Keep Our Dollars in Independence County v. Mitchell
2017 Ark. 154
| Ark. | 2017Background
- KODIC sponsored a countywide local-option petition to permit alcohol sales in Independence County; signatures needed = 7,966 (38% of registered voters).
- County Clerk Tracey Mitchell filed an initial certification (July 30, 2016) finding the petition insufficient after rejecting signatures on petition parts that contained signatures of persons from other counties under Ark. Code Ann. § 3-8-811(b)(6).
- KODIC used the 10-day cure period under Ark. Code Ann. § 14-14-915(e) to submit additional signatures and proofs; Mitchell recertified insufficiency (Aug. 13, 2016), stating 424 otherwise valid signatures were excluded due to § 3-8-811(b)(6).
- KODIC and Carol Crosby appealed to the Independence County Circuit Court (filed Aug. 15, 2016) and sought a declaration that § 3-8-811(b)(6) is unconstitutional under Ark. Const. art. 5, § 1; the Attorney General and opponent Candy Konkler intervened.
- The circuit court upheld the statute, concluded the petition remained insufficient (with only three additional signatures found valid), and rejected Konkler’s other challenges to petition form and notarizations; both sides timely appealed.
- The Supreme Court held the appeals moot because the challenged relief (placing the question on the Nov. 8, 2016 ballot) was no longer attainable and none of the mootness exceptions applied; accordingly, both appeal and cross-appeal were dismissed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jurisdiction/timeliness of appeal from clerk’s insufficiency certification | KODIC: appeal governed by § 14-14-915(f) (15 days after clerk’s recertification following cure); appeal filed timely after Aug. 9 recertification | Konkler: appeal governed by § 3-8-205(b)(1) (10-day appeal from clerk’s determination); KODIC filed late | Court: § 3-8-205 applies only to clerk’s certification of sufficiency; § 14-14-915(f) applies to appeals of insufficiency here — jurisdiction existed |
| Constitutionality of Ark. Code Ann. § 3-8-811(b)(6) (excluding petition parts containing signatures from other counties) | KODIC: statute violates Ark. Const. art. 5, § 1 (citing analogous statewide-initiative holding) | State/Konkler: statute is constitutional; even if unconstitutional, other challenged defects might make petition insufficient | Court: did not reach merits — issue moot because election already occurred; decline to issue advisory ruling |
| Validity of signatures excluded under § 3-8-811(b)(6) | KODIC: excluded signatures were otherwise valid and should be counted | Mitchell/Konkler: statute requires exclusion when petition part contains signatures from more than one county | Court: agreed clerk properly excluded those signatures but ultimately dismissed appeal as moot |
| Additional technical/formal defects (double notarizations/canvasser affidavits, not file-marked, changed petition format, missing attorney certification) | Konkler: these defects fatally invalidate petition parts | KODIC/Clerk: defects do not render petition invalid; were not fatal | Circuit court rejected these challenges; Supreme Court did not decide them on merits due to mootness |
Key Cases Cited
- Tripcony v. Arkansas School for the Deaf, 403 S.W.3d 559 (Ark. 2012) (jurisdictional defect deprives appellate review)
- Willis v. King, 98 S.W.3d 427 (Ark. 2003) (election-statutory filing deadlines are jurisdictional)
- Our Cmty., Our Dollars v. Bullock, 452 S.W.3d 552 (Ark. 2014) (after filing, local-option petitions follow procedures in § 14-14-915)
- McDaniel v. Spencer, 457 S.W.3d 641 (Ark. 2015) (struck down a nearly identical requirement for statewide initiatives as unconstitutional)