This post tracks developments in the case filed against the city of Norman in regard to the voter-approved bond for a permanent homeless shelter.
Supreme Court votes to uphold permanent homeless shelter
Oct. 27: The Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled to allow Norman's voter-approved permanent homeless shelter to move forward in an 8-1 vote Tuesday.
In a 16-page ruling, the majority justices wrote they found no support for the residents' argument that the bond issue is not a public utility subject to Article 10 Section 27 of the Oklahoma Constitution.
"The shelter, as described by Residents, aligns with this court's prior descriptions of public utilities as city-owned projects for use or benefit of the public or some limited portion of the public," the conclusion states. "We are bound to give a fair and just construction to what City and voters have declared to be a public utility."
Mayor Stephen Tyler Holman wrote in a Facebook post Tuesday that he is proud Norman has secured the property, obtained voter approval and defended the project before the court.
"Building a permanent shelter and moving the operation out of downtown was part of the plan I ran on when I campaigned for Mayor," Holman wrote. "This is a promise I made to the people of Norman, and we’re delivering on it. Just as importantly, we’re doing it with a clear expectation that the facility will help people transition out of homelessness, not become permanently dependent on emergency shelter."
Holman added that Norman continues to lead the way in establishing legal clarity across the state, stating that the city has a long history of tackling difficult issues.
Supreme Court denies argument, brief requests
Oct. 26: The Oklahoma Supreme Court denied the plaintiffs’ requests for oral arguments and to submit appellate briefs in the lawsuit against the voter-approved bond for a permanent homeless shelter in a 6-3 vote Monday, according to the Oklahoma State Courts Network.
Those concurring include Justices James Winchester, James Edmondson, Douglas Combs, Noma Gurich, Richard Darby and Travis Jett. Those dissenting include Chief Justice Dustin Rowe, Vice-Chief Justice Dana Kuehn and Justice M. John Kane.
Supreme Court grants motion to retain
June 19: On Tuesday, the Oklahoma Supreme Court granted the plaintiffs' motion to retain the case, rendering the city of Norman's request for a fast track docket moot.
City attorney talks next steps
May 28: In a phone call with OU Daily, Norman City Attorney Rick Knighton explained the next steps in the legal process.
According to Knighton, the plaintiffs submitted a motion for oral arguments and a request for additional briefing.
Knighton said if denied, the lawsuit will continue as an accelerated appeal without additional briefing, and will be resolved with the Oklahoma Supreme Court's ruling.
“There really isn’t any need for further briefing or argument,” Knighton said. “The court has what it needs to be able to make the decision.”
Appeal filed
May 27: An appeal challenging Norman voters' approval of a homeless shelter bond has been filed with the Oklahoma Supreme Court following dismissal in Cleveland County District Court.
Three Norman residents appealed a dismissed lawsuit challenging Norman voters’ approval of a homeless shelter bond to the Oklahoma Supreme Court.
According to the Oklahoma State Courts Network, the lawsuit seeks legal clarification on the constitutionality of voters’ approval of an $8 million bond to construct a permanent homeless shelter.
The lawsuit was originally filed on April 16 in the Cleveland County District Court by former Norman City Council Ward 5 candidate Dianna Hutzel. Plaintiffs also include William Coker and former Ward 4 candidate Teresa Borum.
On April 29, Cleveland County Judge Michael Tupper dismissed the lawsuit, ruling the plaintiffs’ argument legally insufficient.
Ward 4 Councilmember Helen Grant wrote in a Facebook post Thursday that they believe the lawsuit will fail again.
“It’s ironic to me because what they will have spent in legal fees will be more than what they are paying in property tax,” Grant wrote.
According to the City of Norman’s website, residents will pay an annual increase on property taxes. Estimated average increases are as follows:
• $3.26 for homes valued at $100,000
• $6.81 for homes valued at $200,000
• $10.36 for homes valued at $300,000
• $13.91 for homes valued at $400,000 and
• $17.46 for homes valued at $500,000.
Background
During the April 29 hearing, the plaintiffs’ attorney Matt Failing argued the vote should have fallen under the Oklahoma Constitution’s Article X, Section 26, which requires a 60% supermajority vote on debt incurred greater than the city’s income that year.
The bond passed with 54.25% of the vote.
Norman City Attorney Rick Knighton argued the vote fell under Section 27 of Article X, which requires a simple majority vote on debts for public utilities, which he said can be defined by public use and benefit.
Failing argued that because the shelter only serves those who are unhoused, and not the “public at large,” the vote should have fallen under Section 26.
Tupper said the “public benefit” of the shelter to health, safety and welfare fits into the constitutional definition of public utility.
This story was edited by Audrey McClour and Reagan Rozzi.
