Hunter v. City of Louisville

• Decision Date: 30 September 1924
• Citation: 204 Ky. 562,265 S.W. 277
• Parties: HUNTER v. CITY OF LOUISVILLE ET AL.
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

265 S.W. 277

204 Ky. 562

HUNTER v. CITY OF LOUISVILLE ET AL.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

September 30, 1924

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County, Chancery Branch, First Division.

Suit by Harrison Hunter against the City of Louisville, and others. Judgment for defendants and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Emmet R. Field, of Louisville, for appellant.

William T. Baskett, of Louisville, for appellees.

McCANDLESS J.

This is a suit by a taxpayer to test the validity of an issue by the city of Louisville, of $750,000 in bonds, authorized by an act of the General Assembly, approved March 20, 1922, being chapter 23 of the Session Acts of that year, and entitled:

"An act to provide for the construction and maintenance, in cities of the first class, of memorials in honor of the soldiers and sailors furnished by such cities and the counties wherein situated, to the United States army and navy during the recent world war providing for the voting of a bond issue in such cities and for the acceptance of gifts and donations, for such purposes (partially repealing section 2827 Kentucky Statutes, and for related purposes), including the creation of a memorial commission in such cities."

In the body of the act provision is made, in section 1 for the appointment of a commission by the mayor, subject to the approval of the board of aldermen, for their qualification, term of office, and for filling vacancies; in section 2 for the organization of the commission; in section 3 for certain enumerated but not exclusive powers of the commission; in section 4 for the execution of proper bonds by the officers; in section 5 for the commission to acquire suitable grounds, and to construct and furnish an adequate memorial thereon, as therein described, when the conditions of the act are met; in section 6 for the commission to acquire land by gift, purchase, lease, or condemnation, and hold title therein for the purposes of the act; in sections 7 and 8 for the employment of an architect, and selection of plans, to be approved by the mayor; in section 9 for the submission of bids on all contracts requiring an expenditure in excess of $500; in section 10 for a report to the mayor of the city upon the completion and equipment of the memorial, to be approved by the board of aldermen; in section 11 for an annual tax levy of not exceeding one cent on each $100 of taxable property for the maintenance of the memorial; in section 12 to limit the expenses of such maintenance; in section 13 and 14 for an annual financial report by the commission to the mayor, and by him transmitted to the council; in section 15 for the uses to which the memorial may be put, and for the preservation and uses of the income arising therefrom; in section 16 authorizing the commission to accept gifts of every description of property, and to reduce the subject of donations to money or high class interest-bearing securities, acceptable to the commission and the mayor of Louisville, and directing the placing of the funds in solvent banks or trust companies in the city, agreeable to the donors, to be held by such depositories until the proceeds from the bond issue are available. Such money to bear interest at a fair rate, and directing that, when the bond proceeds are available, the depository shall pay over the money or deliver the securities, as the case might be, to the commission for its use according to the term of the act, but if after the gift or donation is made the proposed bond issue is defeated or invalidated, such gifts or donations are to be returned to the donor by the trustee holding under the act; in section 17 for an ordinance submitting to the voters of the city at an election in November, 1922, whether the bonds of the city should be issued for the purposes set forth in the act in the amount of $750,000, and requiring the ordinance to provide the date and maturity of such bonds, the interest rate, with certain details regulating their execution and delivery; in section 18 for the sale of the bonds when issued, and the manner in which the proposed issue shall be paid; in section 19 for the establishment of a fund for surplus income to be used for improvements, replacement, or reconstruction; in section 20 that all disbursements by the commission, prior to the completion of the memorial, shall come out of the donations and proceeds from the sale of the bonds, except the commission is authorized to borrow sufficient funds to pay the preliminary expenses, and, in the event the bond issue is defeated, the commission shall be dissolved and its powers then cease, and the city pay the money so borrowed; in section 21 that upon such dissolution the commission is required to turn its effects over to the city and vest the title therein to the city; in section 22 that if within two years after the voting of the bond issue there shall be given or donated to the commission not less than $500,000, in total, the commission then, and in that event only, may sell the bonds and construct the memorial; in section 23 that all the proceeds arising from the sale of the bonds shall be used for the purpose of the act, and that the title to all the property however acquired should vest in the commission for the purposes contemplated in the act; in section 24 that so much of section 2827 Kentucky Statutes as vest in the board of public works of cities of the first class, supervision and control of the construction of public buildings and improvements is repealed to the extent that it conflicts with this act, but no further. There are several other provisions, but the above are all that can have any bearing on the questions involved.

The petition shows a full compliance with the terms of the act in the appointment of the commission; that gifts and donations have been made in the amount of $500,000, and deposited in trust with a solvent bank and trust company agreed upon by the commissioners and donors, and is being held by it in accordance with the provisions of the act. It further shows that, in accordance with the provisions of the act, the general council of the city of Louisville enacted an ordinance submitting the question of the issual of the sum of $750,000 in bonds in question, for the purpose mentioned, to the voters of that city, at the general election on November 7, 1922, and that more...