Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout113-00 RESOLUTION• RESOLUTION NO. 113-00 MICROFILMED A RESOLUTION AGREEING TO A PROPOSED STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT SUBJECT TO COURT APPROVAL IN RE. HICKS, ET AL V CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ET AL; CIV 97-500 IN THE AMOUNT OF $213,469.50. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS* Section 1. That the City Council hereby agrees to the proposed Stipulation of Settlement Subject to Court Approval In Re: Hicks, et al v. City of Fayetteville, et al., CIV 97-500 in the amount of $213,469.50. A copy of the proposed stipulation is attached hereto marked Exhibit "A" and made a part hereof. PASiED AND APPROVED this15S day of August , 2000. ATTEST: / / By: � rte(, re Heather Woodruff, City Cl APPROVED By: /� F ed Hanna, Mayor NAME OF FILE: CROSS REFERENCE: Date Contents of File Initials 8-/-Uo1/, //3 -DD z:Dirtz--7 IP( meezi.*,,,, itt: ti /S -W 7,.2 /P1.6 /%G� 1.67n C4 aA - • FAYETTEVILLE LEGAL DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY DIVISION EPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE To: Fred Hanna, Mayor Fayetteville City Council JEnnv E. ROSE. CTry ATTORNEY ,_s� LAGAYIE D.MCCARTY. Asst Cm AnmRNEV � // From: Jerry E. Rose, City Attorney. 1`1 Date: July 25, 2000 Re: Proposed settlement of litigation regarding the rollback of ad valorem taxes for the years 1994 through 1999. Attached please find a copy of a draft of an agreement between the City of Fayetteville and a class of plaintiffs settling the litigation regarding the rollback of millage required by Amendment 59 of the Arkansas Constitution. The basic conditions of settlement are as follows: 1. The City agrees to pay an agreed total amount of $213,469.50 to all class members who file a claim on a pro rata basis (less court approved attorney fees). 2. The attomeys for acourt of 33 /o of the $213,469.50 ande class members will the attorney City will 1/not object to that request. 3. The refund process will follow the county's procedure and the City will pay for their share of the refund costs (not out of the $213,469.50 but as an additional expense). 4. The refund process will require the presentation of a claim form except for out of county and those physically unable to present the form. 5. Millage will be rolled back from 1.0 mills to 0.8 mills. 6. ad valorem property tax for the years encompassing994 through 1999. regarding ad • Cvr1110 L1W r1RM 3C1-3 p.1 • • THE EVANS LAW FIRM A Professional Association POST OFFICE BOX 1986 2333 NORTH GREEN ACRES FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS 72702-1986 TELEPHONE (501) 521-9998 TELEFAX (501) 521-9995 MARSHALL DALE EVANS, J.D., P.A. CHARLES N. WILLIAMS} STEPHANIE BRODACZ, J.D., LLM., P.A. OF COUNSEL ROBERT D. BRANDON, J.D., P.A. t Formerly Circuit/ Chancery Judge ROB W. WRIGHT, MHSA., P.D., J.D. MONICA K. ROBERTS, J.D.• *Licensed in Oklahoma July 24, 2000 Jerry Rose Fayetteville City Attorney 113 W. Mountain Fayetteville, AR 72701 VIA FACSIMILE Re: Hicks, et al. v. City of Fayetteville, et al.; Washington County Circuit Consolidated No. CIV 97-500 Dear Jerry: Following is a Stipulation of Settlement. With kindest regards, Sincerely yours, Mars 1 . r ale Evans, P.A. Enclosure Attachment c:\M<odR_nc5Tnfcr/lLwc\eo Lester.\00-07-21 attorney lcr.mc JUL-24-2000 15:36 521 9995 P.01 Jul 24 00 04:53p EVRM•LRW FIRM St 521-9995 • IN THE CIRCUIT COURT WASHINGTON COUNTY, ARKANSAS JEANNE M. HICKS, et al, vs. Consolidated No. CIV 97-500 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, et al, PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS P.2 STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT SUBJECT TO COURT APPROVAL OF CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE. ARKANSAS WHEREAS, Jeanne M. Hicks and Tammy Lewis, for themselves and all others similarly situated, are the Class Plaintiff for the City of Fayetteville ad valorem property taxpayers in the captioned civil action; and, WHEREAS, this litigation was certified as a Class Action pursuant to Rule 23 of the A.RC.P. by order of this court; and, WHEREAS, Plaintiff (as hereinafter defined) and the Defendant City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, desire to terminate all complex and protracted litigation regarding the issues of millage rollbacks damages and attorneys' fees between themselves as