State Sen. George Everett and radio station owner John Stokes had asked the judge to review and void her June dismissal of their lawsuit.

Instead, Curtis upheld her earlier finding that:

• Trustees complied with open meeting laws at a special meeting at which they approved an out-of-court settlement of an earlier lawsuit challenging the December 2002 bond election.

• The results of the bond election were valid.

Stokes said Tuesday that he and Everett were weighing their options. He said their next alternative in the legal process was to proceed to the Montana Supreme Court.

Despite the rejection of all the claims in his legal actions, Stokes said he remains convinced the college violated open meeting laws and election laws.

Stokes said he and Everett may or may not file an appeal. He said they had 60 days to challenge the latest ruling.

Stokes said he wasn't discouraged by what he called an "adverse ruling at the local level." He said previous Montana Supreme Count decisions went against school districts accused of violating open meeting laws.

Dana Christensen, attorney for the college, called Curtis' latest ruling "very good." He declined to speculate on the college's response to a potential appeal to the Montana Supreme Court.

In spite of months of legal wrangling over the election, Stokes has maintained he and Everett are not "anti-college." He remains resolute that the college violated more than minor election laws in extending the bond election date.

The dust-up began when the county election office made a mistake in dropping 15,000 voters from a list provided to the college for its mail-in election. The college sent ballots to excluded voters rather than cancel the election.

Stokes contends Curtis erred in validating election results because the latest lawsuit alleged open meeting law violations. He said that issue was "outside the pleading."

However, the judge pointed out that Stokes and Everett "never objected to the court's consideration of this issue until after the court issued its ruling."

In her decision, Curtis wrote that Stokes and Everett "placed the issue front and center" in their lawsuit. They brought the election challenge into this lawsuit with requests that Curtis forbid any actions contrary to legal findings in the settled suit.

Since then, Stokes said he and Everett offered to drop all legal actions if the college held a new bond election.