Board of Water and Light Trustees of City of Muscatine v. City of Muscatine
| Citation | 253 Iowa 558,113 N.W.2d 260 |
| Decision Date | 06 February 1962 |
| Docket Number | No. 50542,50542 |
| Parties | BOARD OF WATER AND LIGHT TRUSTEES OF the CITY OF MUSCATINE, Iowa, Appellee, v. The CITY OF MUSCATINE, Iowa, Walter I. Conway, Mayor of the City of Muscatine, Iowa, and Lyndon Fisher, Earl Jones, H. Pat Finnegan, Arthur Bunn, Gerald Powell, Harold Sadel and Robert Bosch, Members of the City Council of the City of Muscatine, Iowa, Appellants. |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
Robert B. Jehring, City Atty., and R. K. Stohr, Muscatine, for appellants .
C. J. Rosenberger, Muscatine, for appellee.
The controversy to be determined here is whether the plaintiff Board of Water and Light Trustees of the City of Muscatine, hereafter referred to as the board, or the defendants, represented by the city council of the City of Muscatine, hereafter designated as the council, has the right to fix the salaries of the members of the board. The plaintiff brought its declaratory judgment action for the purpose of testing this question. The trial court upheld the plaintiff's contention, and entered its decree and judgment accordingly. The defendants appeal.
The facts are stipulated. They may be summarized. The City of Muscatine is a special charter city, and at all times material here had a population of less than 25,000. Also at all material times the city had municipally owned waterworks and electric light and power plants. Since March 30, 1929, these plants have come under the provisions of Senate File No. 288 of the Acts of the 43rd General Assembly, which now appear as Sections 420.297 to 420.304 of the Code of 1958, I.C.A. On March 29, 1929, the then mayor of the city, in accordance with the Act, appointed trustees of the co-ordinated Board of Water and Light Trustees, their terms to commence on March 30 next. These trustees took office accordingly, and since that date the water and light plants have been operated by the board of trustees. At present there is a board of five trustees having charge of the operation and management of the two municipal plants.
On March 28, 1929, the council passed an ordinance which among other provisions fixed the salaries of the members of the new board at $50.00 per month each. On April 9, 1929, at the first regular meeting of the newly appointed board, it adopted a rule which also fixed the salaries of the members at $50.00 per month. The council and the board being thus in agreement as to the salaries of the board members, no friction developed on the point until the council, on or about December 15, 1955, repealed so much of the original ordinance as fixed the salaries at $50.00 per month, and enacted the following in lieu thereof: 'The salary of each Trustee appointed and serving on the Board of Water and Light Trustees shall be ($50.00) per month until December 29, 1959, after which time all Trustees shall serve without pay.' This ordinance is challenged by the present action. The board contends the council has no power to fix the salaries of the board members, and that its action in attempting to establish their compensation at zero was void. The trial court so held.
I. Case authority on the point is entirely lacking in Iowa. While some cases are cited by the contending parties, upon examination we find them pertinent only so far as they establish broad general rules governing the powers, rights and duties of municipal corporations. The real authority for the rights of the contending parties must be found chiefly in the statutes.
Prior to the enactment into law of Senate File 288 of the Acts of the 43rd G.A., the City of Muscatine had both municipal waterworks and electric light and power plants, which were operated and managed by separate boards of trustees. The material part of the 1929 enactment is found in Sections 420.297, 420.300, and 420.303, which we set out in order following:
'420.297 Management. In special charter cities having a population of less than twenty-five thousand owning two or more public utility plants and works, as provided for under chapter 397, such works and plants shall be managed, operated, extended and controlled by a co-ordinated board of trustees which shall be composed of five resident electors appointed for the term of five years by the mayor of said city. When once established such cities shall continue under the provisions hereof regardless of change of population. * * *
'420.300 Compensation. The compensation of said trustees shall not be more than six hundred dollars per annum to each member of said board. * * *
Other sections deal with terms, vacancies, and removals not material here.
It is evident from these sections that the legislature required a co-ordinated board of trustees; that salaries of the members may not exceed $600 each per annum; and that the powers and duties of the board must be found in chapters 397, 398, 399, and 401 of the code. In chapter 397, which deals with municipal public utility plants generally, we find Section 397.34: In Section 398.9, pertaining to disbursement of funds of the plants, we find: '* * * Such moneys shall be paid out by the city treasurer only on the written order of the board of waterworks trustees, who shall have full and absolute control of the application and disbursement thereof for the purposes prescribed by law, including the payment of all indebtedness arising in the construction of such works, and the maintenance, operation, and extension thereof.'
The most cogent language pertinent to the present situation is found, however, in Section 399.17 of chapter 399. This chapter relates to waterworks plants in cities of 50,000 population or more. But by the express terms of Section 420.303 it is made applicable to the operation and management of co-ordinated plants in special charter cities. The powers are broad. The board has 'complete management and control' of the plants. It makes 'all necessary contracts pertaining to the operation, maintenance, extensions, and improvement' of the plants; and it may sue and be sued.
II. There are in fact two questions involved here, although they are closely related. The first is, does the council have the right to fix compensation, or to decree no compensation for the members of the board? The second is, if the council does not have the power, may the board members fix their own salaries?
We may start with the assumption that the legislature intended that someone could fix compensation. It said, in Section 420.300, that it should not be more that $600 per annum per member. It must also be noted that nowhere in the various sections from 420.297 to 420.304, which were added to the existing law by Senate File No. 288, supra, is there any mention of the city councils or of any powers delegated to them. The mayor makes the appointments; and so far as these sections are concerned, that is the only function of the city government. The statute fixes the length of the terms; when they expire, new appointments are made. The city council is a stranger to these statutes. Certainly no express power is given it. Nor do we see how it is possible to imply any powers. The...
To continue reading
Request your trial