District voters approved the proposed budget, including this appropriation on May 18, 1999. This resolution also awarded the contract for the construction project to Duguid. Petitioner challenges this resolution in the instant appeal. I denied petitioner's request for interim relief on March 9, 2000. Petitioner contends that respondents failed to follow proper procedures for submitting the fire escape construction project to district voters on May 18, 1999.
Respondents contend that the challenged resolution is in all respects lawful.
Respondents also contend that the appeal should be dismissed because petitioner failed to join a necessary party. As a preliminary matter, petitioner offers additional facts, assertions and exhibits in his reply affidavit to buttress arguments he makes in his petition. Therefore, while I have reviewed petitioner's reply, I have not considered those portions which contain new assertions, facts or exhibits that are not responsive to new material or affirmative defenses set forth in the answer. Respondents claim that petitioner is not aggrieved and lacks standing to bring this appeal because the board's action did not result in a tax increase and was authorized as an ordinary contingent expense. Petitioner is a district resident.