Taxpayer, a homeowner, brought action seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against public school district as well as its superintendent, in her official capacity, and the city’s board of education, alleging provisions in the teachers’ union collective bargaining agreement (CBA) that provided preferences based on race and ethnicity violated Minnesota Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause.
The District Court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of standing and ripeness. Taxpayer appealed. The Court of Appeals reversed. Defendants petitioned for review, which was granted by Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court held that taxpayer lacked taxpayer standing to bring action.
The disbursement of public funds to implement and monitor compliance with provisions in teachers’ union collective bargaining agreement (CBA) that provided preferences based on race and ethnicity was merely incidental to claim of taxpayer, a homeowner, that provisions violated Minnesota Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause and, thus, taxpayer lacked taxpayer standing to bring action seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against public school district as well as its superintendent, in her official capacity, and the city’s board of education in connection with claim; although funds could be used to implement provisions, they were merely incidental to substantive governmental action taxpayer sought to challenge.