State ex rel. Wight v. Park City School District No. 12 of Summit County

• Decision Date: 02 June 1913
• Docket Number: 2506
• Citation: 43 Utah 61,133 P. 128
• Court: Utah Supreme Court
• Parties: STATE ex rel. WIGHT v. PARK CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 12 OF SUMMIT COUNTY et al

133 P. 128

43 Utah 61

STATE ex rel. WIGHT v. PARK CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 12 OF SUMMIT COUNTY et al

No. 2506

Supreme Court of Utah

June 2, 1913

Action by the State, on the relation of L. B. Wight, against the Park City School District No. 12 of Summit County, Utah, and others, trustees of said school district, to prohibit defendants from levying a high school tax.

WRIT DENIED.

A. R Barnes, Attorney General, and E. V. Higgins and Geo. C Buckle, Assistants, for plaintiff.

Snyder and Snyder for defendants.

McCARTY C. J. STRAUP and FRICK, JJ., concur.

OPINION

McCARTY, C. J.

This is an action to prohibit Park City school district No. 12 and the trustees of said district from proceeding to levy a tax to maintain a high school separate and apart from the other school districts of Summit county. It appears, from the facts alleged in and admitted to be true by the pleadings complaint, and answer filed herein, that during the month of February, 1913, the county superintendent of district schools of Summit county made his recommendation in writing to the board of county commissioners of said county that all common schools districts in said county north of the town of Rockport be incorporated into one high school district, and that all common school districts south of and including the town of Rockport, except Park City and Parley's Park districts, be incorporated into another high school district; that the board of county commissioners, at its regular meeting held on the 5th day of March, 1913, considered the recommendation made by county superintendent of district schools, as aforesaid, and deeming the same practicable and advisable, caused a notice to be published in each of three weekly newspapers published and having a general circulation in Summit county, reciting that the recommendation of the county school superintendent would be considered and acted upon at a regular meeting of the board of county commissioners to be held April 9, 1913; that the recommendation of the superintendent was considered by the board at the meeting of April 9, 1913; that a full presentation was had at the meeting by all parties interested and who desired to be heard orally or in writing for or against the recommendation made by the county school superintendent; that after a careful consideration of the arguments of all parties who desired to be heard the board of county commissioners adopted, with a slight modification, the recommendation of the superintendent; that the board of county commissioners, in acting upon said recommendation, also considered, acted upon, and ratified a previous action of the board had about August 5, 1912, in which it was determined and ordered that Park City common school district be set apart as a common school district maintaining a high school; that at said meeting it was represented to the board of county commissioners that the students of Parley's Park school district, of whom there were only a few, have always been permitted to attend the high school of Park City without charge or expense for tuition, and that it is the intention of all parties interested that such students be permitted to continue to attend the Park City high school as they have done in the past.

The principal ground upon which plaintiff asks for a writ of prohibition is set forth in his complaint as follows:

"That no action of any kind looking to the division of said Summit County into two or more high school districts or setting apart said Park City as a common school district maintaining a high school was taken by the county superintendent of schools, or the board of county commissioners, within 60 days after said chapter 31 (Laws Utah 1911) was approved, or within 60 days after it became a law, and no action of any kind, either by said superintendent or said board of commissioners, was taken or had until about nine months after said act became a law. . . . That the respective boards of trustees of the other school districts of said Summit County, Utah, exclusive of said Park City district, are ready to organize into high school districts embracing the whole of said county, and to levy and collect the necessary tax for the support and maintenance thereof, as directed by said chapter 31, and that, by reason of said threatened wrongful acts of defendants hereinbefore enumerated, this affiant and other taxpayers of said Park City school district will be compelled to pay the taxes levied," etc. "That affiant, as a taxpayer in said high school district, is beneficially interested in this controversy, and that he has not, nor have any of the other taxpayers of said school district, any plain, speedy, or adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law for the prevention of the wrongful acts threatened by said defendants as herein set forth."

Chapter 31, Session Laws Utah 1911, so far as material here, provides:

"Section 1. Each county within the state, except such counties as are constituted school districts of the first class, shall constitute a high school district until subdivided as hereinafter provided. . . .

"Sec. 2. Within sixty days after the approval of this act each county superintendent of district schools shall report to the board of county commissioners as to whether or not, in his opinion, the county should remain one high school district. If, in his opinion, the county should be subdivided into two or more high school districts, then he shall recommend to the board of county commissioners a plan of subdividing such county into high school districts.

"Sec. 3. Upon receipt of such report and recommendations the board of county commissioners shall set a day for hearing the same, which shall be not less than thirty days nor more than sixty days from the day of setting, and shall give public notice of such hearing by publication at least twenty days before the day of hearing in a newspaper published in such county.

"Sec. 4. Any registered voter, who is a taxpayer within such county, may on or before the day set for hearing the recommendations of the county superintendent file written objections to such recommendations. . . .

"Sec. 5. Upon the day set, or upon such other day to which the hearing may...