STATEMENT OF CASE
as they do in their Brief of the Appellees, they may refer to
themselves as "the Council" or "the City Council".
This action is like a stock-holder or share-holder action against the board of directors and the chief executive of a private corporation; it is not an action by an individual or a group of individuals against the corporation. The City of Fairbanks is not a named defendant or appellee in this matter and the briefs and later opinions must not make the misleading impression that the City of Fairbanks is a part of this litigation. This action is brought by tax and rate paying citizens of the City of Fairbanks against the specifically named members of the Council of the City of Fairbanks as is clearly reflected in the above Caption and the Caption of the Complaint [Exc. 1]. To refer in the Brief of the Appellees to themselves as "the City" is highly misleading; the Appellants vigorously object thereto.
objected to the taking of the proceeds from the sale for a different
public purpose without being justly compensated for their
investment in the assets of FMUS as demanded by the Alaska
Constitution, Article I, Section 18, seeking injunctive relief on the
legal grounds to stop the sales proceedings until they comply with
the constitutional mandate.
Appellees (hereafter the City Council) in their Brief of the Appellees page 2,
give the impression of a false fact, namely that the appellants or plaintiffs seek to stop the sale of the Fairbanks Municipal Utilities System (FMUS hereafter) completely. The plaintiffs did only seek injunctive relief from proceeding with the sale "under the present ordinances and terms" [Exc. 3]. When the ordinances and terms are changed and comply with the constitutional mandate and provide for just compensation to the plaintiffs and all others similarly situated for their investment that they have in the assets of FMUS, the sale could proceed.
The City Council’s statement of fact on page 2 of their Brief of the Appellees that the plaintiffs seek "to enjoin the City from proceeding with the sale" is incorrect and not supported by the facts; the correct statement of fact is that the plaintiffs did seek to enjoin the Council of the City of Fairbanks from proceeding with the sale of FMUS "under the present ordinances and terms". [Exc. 3].
to their opposition for the request of a jury trial
On page 2 of their Brief of the Appellees under Proceeding in the Trial Court the City Council failed to note that the appellants filed a Reply to Opposition to Request for Trial by Jury (R. 129 - 132) timely. They also failed to note that the appellant filed an Opposition to Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [R. 111 - 119].