Narrative Opinion Summary
This case addresses the legal sufficiency of Referendum Petition No. 25, State Question No. 799, submitted by proponents seeking a public vote on HB 1010xx, a revenue-generating bill imposing various tax increases. Protestants challenged the petition, citing deficiencies in the gist and the lack of an exact copy of the measure's text. The court emphasized the constitutional right to referendum as fundamental yet subject to statutory compliance. It reiterated that the gist must clearly inform voters of the proposition's effect, which was insufficient in this case due to omissions of key tax details, such as the little cigar and hotel/motel taxes. The court also highlighted the requirement for an exact copy of the measure, noting missing sections and pagination in the petition, which hindered informed decision-making. Substantial compliance is permissible for minor clerical errors, but omissions of substantive content render petitions invalid. Consequently, the court declared Referendum Petition No. 25 legally insufficient and ordered its removal from the ballot, allowing proponents to submit a new petition within the statutory timeframe. The decision underscores the balance between preserving the right to referendum and ensuring adherence to statutory obligations to prevent voter deception.
Legal Issues Addressed
Constitutional Right to Referendumsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The right to referendum is a constitutionally reserved power, allowing citizens to approve or reject legislative acts, but it is subject to constitutional and statutory limitations.
Reasoning: The right to a referendum is a constitutionally reserved power, viewed as sacred and deserving of careful preservation.
Judicial Review of Petition Compliancesubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court reviews referendum petitions for compliance with constitutional provisions, statutory requirements, and judicial precedents to protect against fraud and ensure transparency.
Reasoning: Citizens may challenge the legal sufficiency of initiative or referendum petitions, prompting the Court to review these petitions for compliance with constitutional provisions, legislative laws, and judicial precedents.
Legal Sufficiency of Gist in Petitionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The gist of a petition must be informative and accurately convey the proposition's effect without being misleading to ensure voters can make informed decisions.
Reasoning: The court's prior jurisprudence establishes that the gist must be brief, informative, and accurately convey the proposition's effect without being misleading.
Mandatory Inclusion of Measure's Textsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: An exact copy of the measure's text is required in referendum petitions, and the omission of section numbers or other substantive elements renders the petition insufficient.
Reasoning: The copy of HB 1010xx attached to the petition lacks section numbers, pagination, and the final page indicating legislative action, which are acknowledged as missing by both parties.
Requirements for Referendum Petitionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Referendum petitions must adhere to statutory requirements, including providing an exact copy of the measure's text and a concise statement of the gist of the proposition.
Reasoning: Referendum petitions must adhere to specific statutory requirements, including a procedural framework outlined in 34 O.S. Supp. 2015. 8, which governs their filing, publicizing, signing, and submission.
Substantial Compliance in Referendum Petitionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Substantial compliance with statutory requirements is acceptable for referendum petitions unless substantive portions are omitted, which would render the petition legally insufficient.
Reasoning: According to Title 34 O.S. Supp. 2015. 1, substantial compliance is adequate for referendum petitions, and Title 34 O.S. 2011. 24 states that if the procedure is substantially followed, clerical and technical errors can be disregarded.