A marathon hearing discussing the validity of the May 3 elections for positions on the Flathead Joint Board of Control ended in a cliffhanger on Monday, as Lake County District Court Judge James A. Manley retreated to his chambers to draft a judgment he said he would issue in two weeks.

A flannel and blue jean-clad group of citizens lined the courtroom from morning until late afternoon listening to lawyers representing the board, the Lake County Attorney’s Office and a group called Mission Valley Irrigators swap legal arguments concerning what agency has the authority to cancel elections.

In May, the FJBC, which consists of representatives from the Mission, Flathead and Jocko Irrigation Districts, refused to seat three newly elected members on the grounds that the election was flawed and unfair to voters. Two of the members were elected to the Flathead district and one was chosen to represent the Mission district. 

During courtroom testimony, FJBC Executive Manager Johanna Clark said that the board did not have enough time to come into compliance with changes in Lake County’s interpretation of state election laws. 

“I was not given the tools and ability to do what they were asking me to do,” she said. 

To fulfill state requirements, the county stipulated that groups of people that owned land, such as corporations or trusts, needed to fill out notarized affidavits certifying a specific voting agent for the entity. 

Clark said she tried to send out copies of the documents, but she had no official list of names of people to notify of the new requirements. 

After fielding complaints from irrigators who had not yet received ballots, the board voted to cancel the election on April 21, however the county carried on nonetheless. 

During testimony after Clark, Lake County Election Administrator Kathie Newgard said she contacted the Montana Secretary of State’s office regarding the cancellation but was told she did not have the authority to stop the election. 

According to Newgard, a total of 754 out of roughly 8,000 ballots were not sent out because they were not associated with a designated voter. Of that number, 177 were later issued at the courthouse when irrigators turned in their affidavits by hand, she said. 

Bill Rossbach, an attorney representing the two members elected to the Flathead district, said that the FJBC knew about the requirement to issue notarized designations far in advance, and even have bylaws that address the issue.

“This is nothing new,” he said

Rossbach argued that the board initially opted to continue the election despite the ballot issues, noting that his clients went on to oust incumbent representatives by significant margins.

David Lake defeated Shane Orien by about 25,000 votes while Janette Rosman beat Wayne Blevins by roughly 4,000 votes. During irrigation district elections, voters are allotted votes based on the amount of land they own, receiving one vote for each irrigable acre. 

Legal council for the board countered this argument, however, picking apart the election process itself. Bruce Fredrickson, one of the board’s attorneys, said that the issue of designating a voting agent created havoc when it came to a husband, wife or family members with the same last name. This confusion, he said, led to numerous delays and the proper affidavits were sent out just weeks before the election was scheduled to take place. 

Fredrickson also scrutinized the way Newgard and the election office counted the votes. 

“Some ballots slipped through, some were withheld,” he said. “You just don’t know.”

When asked whether the county dropped the ball, however, Newgard said she felt like her office carried out the election to the best of its ability, adding that irrigation district elections are unique in that they don’t involve registered voters. 

After multiple rounds of rebuttals, Judge Manley noted a conundrum in the web of recent lawsuits filed involving the FJBC. In addition to contesting the election, attorneys for the Mission Valley Irrigators group have also filed complaints questioning the legality of the board’s reformation after it disbanded in 2013. 

“How can I issue relief over your own argument that there’s no board to be elected to?” Manley asked.

Rossbach assured that while future judgments may change the status of the board, the Flathead Irrigation District will continue to exist regardless.

During earlier discussions, Manley hinted that a judgment in the case may hinge on whether a statute exists stipulating what warrants the cancellation of an election.

“That’s what I have to find,” he said.

Such a search may prove difficult however. 

“Unfortunately you might be on your own with that,” Fredrickson replied. “A statute has not been death with yet by our Supremes.”