parties to this litigation, and WHEREAS, Plaintiff (as hereinafter defined) and the City of Fayetteville desire to ter- minate all complex and protracted litigation regarding the rollback of millage, amount and method of refund to taxpayers (as hereinafter defined) of the amounts found to have been ille- gally exacted in violation of ARK. CONST. art. XIV §14 (Amendment 59), and attorneys' fees, and, JUL-24-2000 15:36 521 9995 P.02 - JUI e, UU U4: anp tVHMS LOW FIRM 521-9995 • • WHEREAS, the Plaintiff (as hereinafter defined) and the Defendant City of Fayetteville have agreed to settle, resolve and compromise their several claims and disputes on the terms and conditions set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby stipulated and agreed as follows: 1. DEFINITIONS. As used herein, the following terms shall have the following meanings unless the context otherwise requires: 1.1 "Class" shall mean all ad valorem taxpayers for which Jeanne M. Hicks and Tammy Lewis were certified to represent as Class Action Representatives pursu- ant to Rule 23 of the A.R.C.P. by order of this court, i.e., the ad valorem taxpayers of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas. 1.2 "City of Fayetteville" (hereinafter refereed to as the "City") shall mean the City of Fayetteville as a municipal corporation existing under the laws of the State of Arkansas and its past, present, or future directors, aldermen, council members, officers, controlling persons, employees, agents, representatives, attorneys of record in this litigation, assigns, beneficiaries, predecessors and/or successors in interest. 1.3 "Plaintiff' shall mean Jeanne M. Hicks and Tammy Lewis, individually and on behalf of the Class and Class Members they represent 1.4 "Person" shall mean an individual, corporation, partnership, association or other entity. JUL-24-2000 15:36 2 P. 3 521 9995 P.03 /Sr' Jul 24 00 04:54p EVANS LAW FIRM 521-9995 - p.4 • • 1.5 `Taxpayers" shall mean any person who paid real or personal property taxes for property within the City of Fayetteville for any of the tax years 1994 through 1999. 1.6 "Illegally Exacted Ad Valorem Property Taxes" shall mean all real and personal property taxes from the taxpayers in excess of the amount allowed by ARK. CONST. art. XIV, §14 (Amendment 59). 2. ORDER AND JUDGMENT. The Plaintiff and the City stipulate and agree to be bound by and will jointly request that the court enter an order and judgment that will contain the following substance and matter: 2.1 Illenally Exacted Ad Valorem Property Tax Refunds. a. Taxpayers who file a claim shall have the opportunity to receive a pro - rata refund of all illegally exacted ad valorem taxes paid less the award of attor- neys' fees set forth below. b. The court shall appoint Special Master fnamel or other person mutu- ally agreed upon by the Plaintiff and the City to serve as special master to super- vise, as approved by the court, the method and procedure of the refund process. c. The expenses of administering the refund, including notice, and the Special Master shall be borne by the City. d. The refund process shall be administered by the County with a claims process whereby Class Members may personally present a claim form. Out -of - county taxpayers and those taxpayers that are physically unable to present the form may have another person present the claim form. The Court shall appoint 3 Ji.L-24-2000 15:37 521 9995 P.04 - Jul 24 00 04:54p EVANS LAW FIRM • • 521-9995 • George B. Morton, P.O. Box 399, Fayetteville, Arkansas, 72702, to so act if necessary. 2.2 Attorneys' Fees of Plaintiff's Attomeys. a. Attorneys for the Plaintiff shall request an award of attorneys' fees and costs for representing the Class an amount of 33-1/3% of the illegally exacted ad valorem property taxes, subject to court approval, which shall be payable directly to The Evans Law Firm, P.A., and Hirsch Law Firm, P.A., within 14 days of entry of Order Approving Settlement. Defendant shall not object to the requested attor- neys' fee of 33-1/3% of the fund. Attomeys for Plaintiff waive any claim for attorney's fees from the refunds to be paid to Intervenors, William Jackson Butt, II, Butt -n -Butt Hardwood Plantation, L.L.C., and John R. Hudson. 