Board of Supervisors of Lauderdale County v. City of Meridian

• Decision Date: 24 October 1927
• Docket Number: 26606
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court
• Parties: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF LAUDERDALE COUNTY v. CITY OF MERIDIAN. [*]

114 So. 803

149 Miss. 139

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF LAUDERDALE COUNTY v. CITY OF MERIDIAN. ^[*]

No. 26606

Supreme Court of Mississippi

October 24, 1927

Division A

HIGHWAYS. Law requiring taxes for certain improved roads to be used solely therefor repeals, as affects such taxes, previous law granting half of taxes to municipality (Laws 1926, chapter 227; Laws 1920, chapter 232).

Laws 1926, chapter 227, requiring that any tax levied for maintenance of certain improved roads must be used solely for that purpose, in so far as it affects taxes so levied, cannot be harmonized with Laws 1920, chapter 232, authorizing payment to municipality of half of road taxes collected therein after notifying board of supervisors by resolution and to that extent repeals the latter act, precluding recovery by city of half of taxes levied for maintenance of certain improved roads.

2. STATUTES. Conflicting statutes with no express repeal provisions should be construed if possible so as to harmonize them.

Conflicting statutes with no express repeal provisions should be construed if possible so as to harmonize them and give full effect and proper applications to provisions of both, since repeals by implication are not favored.

3 HIGHWAYS. Levy of road tax is not for benefit of municipal street fund to extent of one-half of tax collected within municipality (Laws 1920, chapter 232; Laws 1926, chapter 227).

Levy of road tax by board of supervisors under Laws 1926, chapter 227, is not made for the benefit of municipal street fund to extent of one-half of tax collected within municipality, and no part thereof is payable to municipality, since right of municipality under Laws 1920, chapter 232, to receive one-half of such taxes arises only in event it elects to preserve for itself the benefit of such act by resolution as provided therein.

4 HIGHWAYS. Law requiring taxes for specified improved road to be used solely therefor conflicts with law authorizing city to demand one-half tax collected therein (Laws 1920, chapter 232; Laws 1926, chapter 227).

Laws 1926, chapter 227, mandatorily requires that all taxes levied for maintenance of any specified improved roads shall be used solely for that purpose and for no other purpose, and hence conflicts with Laws 1920, chapter 232, authorizing municipal corporation, in case of election, to require payment to it of one-half tax collected within municipality.

5 HIGHWAYS. Levy for road maintenance, based on recommendation of levy for certain named improved roads, was made for that purpose and not generally (Laws 1926, chapter 227).

Where recommendation of road commissioners under which board of supervisors received authority to make special levy for road improvement recommended and requested levy for certain named improved road, the levy was made for purpose of maintaining certain improved roads within meaning of Laws 1926, chapter 227, and not generally for benefit of maintenance fund, notwithstanding particular item was listed simply as good roads district No. 1, since only authority which board of supervisors had to make special levy was based on such recommendation.

Suggestion of Error Overruled Jan. 2, 1928.

APPEAL from circuit court of Lauderdale county. HON. J. D. FATHEREE, Judge.

Action by the city of Meridian against the board of supervisors of Lauderdale county. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Reversed and rendered.

Judgment reversed.

Victor W. Gilbert, for appellant.

The issue is whether a municipality located within a good roads district, is entitled to one-half of the ad valorem taxes collected on property in the city, where the tax is levied for the maintenance of specified roads. The city of Meridian claims that it is entitled to this money under chapter 232, Acts of 1920, and the board of supervisors, conceding for the present the validity of this chapter, denies that the municipality is entitled to the money under chapter 227, Acts 1926.

The issue involved is purely a question of law. This question of law is presented by the plea of the defendant to which a demurrer was sustained. When two statutes are brought under review the first effort is to harmonize them if possible; but if this is impossible then the latest is to be given effect.

Chapter 149, Laws 1910, under which good roads district No. 1 of Lauderdale county, was organized is set forth as amended under section 7158 et seq., Hemingway's Code, and 7158 et seq., in Hemingway's Supplement being chapter 277, Laws of 1920.

