Anderson v. City of San Antonio
| Decision Date | 24 January 1934 |
| Docket Number | No. 6088.,6088. |
| Citation | 67 S.W.2d 1036 |
| Parties | ANDERSON et al. v. CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
Hicks, Dickson, Bobbitt & Lange, of San Antonio, and W. A. Wade, of Dallas, and Fagan Dickson, of San Antonio, for plaintiffs in error.
T. D. Cobbs, Jr., C. K. Quin, and W. C. Davis, all of San Antonio, for defendant in error.
On the 16th day of January, 1929, the board of city commissioners of the city of San Antonio passed an ordinance, the first section of which reads as follows:
Subsequent sections of said ordinance provide for a fund to pay for such advertising and a method for the use of such fund. Later an ordinance was passed levying a tax for the purpose of creating an advertising fund for said city.
Plaintiffs in error, as taxpaying citizens of the city of San Antonio, brought this suit in the district court of Bexar county, seeking to enjoin the enforcement of said ordinance and to restrain the city officials from collecting said tax and from expending any city funds for advertising purposes. The trial court granted a temporary injunction as prayed for, but, on appeal to the honorable Court of Civil Appeals for the Fourth District, the judgment of the trial court was reversed, the injunction was set aside, and the cause was dismissed.
In the case of W. F. Davis et al. (Howard Bland, Sr., et al.) v. City of Taylor et al., 67 S.W.(2d) 1033, this day decided, this court overruled the contention that an ordinance levying a tax and creating a fund for the purpose of advertising the advantages of the city is void because the tax attempted to be levied is not for a public or municipal purpose. This case, however, differs very materially from the City of Taylor Case. In that case there was an express charter provision in its home rule charter authorizing and providing for the exercise of such power.
The important issue in this case is, as is asserted by plaintiffs in error, that neither the charter nor the general laws of this state empower the city of San Antonio to levy a tax or to expend municipal funds for the purpose of advertising the advantages of the city for the purpose of increasing its trade and commerce. We approve the contention of plaintiffs in error in this case. There is no charter provision whatever authorizing such expenditure of the city's funds, and there is no general law authorizing same.
The home rule amendment to the state Constitution (article 11, § 5) provides: "Said cities may levy, assess and collect such taxes as may be authorized by law or by their charters."
The city seeks to uphold the ordinance and the power to use its funds for the purpose of advertising its advantages under article 1175 of the Revised Statutes, known as the enabling act of the home rule amendment. Article 1175 provides:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
San Antonio River Auth. v. Austin Bridge & Rd., L.P.
...the declared objects and purposes of the corporation"—that is, "not simply convenient, but indispensable." Anderson v. City of San Antonio , 123 Tex. 163, 67 S.W.2d 1036, 1037 (1934). Should doubts arise, we presume that the legislature did not impliedly grant a power. See id. ("Any fair, r......
-
Central Power & Light Co. v. City of San Juan
...from the powers granted, or those that are incidental to the purpose for which the corporation was created. Anderson v. City of San Antonio, 123 Tex. 163, 67 S.W.2d 1036, 1037 (1934); Davis v. City of Taylor, 123 Tex. 39, 67 S.W.2d 1033, 1034 (1934); Foster v. City of Waco, 113 Tex. 352, 25......
-
Scroggins v. City of Harlingen
...adopted by other cities under the Home Rule Amendment. See Davis v. City of Taylor, 123 Tex. 39, 67 S.W.2d 1033; Anderson v. City of San Antonio, 123 Tex. 163, 67 S.W.2d 1036. In this instance the city acquired a park, embracing considerable acreage, and used it for the purpose of advertisi......
-
Zachry v. City of San Antonio, 13031
... ... 866, the Commission of Appeals approved the authority of the City to manufacture ice under a statutory and charter grant of power no more specific nor broad than that of the San Antonio Charter. The San Antonio grant of power is broad and is intended to be. On the other hand, in Anderson v. City of San Antonio, 123 Tex. 163, 67 S.W.2d 1036, 1037, the Court refused the City's effort to impose a tax for advertising purposes, even though the charter granted power to pass ordinances 'necessary for the order and good government of the city, or the trade, commerce and health thereof.' ... ...