2.3 Undistributed or Unclaimed Funds Paid Into General Fund of City. a. All illegally exacted ad valorem property taxes which remain after rea- sonable effort, approved by the court, have been made to refund such monies to the taxpayers shall be paid into the general fund of the City and may be used by the City in any manner as its council may approve, including but not limited to, any payments made by the City pursuant to this Stipulation or any order of this court. 2.4 Stipulated and Agreed Amounts. a. The Plaintiff and the City stipulate and agree that $213,469.50 is the agreed total amount to be paid by the City; which amount is to be to the Class of taxpayers (less court -approved legal fees) to all Class Members who file a claim for refund. Refunds are to be paid'' 'A in June 2001 and'A in June 2002. JUL-24-2000 15:37 4 P.5 521 9995 P 05 Jul 24 00 04:54p EVANS LAW FIRM • • 2.5 Rollback of Millage. a. The millage rate of the City has been 1.0rfor both real and personal property taxes. upon court approval of this settlement, the City's millage shall 5 roll back to 0.8for both real and personal property subject to lawful adjustment. 2.6 Full and Complete Discharge of all Class Claims Against the City. a. Any claims, demands, and causes of action of the Class, and each and every member thereof, and/or their attorneys of any kind or nature in connection with, directly or indirectly, any subject matter decided in this litigation concerning ad valorem property tax for the years 1994 through 1999. A separate claim filed in the Circuit Court of Washington County by the same Plaintiff against the City for refund of property taxes for the tax year 1998 and thereafter shall be dismissed as to the City with prejudice immediately after entry of the order approving the settlement. b. Washington County claims certain monies from the City for reim- bursement from road tax millage. Plaintiff assigns whatever rights they have thereto to Washington County and are not settling that claim which the County may now have against the City. ' 3. PROCEDURES AND CONDITIONS TO EFFECT STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT. 3.1 The Plaintiff, Plaintiffs counsel and the City will jointly request that the court take the following actions and order the following events: a. Conduct a telephone conference on July 25, 2000 for the purposes of: i. Preliminary approval of this Stipulation and Settlement. 521-9995 • JUL-24-2000 15:38 5 p.6 521 9995 P 06 Jul 24 00 04:54p EVAMS LAW FIRM 521-9995 • • ii. Appointment of a special master with instructions to present to p.7 the court a proposal for the method and procedure of the refund process. iii. Approving a Notice of Stipulation of Settlement and Hearing. iv. Find that notice by publication is the best notice practicable under the circumstances and that Notice of Settlement should be published twice in the Legal Notices Section of the Northwest Arkansas Times. v. Set the date of August 31, 2000 as the cutoff date by which any and all objections to this Stipulation of Settlement must be filed with the Circuit Clerk, Washington County; and vi. Set and conduct a hearing on September 5, 2000, at 9:30 a.m., in the Washington County Courthouse to consider final approval of the Stipulation of Settlement. b. At the final approval hearing, consider and approve the amount of the refund, the method and procedure of the refund process, approve the attorneys' fees and expense award; and enter the court's Order Approving Settlement. 4. MISCELLANEOUS. 4.1 The undersigned attorneys of record for Jeanne M. Hicks and Tammy Lewis, for themselves and all others similarly situated, warrant to the City that they have the authority to settle the issue of attorneys' fees for all attorneys who represent or represented said Plaintiff during the course of said litigation and that any and all claims or liens of any nature regarding the payment of attorneys' fres, costs and/or expenses are the sole responsibility of the undersigned attorneys of record for Jeanne M. Hicks and Tammy Lewis, for themselves and all others similarly JUL-24-2000 15:38 6 521 9995 P.07 Jul 24 00 04:S5p EVANS LAW FIRM 521-9995 • • situated, and said attorneys agree to indemnify and hold harmless the City from any such claims, including but not limited to, the attorneys' fees, if any required in the City's defense of any action seeking additional attorneys' fees other than as stipulated and agreed herein. 4.2 This Stipulation of Settlement shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Arkansas. 