599 A.2d 289, 300 (1991) (en banc) (“To force every aggrieved taxpayer to assume the task of appealing, when the larger question can be expeditiously and efficiently resolved in a single action, would be unnecessarily burdensome on both property owners and the judicial system.”). The statutory appeals process is also not designed to provide the declaratory or in-junctive relief Appellants seek, and moreover, strict adherence to it would implicate many of the concerns highlighted in Kow-enhoven pertaining to piecemeal litigation .and the inadequacy of the statutory remedy. This undermines any suggestion that the present controversy is an inappropriate one for the exercise of equity jurisdiction. Cf. Fry v. Napoleon Cmty. Schs., 580 U.S. _, _, 137 S.Ct. 743, 754, 197 L.Ed.2d 46 (2017) (<HOLDING>). As for our recent decision in Lemer, that
holding that by its terms the idea does not require exhaustion where the relief sought is unavailable in an administrative proceeding under the idea monetary damages are not available so exhaustion is not required holding that exhaustion is not required for plaintiffs seeking money damages because damages are unavailable through the administrative process and because all other relief available to the plaintiffs under the idea had already been provided through a settlement agreement holding that exhaustion was not required under a federal education statute where the gravamen of the complaint was not that the plaintiff had been denied the type of education the statute guarantees and hence the relief sought was not available through the statutory appeals process holding that the title of the statute did not limit the reach of the statute holding that exhaustion is required even where the relief sought is not available in the administrative process