S-26-0325 Mark Allen Koch (Appellant) v. City of Sargent, Nebraska (Appellee)
Appeal from the Nebraska Court of Appeals on appeal from the District Court for Custer County, Judge Karen L. Noakes
Attorneys: Mark Allen Koch (Self-represented Appellant) and Heather L. Sikyta (Sikyta Law Office for Appellee)
Civil: Nebraska Open Meetings Act and final order
Proceedings Below: Appellant brought a lawsuit against Appellee for violation of the Nebraska Open Meetings Act. Appellee filed a motion to dismiss Appellant’s complaint, which the district court granted, in part, and denied, in part. After a hearing, the district court dismissed the remainder of Appellant’s complaint against Appellee. On appeal to the Nebraska Court of Appeals, it determined that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the matter, and it dismissed the appeal. Appellant petitioned for further review, which the Supreme Court granted and transferred this case to its docket.
Issues: On petition for further review, Appellant assigns the following errors: 1) The district court did err in not accepting the answer of Appellant to the question asked about what statute did the Sargent City Council break in the first 8 causes of action. Appellant responded the Open Meetings Act of the State of Nebraska which is exactly how Nebraska Revised State Statute 84-1407 requires the statutes to be cited; 2) The district court did error in refusing to accept the argument that all 8 items were not on the notice of public hearing for the 2025-2026 budge 24 hours prior to the meeting as required in the Open Meetings Act (even though voted on during the public hearing with roll call votes; 3) The district court did err in not voiding the roll call vote to “proceed declaring 502 West Main an unsafe building” when Appellant was not allowed to speak in the agenda item presentation where no inspector represented the condition of the building, no inspector presented any inspection report to the Council, and there was no current inspection of the condition on the interior of the building. Furthermore, the roll call vote was taken during the public hearing for the 2025-2026 budget without being notified as such; 4) The district court did err in failing to note that the testimony in the case pointed out the arbitrary allowance of over 10 citizens to comment during the TIF financing presentation (without any documentation given to the citizens about TIF (tax incremented financing) over the public exception spoken in objection to the Sargent NE City Council hearing anything without the citizens having a copy of the documentation to review against 84-1412(8); 5) The district court did err in allowing the City of Sargent NE to not allow the Plaintiff/Appellant to view the agenda in the City Offices against Neb. Rev. Stat. § 84-1411; 6) The district court did err in cause of action 14 with the City of Sargent not allowing the Plaintiff/Appellant to view the minutes of the meeting after 10 days in the City Offices; 7) The district court did err in allowing the members of the public (over 10) to speak in the public meeting (September 9, 2025) without identifying each and every speaker; 8) The district court did err in allowing the City of Sargent Mayor to open the public hearing for final tax request resolution 2025-7 at 7:51 p.m. and close the public hearing at 7:52 p.m. without letting anyone (attendees/citizens) to speak in the public hearing; 9) The district court did err in ruling that Appellant brought the petition under the wrong statute (84-712 as opposed to the statute for the Open Meetings Act 84-1407 et seq.); and 10) The Nebraska Court of Appeals did err in dismissing the case May 5, 2026, with the final judgment in place on CI25-137 April 7, 2026.