43 This Stipulation of Settlement constitutes the whole agreement between the Plaintiff, Plaintiffs counsel and the City and supersedes all earlier agreements, oral or written, if any. The parties hereto state and acknowledge that they have not given or relied upon any representations, warranties, or promises that are not set forth herein. 4.4 This Stipulation of Settlement may be modified, but such modification must be in writing and approved by the parties hereto, or may be modified by court order. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Stipulation of Settlement has been executed and entered into as of this day of July, 2000 by the undersigned parties and counsel of record for the parties hereto. Parties: Jeanne M. Hicks, for herself and all others similarly situated taxpayers within the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Tammy Lewis, for herself and all others Similarly situated taxpayers within the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas 7 JUL-24-2000 15:39 521 9995 p.8 O. es • -Jul 24 00 04:55p EVRMS LAW FIRM 4, 521-9995 • • Attorneys at Law of Record; Marshall Dale Evans, Attorney for Jeanne M. Hicks and Tammy Lewis, for themselves and all others similarly situated E. Kent Hirsch, Attorney for Jeanne M. Hicks and Tammy Lewis, for themselves and all others similarly situated Fred Hamia}f, Mayor, City of Fayetteville, Arkansas JLL-24-2000 1539 8 p.9 521 9995 P.09 Jul 24 00 04:55p EVAMS LAW FIRM 521-9995 p.10 • • CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, E. Kent Hirsch, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing pleading was deposited in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, addressed to: Mr. Rudy Moore, Jr. Mr. Thomas Olmstead P.O. Box 290 Fayetteville, Alt 72702-0290 Mr. Charles Harwell Mr. Marcus Van Pelt Cypert, Crouch, Clark & Harwell P.O. Box 1400 Springdale, AR 72764 Mr. Boyce R Davis Prairie Grove City Attorney P.O. Box 999 Lincoln, AR 72744 Mr. David G. Nixon The Nixon Law Firm 2340 Green Acres Road, Suite 12 Fayetteville, AR 72701 Mr. William Jackson Butt, II Davis, Cox & Wright, PLC P.O. Drawer 1688 Fayetteville, Arkansas 72702-1688 Brian Brooks, Deputy Attorney General 200 Catlett-Prien Tower Bldg. 323 Center Street Little Rock, AR 72201-2610 this day of July, 2000. c.+nnWJ1ith97%V vuf:-oyuv - farticvaledoc 9 JUL-24-2000 15:39 521 9995 Mr. Jeff Harper City Attorney of Springdale P.O. Box 1208 Springdale, AR 72765-1208 Mr. George Butler Attorney at Law 280 N. College Ave., Suite 145 Fayetteville, AR 72701 Mr. Jerry Rose City of Fayetteville Admin. Building 113 W. Mountain Fayetteville, AR 72701 Mr. Danny Wright Elkins City Attorney 130-C North College Fayetteville, AR 72701 Mr. John R. Hudson Attomey at Law 16 E. Spring Fayetteville, AR 72701 Honorable Paul Danielson Circuit Judge P.O. Box 188 Morrilton, AR 72110 E. Kent Hirsch P.10 • • CX,HIB1T A IN THE CIRCUIT COURT WASHINGTON COUNTY, ARKANSAS JEANNE M HICKS, et al, PLAINTIFFS vs. Consolidated No. CIV 97-500 CIV 98-1403 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, et al, DEFENDANTS STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT SUBJECT TO COURT APPROVAL OF CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS WHEREAS, Jeanne M. Hicks and Tammy Lewis, for themselves and all others similarly situated, are the Class Plaintiff for the City of Fayetteville ad valorem property taxpayers in the captioned civil action; and, WHEREAS, this litigation was certified as a Class Action pursuant to Rule 23 of the A.R.C.P. by order of this court; and, WHEREAS, Plaintiff (as hereinafter defined) and the Defendant City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, desire to terminate all complex and protracted litigation regarding the issues of millage rollbacks damages and attorneys' fees between themselves as parties to this litigation; and WHEREAS, Plaintiff (as hereinafter defined) and the City of Fayetteville desire to termi- nate all complex and protracted litigation regarding the rollback of millage, amount and method of refund to taxpayers (as hereinafter defined) of the amounts found to have been illegally exacted m violation of ARK. CONST. art. XIV §14 (Amendment 59), and attorneys' fees, and, WHEREAS, the Plaintiff (as hereinafter defined) and the Defendant City of Fayetteville have agreed to settle, resolve and compromise their several claims and disputes on the terms and conditions