gas production. The bill also changed the taxation method of little cigars and imposed a new hotel/ motel room tax. The room tax was later repealed in a separate bill.

The gist of the petition being circulated for signatures does not mention the little cigar tax or the room tax.

Bowers, the attorney for Oklahoma Taxpayers Unite!, acknowledged the defects in the petition but

said the Supreme Court has ruled previously that a referendum petition need only be in substantial compliance with the requirements.

“How do you substantially comply with the word ‘exact?’” Justice James E. Edmondson asked Bowers.

Bowers said, “Substantial compliance is appropriate even if the word

‘exact’ is included.”

Vice Chief Justice Noma Gurich told Bowers that the petition didn’t even meet the threshold of substantial compliance with the requirements.

Gurich said the “overall issue we look for in all of these cases is, ‘Are the voters misled?’ And that’s my concern.”

The justices spent some time discussing

the potential impact of repealing the tax bill, which, as passed, would raise about $475 million a year.

Sonne, the attorney for the professional educators association, said it was indisputable that the tax bill was approved to fund pay hikes for teachers and support staff and that the raises were jeopardized by the petition

effort alone.

Bowers said the justices shouldn’t speculate about budget policy or whether the referendum should or shouldn’t be passed.

Justice Patrick Wyrick noted that the Oklahoma Supreme Court was faced with a similar situation last year and that it invalidated a cigarette tax knowing that it might blow a hole in the state budget.