Hays v. City of Kalamazoo
| Decision Date | 06 January 1947 |
| Docket Number | No. 54.,54. |
| Citation | 25 N.W.2d 787,316 Mich. 443 |
| Parties | HAYS v. CITY OF KALAMAZOO et al. (MICHIGAN MUNICIPAL LEAGUE, Interventer). |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE Appeal from Circuit Court, Kalamazoo County; Earl C. pugsley, judge.
Suit in equity by Charles B. Hays against the City of Kalamazoo and the mayor and commissioners thereof to enjoin inclusion in the city budget and payment of a sum contributed annually by the city to the Michigan Municipal League, which intervened as a party defendant. From a decree denying the relief sought against the city and its officials, but enjoining intervenor from engaging in certain legislative activities, plaintiff appeals, and defendants and intervenor cross-appeal.
Decree modified, and decree entered denying the relief sought by plaintiff and dismissing the bill of complaint.
Before the entire bench.
James B. Stanley, of Kalamazoo, for appellant.
Richard H. Paulson, City Atty., of Kalamazoo (Sweet, Paulson & Laing, of Kalamazoo, of counsel), for individual defendants and City of Kalamazoo, defendants and cross-appellants.
Schaberg & Schaberg, of Kalamazoo (John W. Lederle, of Ann Arbor, of counsel), for intervening defendant and crossappellant.
William E. Dowling, Corporation Counsel, and John H. Witherspoon, Asst. Corporation Counsel, both of Detroit, for City of Detroit, amici curiae.
Charles H. Menmuir, City Atty. of Traverse City, of Traverse City, and Orph Holmes, City Atty. of Ferndale, of Ferndale, for City of Traverse City, amici curiae.
Plaintiff, a taxpayer of the city of Kalamazoo, brought suit in the circuit court against said city, its mayor and its city commissioners, for the purpose of obtaining equitable relief. The bill of complaint, filed November 25, 1944, alleged that for a period of ten years and upwards past, defendant city had annually contributed to the Michigan Municipal League public funds derived from taxes and assessments, that the city manager, in preparing a budget for the year 1945, had included therein for the purpose indicated the sum of approximately $500, and that in accordance with the action taken in prior years such item would be approved by the city commission. The bill further alleged that such proposed expenditure was not authorized under the Constitution, the statutes of the State, or the city charter. Plaintiff asked that the court declare such expenditure to be unauthorized, illegal, and void, and that defendants be enjoined from including the item referred to in the budget of the city for the year 1945, and from paying any money whatsoever to the municipal league.
Defendants filed an answer to the bill of complaint, admitting annual payments to the Michigan Municipal League, and that the amount included for such purpose in the 1945 budget was slightly in excess of $500. The answer further alleged that such payments were made in consideration of services received, and denied that the city of Kalamazoo was without authority to make the expenditure in question.
The Michigan Municipal League filed a petition in the case, claiming an interest in the subject matter of the litigation and seeking permission to intervene as a party defendant. Such permission was granted. Thereupon the intervenor filed its answer to the bill of complaint, setting forth specifically the nature and purposes of its organization and the character of the services rendered by it to its various constituent members, including the city of Kalamazoo.
The present charter of the defendant city was adopted under the provisions of Act No. 279, Pub.Acts 1909, as amended, commonly referred to as the city home rule act.1 Section 3 of said act, in prescribing mandatory charter provisions, specifies in subsection (h) the requirement ‘For an annual appropriation of money for municipal purposes.’ The statute must be contrued in connection with the home rule provisions of the Constitution, particularly art. 8, §§ 20 and 21. Said sections are as follows:
‘20. The legislature shall provide by a general law for the incorporation of cities, and by a general law for the incorporation of villages; such general laws shall limit their rate of taxation for municipal purposes, and restrict their powers of borrowing money and contracting debts.
Art. 8, § 23, as amended at the general election held November 7, 1944, provides: ‘Subject to the provisions of this constitution, any city or village may acquire, own and operate, either within or without its corporate limits, public utilities for supplying water, light, heat, power and transportation to the municipality and the inhabitants thereof; and may also sell and deliver, heat, power and light without its corporate limits to an amount not to exceed 25 per cent of that furnished by it within the corporate limits, and may also sell and deliver water outside of its corporate limits in such amount as may be determine by the legislative body of the city or village; and may operate transportation lines without the municipality within such limits as may be prescribed by law: Provided, That the right to own or operate transportation facilities shall not extend to any city or village of less than 25,000 inhabitants.’
