People ex rel. Lindheimer v. Hamilton
| Decision Date | 13 February 1940 |
| Docket Number | 25244.,Nos. 25212,s. 25212 |
| Citation | 25 N.E.2d 517,373 Ill. 124 |
| Parties | PEOPLE ex rel. LINDHEIMER, County Collector, v. HAMILTON. PEOPLE ex rel. TOMAN, County Collector, v. 900 NORTH MICHIGAN BLDG. CORPORATION. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Proceedings by the People on the relation of Horace G. Lindheimer, County Collector, against T. H. Hamilton, and on the relation of John L. Toman, County Collector, against 900 North Michigan Building Corporation, wherein objections were made to certain taxes for the year 1936. From judgments overruling their objections, T. H. Hamilton and 900 North Michigan Building Corporation appeal.
Affirmed.Appeal from Cook County Court; Edmund K. Jarecki, Judge.
Scott, MacLeish & Falk, of Chicago (Robert S. Cushman and Pomeroy Sinnock, both of Chicago, of counsel), for appellant T. H. Hamilton.
Woods, Woods, Brown & Salter, of Chicago (Adelbert Brown, Robert N. Holt, and Robert E. Corcoran, all of Chicago, of counsel), for appellant Nine Hundred North Michigan Bldg. Corporation.
Thomas J. Courtney, State's Atty., Richard S. Folsom, John O Rees, and Kirkland, Fleming, Green Martin & Ellis, all of Chicago (Joseph B. Fleming, of Chicago, Albert Fink, of Oak Park, and Thomas M. Thomas, Thomas F. Scully, Marshall V. Kearney, and Brendan Q. O'Brien, all of Chicago, of counsel), for appellees.
Both of these causes are appeals taken from the judgment of the county court of Cook county, overruling objections to certain taxes for the year 1936. Cause No. 25212 involves objections to taxes of the board of education of the city of Chicago, levied for new buildings, and objections to that part of the 1936 taxes for the Chicago Park District for the purpose of paying principal and interest on certain revolving-fund bonds in the amount of $5,000,000, claimed to have been authorized and issued in excess of its constitutional debt limitation. Cause No. 25244 involves the same item of taxes of the board of education, and the 1936 taxes of the Cook County Forest Preserve District, levied for the purpose of constructing and maintaining a zoological park. In both causes, the objections were overruled and appeals were taken directly to this court. In both causes, the objections to the taxes for ‘new buildings' included in the appropriation set out in the budget of the board of education, to be paid from the building fund, are based upon the claim that the amount appropriated includes payments on contracts for school buildings in course of construction, and, also, for buildings to be constructed under contracts to be let during the school year, and is, therefore, not sufficiently itemized. The statute authorizing taxes to be levied for school purposes provides for two funds-the educational fund and the building fund, for each of which a separate tax is provided. Until the adoption of the so-called Budget law (Ill.Rev.Stat.1939, chap. 122, § 158a) it was not necessary for a board of education to do more than specify the amounts to be expended out of each fund, without itemization. Koelling v. People ex rel. Raymond, 196 Ill. 353, 63 N.E. 735.
When the Budget law for school districts having a population of 500,000 or more was enacted it required the taxes to be levied and expended in accordance with the annual budget in such school district. The purpose of requiring a budget was to insure that taxes levied for specific school purposes should be expended for such purposes. The act requires estimates of all current assets and liabilities of each fund of the board of education, and the amount of such assets available for appropriation, whether for expenditures or charges to be made or incurred during the year, or for liabilities unpaid at the beginning of the year. It shall also contain an estimate of the net amount of taxes to be received from the levies of prior years, and the liabilities of the respective funds, including the amount of final judgments and interest; the principal amount of anticipation warrants, temporary loans and accrued interest, and any amount which the board is required to pay back to the working cash fund for educational purposes. Such school budget shall also set forth the estimate of taxes to be levied for the current year and all revenue to be derived from sources other than taxation, and such estimates shall be segregated and classified as to funds, in such manner as to give effect to the requirements of law relating to the purposes to which said assets and taxes and current revenue are applicable, so that no expenditures shall be authorized for any purpose in excess of the money lawfully available for such purpose. To accomplish this purpose the act further provides that the budget shall specify (a) The several organization units, purposes and objects for which appropriations are made, (b) the amount appropriated for each organization unit, purposes or object, and (c) the fund from which or to which each amount appropriated is to be paid or charged.
The particular item objected to in the budget is as follows:
+--------------------------------------------------+
¦Budget ¦Items of Appropriation ¦Amounts ¦
+-------+--------------------------+---------------¦
¦Index ¦under ¦Appropriated ¦
+-------+--------------------------+---------------¦
¦ ¦Standard Accounts ¦ ¦
+--------------------------------------------------¦
¦School Buildings-60-To provide for payments on ¦
+--------------------------------------------------¦
¦contracts of sundry school buildings in course of ¦
+--------------------------------------------------¦
¦construction and to be constructed on contracts to¦
+--------------------------------------------------¦
¦be awarded upon special authority of the Board ¦
+--------------------------------------------------¦
¦of Education. ¦
+--------------------------------------------------¦
¦S-700 ¦New Buildings ¦$5,770,900.00 ¦
+--------------------------------------------------+
This item must be examined in connection with other pertinent parts of the budget set out in the record. Under the heading of ‘estimated resources' nine separate funds, including the educational and building fund and the gross amount of the 1936 tax levy, together with the miscellaneous revenue and the resources available for appropriation, are enumerated. In like manner, current liabilities and charges against such assets are set forth. When it comes to the expenditures authorized to be made out of the taxes levied for the current year, and the assets on hand, the separate purposes for which money may be expended are set forth and summarized for each of said nine funds, among which is the building fund. It, in turn, is divided into five general purposes, which are subdivided again into special or specific items as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Welborn v. Whitney
...validating the irregular exercise of power, and it cannot cure a want of authority to act at all." ¶13 In the case of People v. Hamilton, 373 Ill. 124, 25 N. E. 2d 517, it was held:"The Legislature may validate the irregular or defective exercise of already existing power by statute where t......
-
Board of Educ. of Hancock County v. Slack
...167 Cal.App.2d 190, 334 P.2d 33 (1959); Epping v. City of Columbus, 117 Ga. 263, 43 S.E. 803 (1903); People ex rel. Lindheimer v. Hamilton, 373 Ill. 124, 25 N.E.2d 517 (1940); Pennington v. Town of Sumner, 222 Iowa 1005, 270 N.W. 629, 109 A.L.R. 355 (1936); Dalton v. State Property and Buil......
-
People ex rel. Ammann v. Wabash R. Co.
...purpose for which a tax is levied where each purpose is properly embraced in one general designation.’ In People ex rel. Lindheimer v. Hamilton, 373 Ill. 124, 25 N.E.2d 517, it was held a levy for ‘new buildings' need not be further itemized to show the amounts appropriated for buildings in......
-
Welborn v. Whitney
... ... Lowman & H. Co. v. Ervin, 157 Wash. 649, 290 P. 221; ... People v. Bloom, 193 N.Y. 1, 85 N.E. 824, 18 L.R.A., ... N.S., 898, 127 ... In the ... case of People v. Hamilton, 373 Ill. 124, 25 N.E.2d ... 517, 518, it was held: "The legislature may ... ...