The state wants a judge to throw out a $7.7 million lawsuit from an Eastern Idaho school district.
But Oneida School District Superintendent Jon Abrams accused Attorney General Raúl Labrador’s office of engaging in “delay, subterfuge and inaction” that could cost the district the $7.7 million.
The legal jockeying comes a month after Oneida sued the state, demanding money to help offset the cost of a $29 million bond issue for a new elementary school. School officials say the district expected to receive $7.7 million from the state to offset some of the cost of the bond, which voters approved in 2023. District officials say wording in a 2024 school facilities law puts the state funding in jeopardy.
Oneida filed its lawsuit on July 17. Here’s a rundown of the recent court filings — and a look at what’s on the docket.
The state wants the judge to throw out the lawsuit. On Aug. 9, Labrador’s office filed a motion to dismiss the complaint.
The Idaho Department of Education, the defendant in the lawsuit, enjoys “sovereign immunity” and cannot be sued, deputy attorney general Rafael Droz says in his motion. Droz also argues that Oneida’s lawsuit is premature, since none of the state’s payments are due until Aug. 31.
“There are no allegations that any of these payments will not be made and therefore there is no case or controversy,” Droz wrote.
Ada County District Judge Jason Scott will hear the motion to dismiss on Sept. 5.
The Legislature wants a seat at the table. The Legislature has hired a Boise law firm to argue on its behalf — and file a motion to intervene in the case.
“The Legislature has ‘absolute control’ over state finances, except as limited by the Constitution,” said Preston Carter, one of the Legislature’s lawyers, in an Aug. 13 motion. “Accordingly, the Legislature has established a comprehensive statutory scheme for funding school districts.”
Carter said the Legislature would side with Labrador’s office — and seek dismissal of the lawsuit.
Carter asked Scott to rule by Thursday on the motion to intervene. Labrador’s office and the Oneida district both said they do not oppose the Legislature’s motion.
Oneida wants the $7.7 million set aside. Oneida officials want the Department of Education to sit on the $7.7 million until the lawsuit is settled. In a request for an injunction, filed Wednesday, the district said it would suffer “irreparable harm” if the state spends the money elsewhere.
The $7.7 million sits in a fund, created by the 2023 Legislature, designed to provide schools with money to offset property tax collections. The Department of Education is supposed to parcel out the $203 million fund on Aug. 31, and Oneida has said it wanted its lawsuit resolved by then — and before its share of the money could go elsewhere.
District officials say they have been talking to Education Department officials, including state superintendent Debbie Critchfield, in hopes of resolving the matter by Aug. 31. In a court statement filed Wednesday, Abrams said Labrador’s office has undermined this process. And this “delay, subterfuge and inaction” underscores the need to set the money aside, Abrams said.
Scott is scheduled to hear the motion for an injunction on Aug. 29.
