People ex rel. State Bd. of Equalization v. Pitcher

• Decision Date: 03 April 1916
• Docket Number: 8866.
• Parties: PEOPLE ex rel. STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION et al. v. PITCHER, Commissioner of Finance, etc.
• Court: Colorado Supreme Court

156 P. 812

61 Colo. 149

PEOPLE ex rel. STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION et al. v. PITCHER, Commissioner of Finance, etc.

No. 8866.

Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc.

April 3, 1916

Error to District Court, City and County of Denver; John A. Perry Judge.

Mandamus by the People, on the relation of the State Board of Equalization and another, against Clair J. Pitcher Commissioner of Finance and Ex officio Assessor of the City and County of Denver. From a judgment quashing the writ and dismissing the cause, the People bring error. Reversed, with directions to make the alternative writ peremptory.

Hill and Teller, JJ., dissenting.

Fred Farrar, Atty. Gen., and Norton Montgomery Asst. Atty. Gen., for the People.

James A. Marsh, City Attorney, George Q. Richmond, and C. L. Avery, all of Denver, for defendant in error.

WHITE J.

Upon petition of the people ex rel. the state board of equalization and the Colorado tax commission, the district court issued an alternative writ of mandamus directed to Clair J. Pitcher, as commissioner of finance and ex officio assessor of the city and county of Denver, commanding him to make such additions or corrections in the assessment roll of his county for the year 1915 as necessary to carry out the directions of the state board of equalization and the Colorado tax commission to put said property therein listed on the assessment rolls for taxation purposes at its full cash value, or to show cause within a designated day why he had not done so. To the alternative writ respondent made return or answer, to which the people interposed a demurrer. The demurrer was overruled, and thereupon the people filed a reply to the return of respondent. A hearing was had, the writ quashed, and the cause of action dismissed, whereupon the people brought the matter here for review on error.

The essential facts are as follows: The assessors of the several counties of the state, on or before the 1st day of September, 1915, in accordance with the law, transmitted to the Colorado tax commission their respective abstracts of assessment for such year showing the real and personal property assessed by them in their respective counties, and their valuation thereof. The abstract so prepared and transmitted by respondent showed the aggregate value of property listed and assessed by him and taxable within the city and county of Denver to be $265,337,910. September 16, 1915, the tax commission transmitted to the county board of equalization of the city and county of Denver a communication wherein it recommended a designated increase of valuation on the taxable property in such county, and that such increase be placed upon certain named items or classes of property. This was not done, however, and thereafter on the 1st day of October, 1915, the tax commission, with all of the abstracts of assessment from the various counties of the state before it, 'found and determined the amount of increase or decrease in the valuation of said real and personal property of the respective counties which would place said property on the assessment roll at its true cash value.' The tax commission thereupon made a report of its actions and findings, and on October 4, 1915, transmitted the same to the state board of equalization then in session, at the time and place as required by law, for the purpose of performing the duties imposed upon it by virtue of the provisions of section 15 of article 10 of the Constitution, as amended in 1914 (chapter 55, pp. 163, 164, S. L. 1915). This report, as far as it relates to the city and county of Denver, and omitting the caption and signature, is as follows:

'Pursuant to the provisions of sections 31, and 32 of chapter 216, Session Laws of the State of Colorado, 1911, the Colorado tax commission herewith submits the following to the state board of equalization:

'For the year 1915 the various county assessors returned an assessment of property under their jurisdiction of $921,591,301. The Colorado tax commission having carefully examined the abstracts as returned, and made a study of data available, recommended to certain of the county boards of equalization that increases in valuation aggregating $67,754,753, be placed upon certain classifications of property. Upon these recommendations increases in the aggregate amount of $10,639,767 were made by certain boards, making an aggregate assessment of $932,231,068. This commission has raised these amounts $57,114,986, making an aggregate of $989,346,054.

'The amounts that were added to the local assessments of real and personal property in each of the various counties were as follows:

'Denver, $55,408,952, as follows:

Improved land .................. $ 840,376

Imp. on improved land .......... 547,171

Town and city lots ............. 25,548,128

Imp. on lots ................... 20,549,953

All other animals .............. 2,862

Automobiles .................... 590,768

Musical instruments ............ 389,232

Clocks and watches ............. 34,965

Harness ........................ 11,822

Machinery and equipment ........ 626,434

Money invested in merchandise .. 812,083

Capital in manufactures ........ 30,548

Jewelry ........................ 129,461

Household property ............. 1,660,328

Libraries ...................... 49,801

Furniture and fixtures ......... 470,228

All other property ............. 114,794"

The state board of equalization continued in session from day to day, pursuant to adjournment, until and including the 18th day of October, 1915, on which date, by resolution duly adopted, it fixed the valuation of the real and personal property of the city and county of Denver at $320,746,862, instead of $265,337,910, the amount returned by the assessor in his abstract of assessment, 'making an increase in valuation of $55,408,952.' At the same time and place it further provided by resolution that the aforesaid increase in valuation should be placed upon certain designated classes and items of classes of property in such county. Thereupon a certified notice of its action in the premises was delivered to, and received by, respondent, who refused to make the increase or comply with the orders of the board. The material portions of this notice are as follows:

'* * * That at a meeting of the state board of equalization, held on the 18th of October, 1915, which meeting was held for the purpose of examining the abstracts of assessment of the various assessors of the state for the year 1915, as submitted to said board by the Colorado tax commission, and for the purpose of taking action on said abstracts and of adjusting, equalizing, raising or lowering the valuation of real and personal property of the several counties of the state and the valuation of any item or items of the various classes of such property, all done in the manner as provided by law, and for the further purpose of fixing the rate of tax to be levied and collected within the various counties of the state for state purposes, the following proceedings, among others, were had:

'By resolution, duly adopted, the valuation of the real and personal property of your county was increased from $265,337,910, the amount returned in your abstract of assessment on property assessed by you, to $320,746,862, making an increase in valuation of your assessment of $55,408,952, the rate per cent. of said increase being.

'Said resolution also provided that said increase in valuation of your assessment should be distributed as to the various classes or item or items of classes of property in your county in the following manner:'

(There is here inserted in the notice a duplicate of the classes and items of property and the respective values shown above in the report of the tax commission to the state board of equalization.)

The answer of respondent questions the right of relators to prosecute the action; sets forth respondent's lack of knowledge as to whether the tax commission examined the abstracts of assessment of the various counties of the state or secured any information for the purpose of determining whether the property of the several counties had been properly assessed; alleges that the assessment made by respondent placed the property of the city and county of Denver upon the assessment roll at its full cash value, that the increase in the assessed valuation on property in the city and county of Denver and the findings and report in relation thereto of the tax commission to the state board of equalization 'were made arbitrarily, capriciously, and unlawfully, and as a matter of guess or chance and without the exercise of any method or system whatever,' in that it was made 'solely upon the findings and report made' to it by the tax commission, and that while such board heard some, including respondent, it refused to hear other witnesses in relation to the matter; admits that the tax commission submitted its report to the state board of equalization, that the latter body met at the time and place and for the purpose of performing its duty under the law, that it acted in regard thereto and notified the assessors of the state, including respondent, of its determination in the premises; alleges that chapter 216 of the Session Laws of 1911 is unconstitutional, and that the action of the state board of equalization is in violation of both the federal and state Constitutions.

Upon the hearing of the demurrer which questioned the sufficiency of the facts set forth in the return to constitute an answer or defense to the writ, the court held that the state board of equalization had the power to raise or lower the valuation of any part or parcel whatsoever of the property of any county to bring such property therein to its full and true cash value for the purpose of taxation,...