Neither in the original Act of 1910 nor in any of the amendments thereto, down to chapter 277, Acts of 1920, is found any authority for paying to municipalities one-half of the taxes collected on the property in the cities. Each of these amendatory Acts is complete within itself and under neither is the city entitled to one-half. Bay St. Louis v. Hancock Co., 120 Miss. 873, 83 So. 276.

Under each of these amendatory Acts a special tax levy for the good roads district is authorized only on recommendation of the road commissioners. The limit of the levy was raised from one mill in prior acts to three mills under section 6 of chapter 277 of 1920. Until chapter 232, Acts of 1920, was enacted no municipality was entitled to any part of this fund.

When we examine the companion scheme for road building as reflected in chapter 150, Laws 1910, and the amendments thereto, which was under review in the Hancock County case, supra, we find the same silence as to any right of municipalities to participate in the proceeds of tax levies for road purposes. These two chapters, 149 and 150 of 1910, are the two great tap roots from which has grown our magnificent road building program in this state.

The legislature has well-defined schemes for road construction and each of these schemes is complete, not only as to the manner and method of forming road districts, and the manner of financing the operations, but also as to methods of working roads. None of these schemes or methods call for a division with municipalities. Chapter 232 is a mere fragment of a law, it is wholly incomplete. Without specific reference to all the other laws on the subject it is meaningless. It deals with taxes after they have been collected and ignores all the legislation on the subject as to the manner, method, and purpose of taxation for road purposes and is nothing but a blanket amendment of all these laws without any reference to them whatever. Chapter 232 was a radical departure from a decade of legislation on road construction.

Chapter 227, Acts 1926, reads: "That hereafter when any tax shall be levied for the maintenance of any certain improved road, or roads, that said tax shall be used solely for the purpose of maintaining such road or roads and for no other purpose." Not that one-half of such tax shall be used for that purpose, but the whole of it.

Chapter 232 is broad in its terms including all taxes for "road purposes." Chapter 227 is limited in its scope, applying to "certain improved roads." Unless the road named is also an improved road chapter 227 does not apply.

In the court below the argument was made that the statute dealt with the use of the funds after they had been distributed, that chapter 227 didn't apply until after the distribution had been made.

But the fallacy of this whole argument is at once apparent when we find that the Act, chapter 227, applies to the levy of the tax for a certain purpose, and the proceeds follow the purpose of the levy; the collection being a mere routine, ministerial act.

The levy and the request of the commissioners must be construed together. Each without the other is abortive. The request to make the levy was accepted, approved and adopted by the board. The court erred in sustaining the demurrer to the plea.

A. B. Amis, for appellee.

The scheme of all the various separate road district acts is, that the roads of the district shall be maintained by a commutation tax and special ad valorem tax to be levied annually by the board of supervisors; and a practice (more or less general), had grown up, of making the annual levy of taxes for the maintenance of the roads of the district in general terms. Afterward, and during the same fiscal year, the commissioners of the separate road district, would take over the maintenance of additional roads, and use the tax money so levied and collected to maintain these additional roads, the same as those of which they had control at the time of the levy.

And we submit that this was the evil which chapter 227, Laws of 1926, was intended to remedy. The true intent and meaning of that chapter was to provide a uniform rule for the use of the funds levied to maintain the roads of all good roads districts, by requiring that such funds should be used solely in maintaining the roads under the jurisdiction and control of the commissioners at the time of making the levy, and for no other purpose. That this is the true meaning of the act is indicated by its language, which merely restricts the use of such funds to the maintenance of the particular road or roads for the maintenance of which the levy was made.

The effect of chapter 232, Laws of 1920, is that when the board of supervisors levies a county tax, for the general county road fund, that such levy is actually made for the benefit of the general county road fund and also for the benefit of the municipal street fund, to the extent of one-half of the tax collected within the municipality. And when the board levies a good roads district tax, that such levy is actually made for the benefit of the good roads district maintenance fund and also for the benefit of the municipal street fund, to the extent of one-half the tax collected within the municipality. The real levy for...