set forth herein. EXH• FRO Po_ /Pxc, • • NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby stipulated and agreed as follows: 1. DEFINITIONS. As used herein, the following terms shall have the following meanings unless the context otherwise requires: 1.1 "Class" shall mean all ad valorem taxpayers for which Jeanne M. Hicks and Tammy Lewis were certified to represent as Class Action Representatives pursu- ant to Rule 23 of the A.R.C.P. by order of this court, i.e., the ad valorem taxpayers of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas. 1.2 "City of Fayetteville" (hereinafter referred to as the "City") shall mean the City of Fayetteville as a municipal corporation existing under the laws of the State of Arkansas and its past, present, or future directors, aldermen, council members, officers, controlling persons, employees, agents, representatives, attorneys of rec- ord in this litigation, assigns, beneficiaries, predecessors and/or successors in interest. 1.3 "Plaintiff' shall mean Jeanne M. Hicks and Tammy Lewis, individually and on behalf of the Class and Class Members they represent. 1.4 "Person" shall mean an individual, corporation, partnership, association or other entity. 1.5 "Taxpayers" shall mean any person who paid real or personal property taxes for property within the City of Elkins for any of the tax years 1994 through 1999. 1.6 "Illegally Exacted Ad Valorem Property Taxes" shall mean all real and personal property taxes from the taxpayers in excess of the amount allowed by ARK. CONST. art. XIV, §14 (Amendment 59). 2 • • 2. ORDER AND JUDGMENT. The Plaintiff and the City stipulate and agree to be bound by and will jointly request that the court enter an order and judgment that will contain the following substance and matter: 2.1 Illegally Exacted Ad Valorem Property Tax Refunds. a. Taxpayers who file a claim shall have the opportunity to receive a pro - rata refund of all illegally exacted ad valorem taxes paid less the award of attor- neys' fees set forth below. b. The court shall appoint Special Master Sidney McCollum or other per- son mutually agreed upon by the Plaintiff and the City to serve as special master to supervise, as approved by the court, the method and procedure of the refund process. c. The expenses of administering the refund, including notice, and the Special Master shall be borne by the City. d. The refund process shall be administered by the County with a claims process whereby Class Members may personally present a claim form. Out -of - county taxpayers and those taxpayers that are physically unable to present the form may have another person present the claim form. The Court shall appoint George B. Morton, P.O. Box 399, Fayetteville, Arkansas, 72702, to so act if nec- essary. 2.2 Attorneys' Fees of Plaintiff's Attorneys. a. Attorneys for the Plaintiff shall request an award of attorneys' fees and costs for representing the Class an amount of 33-1/3% of the illegally exacted ad 3 • • • valorem property taxes, subject to court approval, which shall be payable directly to The Evans Law Firm, P.A., and Hirsch Law Firm, P.A., within 14 days of entry of Order Approving Settlement. Defendant shall not object to the requested attor- neys' fee of 33-1/3% of the fund. 2.3 Undistributed or Unclaimed Funds Paid Into General Fund of City. a All illegally exacted ad valorem property taxes which remain after rea- sonable effort, approved by the court, have been made to refund such monies to the taxpayers shall be paid into the general fund of the City and may be used by the City in any manner as its council may approve, including but not limited to, any payments made by the City pursuant to this Stipulation or any order of this court. 2.4 Stipulated and Agreed Amounts. a. The Plaintiff and the City stipulate and agree that $213,469.50 is the agreed total amount to be paid by the City; which amount is to be to the Class of taxpayers (less court -approved legal fees) to all Class Members who file a claim for refund. Refunds are to be paid 1/2 in June 2001 and 'h in June 2002 or sooner if the City so desires. 2.5 Rollback of Millage. a. The millage rate of the City has been 1.0 for both real and personal property taxes before April 18, 2000. That on April 18, 2000, the City of Fayetteville passed Ordinance 4244 which added 2 mills for a Senior Center for the City of Fayetteville. Upon court approval of this settlement, the City's millage shall roll back to 0.8 for both real and personal property subject to lawful 4 • • adjustment in the future but does not affect the 2 mills added to the City's taxes passed on April 18, 2000. 