Simmons v. Ericson

• Decision Date: 26 January 1929
• Docket Number: 6461,6478.
• Citation: 223 N.W. 342,54 S.D. 429
• Parties: SIMMONS et al. v. ERICSON, County Auditor (INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST. NO. 17 OF CITY OF SALEM, Intervener) (two cases).
• Court: South Dakota Supreme Court

223 N.W. 342

54 S.D. 429

SIMMONS et al. v. ERICSON, County Auditor (INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST. NO. 17 OF CITY OF SALEM, Intervener) (two cases).

Nos. 6461, 6478.

Supreme Court of South Dakota

January 26, 1929

Appeal from Circuit Court, McCook County; Herbert B. Rudolph, Judge.

Action by J. E. Simmons and others against Carl F. Ericson, as County Auditor of the County of McCook, in which Charles McShane was substituted as defendant and Independent School District No. 17 of the City of Salem intervened. From the judgment rendered and from an order denying a new trial plaintiffs and intervener appeal. Plaintiffs' appeal dismissed. Judgment reversed and cause remanded, with directions, on intervener's appeal.

Miller & Shandorf, of Mitchell, for appellants.

C. H McCay, of Salem, for defendant.

H. Van Ruschen, of Salem, for respondent.

BROWN J.

The territorial area of independent school district No. 17 of the city of Salem consists of six sections of land, three miles long by two miles wide, with the municipal boundaries of the city of Salem, one mile square, in the center of the district. Plaintiffs are owners of agricultural lands lying within the school district, outside of the municipal boundaries, and they bring this action to restrain the county auditor from spreading on the tax list any tax for interest and sinking funds on bonds in the sum of $79,500 issued by the district in April, 1923, the proceeds of which were used in building a schoolhouse. The facts were stipulated by the parties, and on the stipulated facts the court entered judgment directing the auditor to extend a tax against the agricultural lands within the school district of 10 mills on the dollar for current expenses and 6.91 mills for bond interest and sinking fund, and a tax against all other property in the district of 19.61 for current expenses and 6.91 mills for bond interest and sinking fund, and from this judgment and an order denying a new trial the plaintiffs appeal. The school district intervened in the action and appeals from so much of the judgment as places a lower tax for current expenses on agricultural lands than on other property in the district, contending that chapter 102 Session Laws of 1923, authorizing a discrimination, is unconstitutional and void. The county auditor, who is defendant, is willing and ready to spread whatever tax is authorized by final judgment in this action and is, in a sense, a disinterested party. Plaintiffs will be designated in this opinion as appellants, and the intervener school district as respondent.

Chapter 102 defines agricultural land, for the purpose of the act, as all land not platted into city or town lots, used exclusively for farm and agricultural purposes, and provides that no agricultural land within an independent school district shall in any year be taxed to exceed 10 mills on the dollar of the assessed valuation "for school purposes," but provides that the act shall not apply to any district in which the average assessed valuation of agricultural land is less than $50 an acre and shall not apply to any independent consolidated district in which there is no incorporated town. Section 5 of the act amends section 7567 of the Revised Code of 1919 so as to provide that the board of education shall levy a tax not exceeding in any one year 25 mills on the dollar on all the taxable property in the district, if the average assessed valuation of agricultural lands therein is less than $50 an acre, but in a district where the average assessed valuation of agricultural lands is $50 or more the board shall levy a tax "for the support of the schools" within the district not exceeding 10 mills on the dollar of all taxable property therein, and if such levy is insufficient for the support of the schools the board shall levy an additional tax not exceeding 25 mills on the dollar on all taxable property other than agricultural land within the district. It is our view that the limitation of 10 mills on the dollar "for school purposes" in section 3 of the act, and 10 mills on the dollar "for the support of the schools" in section 5 is intended to apply only to the ordinary expenses of maintaining and operating the school and does not prohibit an additional tax sufficient to pay the interest and provide a sinking fund for payment of the principal of bonds issued for the purpose of building a schoolhouse. We think that the average person reading that the board of education was authorized to...