Becker v. Selectmen of Town of Bennington
Decision Date | 23 February 1962 |
Docket Number | No. 201,201 |
Citation | 123 Vt. 6,178 A.2d 399 |
Court | Vermont Supreme Court |
Parties | Franklin BECKER v. SELECTMEN OF the TOWN OF BENNINGTON. |
Jones, Ehrich & Dollard, Bennington (John H. Williams, II, and R. Marshall Witten, Bennington, of counsel), for plaintiff.
Norton Barber, Bennington, for defendant.
Before HULBURD, C. J., and SHANGRAW, BARNEY and SMITH, JJ.
This is a petition for a declaratory judgment brought pursuant to the provisions of 12 V.S.A. § 4712. The purpose of the action is to determine the legality of a consolidation of two road districts as voted at the Bennington town meeting held in March of 1961, and, also whether the plaintiff, Franklin Becker, was duly elected as a road commissioner of the town at that meeting for District No. 1.
The parties submitted the case upon an agreed stipulation of facts, pursuant to which the Bennington County Court made findings. An order was issued by the court sustaining the legality of the consolidation as voted, and, it provided that the plaintiff was not duly elected as a road commissioner for the town. The plaintiff brings this appeal from that order. The issue presented is rooted in laws enacted by the 1902 session of the General Assembly.
Special Act. No. 294, approved December 9, 1902 and relating only to the Town of Bennington, provides in part as follows:
* * *
Act No. 55, sections 2980 and 2981 of the Vermont Statutes, was passed at the 1902 session of the General Assembly and approved December 11, 1902. This general enabling act, among other things, provided for the election of town officers including road commissioners, and the division of a town into districts. This act, of course, was not limited to any specific town but applied to all towns in the state. This statute provided in part as follows:
This general act has continued in effect without significant change. Section 1 thereof is now found in 24 V.S.A. § 711(5), and section 2 in 19 V.S.A. § 131.
The same session of the General Assembly passed Act. No. 63, approved November 21, 1902. This statute provided that voters of an incorporated village within a town could not vote in town meetings for the road commissioners of the town unless at least fifteen percent of the last highway tax of the incorporated village shall have been paid over to the town treasurer to be expended upon the highways of the town outside of the village corporation. This provision is now contained in 24 V.S.A. § 701. At all times material the town of Bennington included three separate incorporated villages.
At its annual March meeting in 1903 the town of Bennington voted to elect two road commissioners pursuant to the special act, No. 294, supra. Two road districts were then created by the committee appointed for that purpose under the act. The division of the town into two road districts continued unchanged until the annual meeting in March of 1961. Article 17 of the warning for that meeting reads:
Article 17 was carried by a vote of 1674 to 891. Various town officials, through the local newspapers and otherwise, explained before the annual meeting that if Article 17 was carried the vote for road commissioner would be of no effect and a special election would be held later to elect one road commissioner. This matter was also discussed and similarly explained at the 1961 March town meeting before any vote was taken.
At the annual meeting in March 1961 the plaintiff was the successful candidate for road commissioner, district No. 1. The passage of Article 17 eliminated the office to which he had been elected. Plaintiff therefore contends that the consolidation of road districts as voted was illegal and claims the right to serve as road commissioner for district No. 1.
Following the annual meeting of March 1961 a special meeting for the election of a town road commissioner was held on April 11, 1961. This meeting was duly warned and at the meeting James Cross was elected. Between the annual town meeting of the same year and the special meeting Mr. Cross had been acting as road commissioner by...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Lewandoski v. Vermont State Colleges, AFL-CIO
... ... Becker v. Selectmen of Bennington, 123 Vt. 6, 10, 178 A.2d 399, ... 402 (1962) ... : his work as a zoning administrator and selectman in the town of Stannard, an article which he published on a subject outside his major ... ...
-
City of Rutland v. Keiffer
...they must be read together and harmonized if possible to give effect to a consistent legislative policy. Becker v. Selectmen of Town of Bennington, 123 Vt. 6, 178 A.2d 399. Where words have been omitted from a statute by inadvertence or through clerical error, and the intent of the legislat......
-
Kirchner v. Giebink
...town vote. The general charter provision does not control in light of this specific statutory scheme. See Becker v. Selectmen of the Town of Bennington, 123 Vt. 6, 178 A.2d 399 (1962). The situation is similar to that present in Lawton, 128 Vt. at 528-29, 266 A.2d at 819, where the plaintif......
-
Crescent Beach Ass'n, In re, 350
...of any necessary repugnancy, including a general and special statute, the latter must ordinarily prevail. Becker v. Selectmen of the Town of Bennington, 123 Vt. 6, 10, 178 A.2d 399. Both statutes here under consideration provide the same time limit for the taking of appeal but while the gen......