Judge dismisses lawsuit about Rochester Public Schools' 2023 referendum

Jordan Shearer, Post-Bulletin, Rochester, Minn.
Updated ·3 min read

Apr. 12—ROCHESTER — An Olmsted County district judge has dismissed a lawsuit against Rochester Public Schools that claimed the district was acting out of its authority by proposing a technology levy in the fall of 2023.

The plaintiff, Casey McGregor, filed the lawsuit on Oct. 30, 2023, just a week prior to the referendum, during which voters narrowly rejected the district's request. The school district filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit on Nov. 6.

"We are pleased that the Court issued its order to completely dismiss the complaint Ms. McGregor filed against the District," Superintendent Kent Pekel said in a statement. "The District maintained all along that there was no ballot error, and the Court agreed. It is unfortunate that this lawsuit, which received extensive press coverage, may have become a distraction for some voters shortly before an election that resulted in the narrow defeat of an important referendum proposal by 318 votes."

According to court documents, McGregor's lawsuit claimed "the technology improvements proposed by the Rochester School District were an improper capital project under Minnesota Statutes."

"McGregor's complaint alleges that an error, omission, or wrongful act occurred under Minnesota Statutes," the court document dismissing the case reads. "But what McGregor takes issue with is the language used by the District in describing the technology improvement as a capital project, which is not an error, omission, or wrongful act in the placement or preparing of the question on the ballot. The ballot is accurate."

The order, written by Judge Christina K. Stevens, was filed on April 10, 2024.

In response to McGregor's lawsuit, the district claimed her "filings render her a frivolous litigant and subject to sanctions in the form of attorney fees and costs."

The court denied the request, saying the district made its argument for sanctions under the wrong section of the Minnesota Rule of Civil Procedure. The court further said the district failed to follow the procedural requirements under the section it did reference.

One of those is a "safe-harbor" provision. Essentially, the district would have had to give McGregor a certain amount of time to withdraw or correct her claim before making a filing of its own. Instead, the court document says "There is nothing in the record that indicates the District served its motion on McGregor before filing with the court."

The court denied the district's request for sanctions against McGregor.

"In addition," Pekel said in his statement, "Rochester Public Schools was forced to incur more than $31,000 in funding that could and should have gone to support teaching and learning to defend this case in court."

In an email to the Post Bulletin, McGregor claimed Pekel "repeatedly refused my offers to settle the case to avoid unnecessary expenses for the district and public."

"I offered these, formally, before the election and separately before the Hearing," McGregor wrote. "The District insisted upon having that Hearing in January, after the failure of the ballot was set in stone. They refused to settle in order to play the bully with a tremendously expensive attorney, which they did maliciously."

She added the court response did not touch on other issues she presented in her case, including the underlying issue of the validity of the ballot question.

"Pekel spending $31,000 to ask the Court to declare the printing of the ballots was done without error had nothing to do with the Petition," McGregor wrote.