The ongoing litigation between the Uintah School District Board of Education and board member Dave Chivers has been resolved. Uintah School District issued a press release on Thursday sharing the following: The controversy began when Uintah County Clerk-Auditor Michael Wilkins, after receiving citizen complaints and after the completion of a requested investigation, declared that Mr. Chivers did not maintain his primary residence within his school board district, and that, as a result, a vacancy existed on the Board. Because Utah law requires that a school board act quickly to fill any vacancy or forfeit its right to select a replacement, the District acted on Clerk-Auditor Wilkins’ determination and posted a notice soliciting applications to fill the declared vacancy. Mr. Chivers, believing that the process was based on incorrect facts and violated Utah law, then filed a lawsuit against the Board, Clerk-Auditor Wilkins, and others. Mr. Chivers sought an injunction requiring his return to the Board, a judicial declaration that the process was improper, an award of damages and attorney fees, and other relief. After the lawsuit was filed, the parties involved in the lawsuit agreed to stipulated orders putting Clerk-Auditor Wilkins’ declaration of the vacancy on hold and allowing Mr. Chivers to continue to participate as a Board member while the litigation was pending. Additionally, the Board adopted new Board Policy 002.0220.70, which clarifies when a vacancy exists. The policy defines a “vacancy” on the Board as occurring, “upon voluntary resignation as provided by Utah Code 20A-1-511(2)(a), upon declaration of a vacancy by a Court of competent jurisdiction, or upon the death of a member.” The Policy ensures that, in most circumstances where the qualifications of a sitting Board member are challenged, a vacancy will occur only when there is a judicial order declaring the existence of a vacancy. With these changes, Mr. Chivers has agreed that he no longer has a dispute with the Board. He dismissed the claims against the Board with prejudice (meaning that he cannot re-file his action again based on these facts). Both sides have agreed that they will be responsible for their own costs and attorney fees incurred as a result of the litigation, and that the Board will issue this statement about the lawsuit. In addition, both sides have agreed that the fact that they have resolved the lawsuit does not mean that the Board admits to the violations alleged in Mr. Chivers’s complaint. It is not a determination of whether Mr. Chivers did or did not live in District 2 at the relevant time. Finally, the dismissal will not affect the dispute Mr. Chivers has with Uintah County or the Uintah County Clerk-Auditor. Litigation is taxing, difficult, expensive, and disruptive to working relationships and a positive educational environment. Although the resolution of the case took nearly four months, Mr. Chivers and the Board were able to resolve this dispute without a trial, without adversarial litigation procedures, or even significant involvement in the court. The Board looks forward to a future of cooperation with Mr. Chivers as he continues to represent District 2 on the Uintah School District Board.”
