Four Fort Smith directors dismissed from FOIA lawsuit, filing says

Four Fort Smith city directors were dismissed from a lawsuit alleging violations of the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act, according to a court filing dated Thursday, July 30, 2026.

The dismissal applies to four directors. It does not, by itself, resolve the broader lawsuit or establish whether the alleged FOIA violations occurred.

Case concerns polling tied to government proposal

Fort Smith resident Jack Swink brought the lawsuit and is represented by attorney Joey McCutchen.

The dispute involves polling conducted by Fort Smith City Clerk Sherri Gard in connection with a petition or proposal concerning the city’s form of government. The lawsuit alleges that activity violated the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act.

The court filing is a procedural development in that case, rather than a reported ruling on the underlying allegation. The available report does not state that a court found any Fort Smith official violated the law.

It also does not provide the precise grounds for dismissing the four directors. Their names are not identified in the accessible report, and the report does not specify the status of any remaining defendants.

Separate voter-question effort provides context

The polling was connected to a separate political process that sought to place a question about Fort Smith’s government structure before voters. That proposed change remains important context for the lawsuit, which focuses on transparency requirements surrounding municipal activity connected to the effort.

The case therefore involves two distinct matters: the proposal or petition related to the city’s governmental structure, and Swink’s legal allegation about whether the polling process complied with the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act. The July 30 filing addresses the involvement of four city directors in the lawsuit; it does not establish the outcome of either the FOIA allegation or the separate government-structure proposal.

The accessible report identifies no docket number, further hearing date, filing deadline or other next procedural step. It is also not possible from the report alone to determine what issues, if any, remain to be decided in the broader case.

For Fort Smith residents, the dispute concerns the transparency obligations of public officials during activity related to a potential change in the city’s form of government. Any conclusion that officials misunderstood FOIA requirements remains an allegation attributed to the plaintiff’s side, not a judicial finding described in the available report.