THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
SUPREME COURT


1999 TERM
AUGUST SESSION

Claremont School District, et al
v.
Governor, et al

No. 97-001


MEMORANDUM OF KENNETH E. BLEVENS SR. ET. ALL.
AS AMICUS CURIAE,


Because myself and others have an undeniable interest in the above appeal we ask that the court be mindful of these issues.

1, That as this court has stated; OPINION OF THE JUSTICES (Tax Plan Referendum) March 11, 1999
[W]e recognize the doctrine, so often expressed, that we have nothing to do with the propriety, expediency, or policy of any law; and that these considerations concern the legislature, and not us; that our sole duty, when the validity of any statute is challenged, is to ascertain and declare whether it conflicts with the constitution as the paramount law, leaving all other considerations with the legislature and people, where they of right belong. (Emphases and underlining mine) Express Co., 60 N.H. at 234 (Stanley, J.).
David A. Brock
William R. Johnson
W. Stephen Thayer, III
Sherman D. Horton
John T. Broderick, Jr.


Page 1 of 2


Therefore; I (WE) ask that this Court be mindful that it is limited from controlling ( changing ) that paramount law for benefit or disadvantage.

I (WE) ask that [if ] this Court finds that the present "School Tax" and those collecting said tax are in violation of said paramount law you order the tax shall be returned with interest forthwith.

2, I (WE) ask that this Court be mindful that, that paramount law can only be changed or altered by two-thirds of the voters when properly presented to them. I (WE) refer specifically to this ruling of this court; "Because the legislature must be given a reasonable time to effect an orderly transition to a new system, the present funding mechanism may remain in effect through the 1998 tax year." Merrimack No. 97-001 CLAREMONT SCHOOL DISTRICT & a. v. GOVERNOR & a. December 17, 1997 The factual effect of that decision is to allow the continual violation of that paramount law by this court with no authority to do so.

3, I (WE) ask that this court reconsider cherish as a mandate of the [State] but rather a mandate of the [individuals] elected to state offices and policed by the people at the voting booth, or by a Bill of Address now in place.

Respectfully submitted,

Libertarian Kenneth E. Blevens Sr.
2 Valley Road
Bow New Hampshire 03304