Pledger v. Cutrell
| Decision Date | 15 October 1934 |
| Docket Number | 3571 |
| Citation | 75 S.W.2d 76,189 Ark. 562 |
| Parties | PLEDGER, County Treasurer, v. CUTRELL et al. |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Appeal from Jefferson Chancery Court; H. R. Lucas, Chancellor.
For majority opinion, see 74 S.W.2d 646.
The case of Horne v. Paragould Special School District, 186 Ark. 1000, 57 S.W.2d 568, upon which the majority of the court rely, does not, in my opinion, support the conclusion which the majority have announced, and I therefore respectfully dissent.
The record is silent as to whether the school directors had complied with the law defining their duties in the matter of holding the election at which the school tax was voted, and we must therefore presume that those duties had been performed. Section 97 of Act No. 169 of the Acts of 1931 (Acts 1931, pp. 476-588) defines these duties. Subsection H of section 97 requires the school directors to prepare an estimate of the amount of money needed by the district for the year following the school election, showing separately the amount needed "for general control, instruction operation of the plant, maintenance of the plant, auxiliary agencies, fixed charges, capital outlay, and debt service," and to send a copy of the estimate to the county board of education, and to publish it once a week for three consecutive weeks in a newspaper published in the county at least twenty-five days before the annual election. The obvious purpose of this requirement is to advise the electors what amount of money will be required for school purposes and the uses to which it will be devoted. This may be done by voting a given number of mills for each purpose or by voting any number of mills, not exceeding 18, for all purposes, or for a general school tax. It is a matter of common knowledge that the latter is the method ordinarily employed in the districts throughout the state, and it is stipulated that the tax was so voted in the instant case. The tax voted was "For General Tax," and it is respectfully submitted that this does not include any one purpose to the exclusion of any other purpose for which a school tax may be legally voted.
In the Horne Case the majority of the electors voted a tax of 6 mills "for the building or bond payment fund and 12 mills for general school purposes"; thus specifically limiting to 6 the number of mills for the building or bond payment fund. The remaining 12 mills was not voted for any one of the purposes designated in subsection H, above quoted but was voted for all those purposes except for the building or bond payment fund, for which 6 mills was specifically voted.
Not so in the instant case. No certain number of mills was voted for any specific purpose. The electors, on the contrary, voted "For General Tax." Now, what is "General Tax"? The obvious answer is that it is a tax for all purposes for which the electors had authority to vote leaving to the directors of the school district the duty to apportion the tax collected to the...
To continue reading
Request your trial