Barber v. Board of County Com'rs of Uinta County
| Decision Date | 28 December 1954 |
| Docket Number | No. 2661,2661 |
| Citation | 277 P.2d 977,73 Wyo. 222 |
| Parties | Joseph H. BARBER, Roy E. Briggs, Frank L. Narramore, Vincent A. Vehar, Valerie M. Lewis, Jenny M. Isherwood, and Merlin E. Rollins, Plaintiffs, v. The BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF UINTA COUNTY, State of Wyoming, Defendant. |
| Court | Wyoming Supreme Court |
Fred E. Burdett, Evanston, for plaintiffs.
Harry L. Harris, Evanston, for defendant.
This case is here on reserved constitutional questions. The action was brought on February 19, 1954, by certain county officials of Uinta county in this state, who were elected in 1950, against the board of county commissioners, complaining that they have not been paid enough salary during their term of office by reason of the fact that the board of county commissioners wrongfully kept the county as a county of the second class, whereas the county was in fact, and would have been made, a county of the first class if the commissioners had done their duty. Section 27-301, Wyoming Compiled Statutes 1945, provides that counties having an assessed valuation of twenty million dollars shall be counties of the first class; that counties having an assessed valuation of ten million dollars but less than twenty million dollars shall be counties of the second class. The next section provides the salaries that shall be paid to officials of these counties, fixing the amount to be paid to those of counties of the first class considerably higher than the salaries to be paid to officials of counties of the second class. Section 27-306, W.C.S.1945, as it stood in 1950, provided that: 'The assessed valuation of a county for purposes of this act shall be ascertained by a reference to the assessment last made before the election or appointment of the county officer affected thereby.' The legislature in 1953 added to that section the following clause, namely: 'Provided, however, that when any District Court of this State shall determine that by reason of design, neglect, or default of a County Assessor, County Commissioners, or other such officers that such assessment does not fairly represent the valuation of a County for such year then the assessment made in the year next following shall control for the purpose of this Act.' This clause will hereafter be referred to as the 1953 amendment.
The plaintiffs alleged in their petition that the board of county commissioners in 1950 by design, refusal and neglect failed to put, or cause to be put, all assessable property in the county on the assessment roll so that the assessed value of the property in the county remained below twenty million dollars in value, but that it should have been above that sum and that the assessed value for 1951 was more than that sum. They asked the court to determine that the assessed value of 1950 was unfair and that they be paid compensation based on the assessed value of 1951.
By an agreed statement of facts it appears that the board of county commissioners of Uinta county did not properly assess all the property in that county in 1950; that the assessment roll in that county for 1950 was the sum of $19,692,039 while the assessment roll in 1951 was $20,767,171 and was still greater in 1952; that the lower assessment roll in 1950 came about by reason of the fact that the county commissioners failed to furnish enough money to the assessor of that county to carry out the so-called Boekh system which the legislature had directed to be followed, so that property in the county that should have been included in the assessment roll was in fact not included; that moreover the board failed to assess new construction of the Mountain Fuel Supply Company, a public utility, and if that new construction had been assessed, the assessment roll for 1950 would have been increased in the sum of $274,614.
The court found that the board of county commissioners of Uinta county in 1950 failed and refused to assess the newly constructed plant of the Mountain Fuel Supply Company and failed and refused to provide funds to view and count cattle and sheep in the county, that because of the default, neglect or design of the defendant board, the purported assessment for 1950 does not fairly represent the valuation in the county for that year. Thereupon the trial court submitted to this court for answer the following constitutional questions, namely:
'Where a District Court has determined that by reason of the design, neglect or default of County Commissioners or other such officers, an assessed valuation has been set which does not fairly reflect the valuation of such county for such year and upon which such county officers' salaries have been based, would use of the assessed valuation of the said county in the year next subsequent to their election and qualification in the computation and determination of salaries of such county officers, which would result in payment to said county officers of a salary different from that based upon a standard which does not fairly represent the valuation of such county for such year, be violative of Section 32, Article 3 of the Constitution of the State of Wyoming?
'Where a District Court has determined that by reason of the design, neglect or default of County Commissioners or other such officers, an assessed valuation has been set which does not fairly represent the valuation of such county for such year and upon which such county officers' salaries have been based, would use of the assessed valuation of the said county in the year next subsequent to their election and qualification in the computation and determination of salaries of such county officers, which would result in payment to said county officers of a salary different from that based upon a standard which does not fairly represent the valuation of such county for such year be violative of Section 1, Article 14 of the Constitution of the State of Wyoming?'
Article 3, Section 32, of our constitution provides as follows:
'Except as otherwise provided in this constitution, no law shall extend the term of any public officer or increase or diminish his salary or emolument after his election or appointment; but this shall not be construed to forbid the legislature from fixing salaries or emoluments of those officers first elected or appointed under this constitution, if such salaries or emoluments are not fixed by its provisions.'
Article 14, Section 1, of our constitution provides as follows:
It may not be amiss to mention briefly the manner in which the assessment roll of a county is made up. The property in the county is listed as of the first day of February of each year. § 32-501, W.C.S.1945. The board of county commissioners, sitting as a board of equalization, meets in May and June to equalize the various assessments made. § 32-801, W.C.S.1945. They may deduct and add property that has been omitted. §§ 32-303, 32-403. An abstract of the assessment roll is to be made up on or before the first Monday in July of each year. § 32-511. The State Board of Equalization has general supervision of the assessments that are made in the various counties and may add or deduct from the assessments made on or before the first Monday in August of each year. § 32-711. The same section gives it power to bring proceedings to correct any omission from the assessment roll or in case property has been improperly or unequally assessed. Stated generally, it may be said that the assessment roll is ordinarily complete on or about the first day of September of each year.
Counsel for plaintiffs argues that the basis for salaries should be a basis that is true and correct and that plaintiffs should have relief herein independent of the 1953 amendment here involved. He cites some cases from Washington and other states relating to a basis based on the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rocky Mountain Oil and Gas Ass'n v. State Bd. of Equalization
...excise-tax case, involved application of the sale and use tax to material used in dam construction; Barber v. Board of County Commissioners of Uinta County, 73 Wyo. 222, 277 P.2d 977 (1954), presented a reserved constitutional question as to the proper salaries of county officials as derive......
-
County Court Judges Ass'n v. Sidi
...officer occupying an elective office or appointed to fill a vacancy in an elective public office. Barber v. Board of County Commissioners of Uinta County, 73 Wyo. 222, 277 P.2d 977 (1954); Blackburn v. Board of County Commissioners of Park County, supra 226 P.2d 784; Ballangee v. Board of C......
-
Board of County Com'rs of County of Platte v. State ex rel. Yeadon
...after, but becomes fixed as of the date of the election.... In a more recent case interpreting this provision, Barber v. Board of County Comm'rs of Uinta County, 73 Wyo. 222, 233, The simple facts are these: When county officials are elected or enter upon their duties there should be a defi......