2.6 Full and Complete Discharge of all Class Claims Against the City. a Any claims, demands, and causes of action of the Class, and each and every member thereof, and/or their attorneys of any kind or nature in connection with, directly or indirectly, any subject matter decided in this litigation concerning ad valorem property tax for the years 1994 through 1999. A separate claim filed in the Circuit Court of Washington County as CIV 98-1403 by the same Plaintiff against the City for refund of property taxes for the tax year 1998 and thereafter shall be dismissed as to the City with prejudice immediately after entry of the order approving the settlement. b. Washington County claims certain monies from the City for reim- bursement from road tax millage. Plaintiff assigns whatever rights they have thereto to Washington County and are not settling that claim which the County may now have against the City. 3. PROCEDURES AND CONDITIONS TO EFFECT STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT. 3.1 The Plaintiff, Plaintiff's counsel and the City will jointly request that the court take the following actions and order the following events: a. Enter an order for preliminary approval of: i. Preliminary approval of this Stipulation and Settlement. ii. Appointment of a Special Master for resolution of any refund disputes as specified herein. iii. Approving a Notice of Stipulation of Settlement and Hearing. • • • iv. Find that notice by publication is the best notice practicable under the circumstances and that Notice of Settlement should be published twice in the Legal Notices Section of the Northwest Arkansas Times. v. Set the date of August 31, 2000 as the cutoff date by which any and all objections to this Stipulation of Settlement must be filed with the Circuit Clerk, Washington County; and vi. Set and conduct a hearing on September 5, 2000, at 9:30 a.m., in the Washington County Courthouse to consider final approval of the Stipulation of' Settlement. b. At the final approval hearing, consider and approve the amount of the refund, the method and procedure of the refund process, approve the attorneys' fees and expense award; and enter the court's Order Approving Settlement. 4. MISCELLANEOUS. 4.1 The undersigned attorneys of record for Jeanne M. Hicks and Tammy Lewis, for themselves and all others similarly situated, warrant to the City that they have the authority to settle the issue of attorneys' fees for all attorneys who represent or represented said Plaintiff during the course of said litigation and that any and all claims or liens of any nature regarding the payment of attorneys' fees, costs and/or expenses are the sole responsibility of the undersigned attorneys of record for Jeanne M. Hicks and Tammy Lewis, for themselves and all others similarly situated, and said attorneys agree to indemnify and hold harmless the City from any such claims, including but not limited to, the attorneys' fees, if any required 6 • • in the City's defense of any action seeking additional attorneys' fees other than as stipulated and agreed herein. 4.2 This Stipulation of Settlement shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Arkansas. 4.3 This Stipulation of Settlement constitutes the whole agreement between the Plaintiff, Plaintiff's counsel and the City and supersedes all earlier agreements, oral or written, if any. The parties hereto state and acknowledge that they have not given or relied upon any representations, warranties, or promises that are not set forth herein. 4.4 This Stipulation of Settlement may be modified, but such modification must be in writing and approved by the parties hereto, or may be modified by court order. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Stipulation of Settlement has been executed and entered into as of this day of , 2000 by the undersigned parties and counsel of rec- ord for the parties hereto. Parties: Jeanne M. Hicks, for herself and all others similarly situated taxpayers within the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Tammy Lewis, for herself and all others similarly situated taxpayers within the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas 7