Final Set of Briefs Filed Ahead of Civic Center Lawsuit Appeal

Potter County District Court | Photo by Noah Dawson

The legal teams for Alex Fairly and the Texas Attorney General’s office filed a final set of briefs in the appeal of Fairly’s lawsuit against The City of Amarillo on Thursday.

The lawsuit, which stemmed from the city’s attempt to issue tax anticipation notes to fund renovations to the Amarillo Civic Center last spring, was won by Alex Fairly last October when Judge William Sowder ruled the city broke various state laws when approving the notes. (Councilman Place 1 Cole Stanley, who is now running for Mayor, was the only member of the council to vote against the attempted issuance.) Following the ruling, both the City of Amarillo and Alex Fairly appealed the decision, with the city arguing that the notes had been legally passed and Fairly arguing that the city broke another section of state law not mentioned in the original ruling.

As we reported earlier this month, Fairly’s legal team had filed a brief supporting their argument that “the trial court erred in failing to award Cross-Appellant a declaration that the Ordinance violates section 1431.008(b).” Fairly’s latest filing responds to arguments made by the city in their appeal. In the brief, Fairly’s legal team accuses the city’s legal arguments of being self-contradictory, writing:

“To maintain its delicate, shifting position, the City is forced to argue out of both sides of its mouth. On one hand, the City argues it is not issuing a bond when it needs to show that it did not violate 1431.008(a); on the other hand, the City announces that it will not impose a high tax rate to redeem a 7-year payout schedule on the notes because it will immediately refinance the tax notes with bonds.”

The introduction section of the brief closes by stating that “the City believed it was more clever than the law and its citizens, but the trial court saw through its attempts to abuse its power. This Court should not entertain the City’s attempts, again, to render these protections meaningless.”

The rest of the brief argues, point by point, against the various arguments made by the City of Amarillo in their appeal.

Similarly, a brief filed by the Attorney General’s office argues, point by point, that Judge Sowder was correct in his ruling. The briefs filed by Fairly’s legal team and the Attorney General’s office largely mirror each other, with one key difference being that the Attorney General does not agree with the argument made by Fairly’s legal team in their appeal, stating that “the court did not error in denying Fairly’s requested declaration because the Ordinance properly imposed the tax as required by section 1431.008(b).” The brief filed by the Attorney General’s office has a one-line conclusion stating that “The Court should affirm the district court’s final judgment.”

Briefs submitted by the legal teams for both the City of Amarillo and Alex Farily have requested oral arguments. The brief submitted by the Attorney General’s office did not request an oral argument, but they did ask “to be allowed to participate in oral argument if set by the Court.”

According to the Texas Judicial Branch website, the case is “ready to be set” as of Thursday, March 23rd.