Attention is also called to art. 8, § 25, which provides in part: ‘No city or village shall have power to abridge the right of elective franchise, to loan its credit, nor to assess, levy or collect any tax or assessment for other than a public purpose.’
The Michigan Municipal League was organized in 1928 as a nonprofit corporation. It succeeded a voluntary association of cities and villages of the State, designated as the Michigan League of Municipalities, which functioned for approximately 30 years. At the end of the 1944 fiscal year the membership in the corporation consisted of 283 Michigan cities and villages. The articles set forth the purposes of the corporation as follows: ‘The improvement of municipal government and administration through cooperative effort; and this purpose shall be advanced by the maintenance of a central bureau of information and research; by the holding of annual conventions, schools and short courses; by the publication of an official magazine; by the encouraging of legislation beneficial to the municipalities of Michigan and the citizens thereof; by the rendering of such special and general services as may be deemed advisable; and by the fostering of municipal education and a greater civic consciousness among the citizens of the municipalities of Michigan.’
The general character of the services rendered by the Michigan Municipal League to its constituent members is set forth in paragraph 11 of its answer, which reads: ‘That the Michigan Municipal League exists for the purpose of perpetuating and organizing an agency for the co-operation of Michigan cities in the practical study of matters pertaining to municipal government, and the establishment and maintenance of a central bureau of information for use in collection, compilation and dissemination of statistics, reports and all kinds of information relative to municipal government; that this information and service, among other things, includes taxation problems, utility regulation, construction and engineering, garbage disposal, zoning, civil service, extension of city limits, streets, paving, housing, law enforcement and ordinances, public welfare, liquor control, research, labor problems, pension, compensation, directories, licensing, police and fire protection, legal assistance, transient merchants, floods, stream pollution, accounting, purchasing, public health, parks and play-grounds, postwar planning, information on proposed ligislation, drafting charters, and many other services which are essential to the efficient management of the different municipalities constituting its membership.’
The expenses of the Michigan Municipal League in carrying on its activities are paid in the main from fees assessed, on the basis of population, against the cities and villages making up the membership. The Federal census of 1940 shows that in that year the city of Kalamazoo had a population of 54,097. The amount assessed against it for the year 1945 was the sum of $517. The municipal league is governed by a board of directors, selected from municipal officials representing constituent members. A president, vice-presidents, and a secretary are selected in like manner.
After hearing the proofs of the parties the trial court came to the conclusion that the action of the defendant city in availing itself of the services of the municipal league was not illegal or unauthorized, except as to the legislative activities of the municipal league. Payment for such activities, other than compiling and sending out, to the cities and villages comprising the league, information pertaining to legislative matters, was held, in the opinion filed by the trial judge, to be unauthorized and improper. A decree was accordingly entered, denying the relief sought against the city and its officials, but enjoining the intervening defendant from:
‘1. Advising and counselling individual members of the legislature and legislative committees of the legislature, either during or between legislative sessions, as to desirable or undesirable proposed and anticipated legislation, and
‘2. Drafting legislation and expending money for such purpose, and
‘3. Appearing before legislative committees for the purpose of influencing the actions and reports of said committees upon proposed legislation, and
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gregory Marina, Inc. v. City of Detroit
...use' are recognized by appellant, appellees, and this Court, as worthy of serious consideration, namely: Hays v. City of Kalamazoo, 316 Mich. 443, 25 N.W.2d 787, 169 A.L.R. 1218, and Allydonn Realty Corp. v. Holyoke Housing Authority, 304 Mass. 288, 23 N.E.2d Appellant city calls to our att......
-
Alan v. Wayne County
...v. State Board of Agriculture, 360 Mich. 481, 498, 1104 N.W.2d 350 (1960) (time sharing on rental basis of studio); Hays v. Kalamazoo, 316 Mich. 443, 25 N.W.2d 787 (1947) (Michigan Municipal League Now the nub of the problem in all probability is the value received by the State in return fo......
-
Poletown Neighborhood Council v. City of Detroit
...("(T)he public purpose of slum clearance is * * * the one controlling purpose of the condemnation".); Hays v. Kalamazoo, 316 Mich. 443, 453, 25 N.W.2d 787, 169 A.L.R. 1218 (1947) (taxation) (" 'A public use changes with changing conditions of society' "). It is equally clear, however, and t......
-
City of Gaylord v. Beckett
...because stimulation of the State's apple industry would be beneficially reflected throughout the State. In Hays v. City of Kalamazoo, 316 Mich, 443, 25 N.W.2d 787, 169 A.L.R. 1218, the expenditure of general funds of a city for membership in the Michigan Municipal League, a private nonprofi......