State ex rel. City of Lincoln v. Johnson
| Decision Date | 27 June 1928 |
| Docket Number | 26607 |
| Citation | 220 N.W. 273,117 Neb. 301 |
| Parties | STATE, EX REL. CITY OF LINCOLN, RELATOR, v. L. B. JOHNSON, AUDITOR OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS, RESPONDENT |
| Court | Nebraska Supreme Court |
Original proceeding in mandamus to compel respondent to register certain bonds issued by relator. Writ allowed.
WRIT ALLOWED.
C Petrus Peterson and Charles R. Wilke, for relator.
O. S Spillman, Attorney General, for respondent.
Heard before GOSS, C. J., ROSE, DEAN and THOMPSON, JJ., and CHASE REDICK and WHEELER, District Judges.
This is an original application for mandamus to compel the auditor of public accounts to register and certify municipal bonds in the sum of $ 100,000 issued by the city of Lincoln for the purpose of establishing and equipping an aviation field for aerial traffic. The proposition to authorize the bonds was submitted to the voters of the city at a state-wide primary April 10, 1928--a general election within the meaning of the "Home Rule Charter." State v. Marsh, 107 Neb. 607, 187 N.W. 88. There were 6,330 votes for and 6,173 against the bonds. One ground on which the auditor declined to register them was that the bond proposition submitted to the electors did not receive 60 per cent. of the total vote as required by the statute relating to the issuance of such bonds in cities of different classes. Comp. St. 1922, sec. 4607. The city contends that the statute cited does not control the city of Lincoln, which is governed by a Home Rule Charter containing provisions for the voting and issuing of municipal bonds for "public service property" and for "public utilities" upon a majority vote of the electors. Lincoln Home Rule Charter, art. 2, sec. 1; art. 8, sec. 11. If the local Home Rule Charter of Lincoln controls, instead of the statute relating to cities of different classes, the bonds in controversy were authorized by the majority vote at the general election April 10, 1928. Discussing the power of the city of Lincoln under its Home Rule Charter this court said:
" A city may enact and put into such charter any provisions for its government that it deems proper, so long as they do not run contrary to the Constitution or any general statute." Schroeder v. Zehrung, 108 Neb. 573, 188 N.W. 237.
In considering the constitutional power of a city to frame a charter for its own government, it was held in a later case:
"The purpose of the constitutional provision is to render cities independent of state legislation as to all subjects which are of strictly municipal concern; therefore, as to such matters general laws applicable to cities yield to the charter." Consumers Coal Co. v. City of Lincoln, 109 Neb. 51, 189 N.W. 643.
The statute requiring a vote of 60 per cent. of the electors to carry a proposition to issue bonds for the purpose of acquiring and equipping a municipal aviation field applies to metropolitan cities and to cities of the first and the second classes. It does not apply alike to every part of the state but is legislation confined...
To continue reading
Request your trial