A lawsuit protesting the city of Ketchum’s
payments to the Sun Valley/Ketchum Chamber of Commerce will proceed after a tangle of
procedural difficulties was resolved on Friday.
The suit, filed in Fifth District Court in Hailey on Dec. 21 by Ketchum
resident Craven Young, charges that the city’s contract for services with the chamber
violates the state Constitution. As of Friday’s hearing before Judge William Hart,
Young has been joined in his effort by five more plaintiffs.
The hearing was set to rule on a motion filed by Ketchum city attorney
Margaret Simms to have the suit dismissed.
But on the Tuesday before the hearing, Raymundo Peña, a lawyer from
Rupert, entered the fray representing seven more Ketchum residents, who, like Young,
called themselves members of Burdened Taxpayers, a group claiming to be overburdened by
city property taxes.
Peña attempted to add the additional plaintiffs to Young’s suit.
However, Hart told him his clients would have to file their own suit, and he would then
consolidate the two into one court action. Also, the list of seven plaintiffs was reduced
to five.
Young, who holds a law degree but is not a member of the Idaho bar, is
representing himself. In an interview, Fred White, one of the new plaintiffs said,
"Maybe we felt more comfortable having a bona-fide lawyer" as a reason for
filing a second suit that is nearly identical to the first.
Also, White said, there is more strength in numbers, at least on a human
perception level, which could benefit the plaintiffs’ cases.
Hart told all three parties to start anew. He gave the plaintiffs seven
days to file whatever more they want and told Simms that she could then file whatever she
wants in response.
"Litigating this on the merits is very important," Hart said.
In an interview following the hearing, Young called Simms’ legal
tactics in making procedural objections a "delay game."
The city has already paid the chamber of commerce $157,500 as its first
installment for the current fiscal year, but according to its contract for services with
the chamber, will pay a second installment of $157,500 on or before April 3.
Young contended the city’s alleged delay tactics are to allow it to
make that payment before a court can intervene. For that reason, he said, the new suit
requests a writ of prohibition to forbid the city from making the payment. Young’s
initial complaint asked only for a declaratory judgment ruling the city’s contract
with the chamber to be illegal.
A hearing is scheduled for March 17 at 11 a.m. in Hailey to rule on
Simms’ motion to dismiss the suits.
Simms said in an interview that her motion focuses on a contention that
the plaintiffs lack standing in their role as taxpayers.
"The cases in Idaho say that a generalized grievance by taxpayers
should be addressed by the legislative process," Simms said.
