Story v. Bd. Of Com'rs Of Ala-mange County

• Decision Date: 08 November 1922
• Docket Number: (No. 333.)
• Citation: 114 S.E. 493
• Parties: STORY. v. BOARD OF COM'RS OF ALA-MANGE COUNTY.
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court

114 S.E. 493

STORY.

v.BOARD OF COM'RS OF ALA-MANGE COUNTY.

(No. 333.)

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Nov. 8, 1922.

Appeal from Superior Court, Alamance County; Connor, Judge.

Proceeding by W. E. Story to enjoin the Board of Commissioners of Alamance County from holding a special election on the question of issuing school district bonds. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Controversy without action to enjoin the defendant from holding a special election within the corporate limits of the city of Burlington on the question of issuing bonds on behalf of a school district. The following is a summary of the material "facts agreed":

(1) The members of the board of education were elected by the aldermen of the city, pursuant to the provisions of chapter 341 of the Private Laws of 1907.

(2) On September 22, 1922, the board of education presented to the defendant a petition for an election to be held in the graded school district, which is coterminous with the city, on January 9, 1923, pursuant to chapter 87 of the Public Laws Ex. Sess. of 1920, and the amendments thereto, on the question of issuing bonds of said district for a maximum principal amount of $150,000, to be used for the purpose of enacting enlarging, altering, and equipping school buildings and acquiring sites, or for any one or more of these purposes.

(3) The defendant heard the petition and ordered that an election be held on the question of issuing bonds in an amount not exceeding $150,000, and of levying a sufficient annual tax to pay the principle and interest on said bonds, and ordered a new registration of the voters in said district.

(4) Pursuant to chapter 268 of the Private Laws of 1913, and the votes of a majority of the qualified voters, the city of Burlington has issued $40,000 of bonds for school purposes, which are now an outstanding obligation of the city.

(5) Pursuant to section 76, chapter 732, Public Laws of North Carolina of 1899, at an election duly called and held by the board of aldermen of the city of Burlington, a special tax for schools of 30 cents on the $100 valuation of property was voted by a majority of the qualified voters, and said tax has been annually levied by the board of aldermen of the city of Burlington and collected by the tax collector of the city of Burlington. In the year 1917, under and pursuant to the provisions of chapter 102, Public Laws of 1917, a majority of the qualified voters of the city of Burlington, at an election called and held by the board of aldermen of the city, voted in favor of an additional tax for schools of 20 cents on the $100 valuation of property, the same to be in addition to the 30 cents theretofore voted, and such additional tax, or so much thereof as the board of aldermen has deemed necessary, has since said date been annually levied by the board of aldermen and collected by the tax collector of said city.

(6) On the 4th day of April, 1922, the city of Burlington held an election under the Municipal Finance Act of 1921 upon the question of the approval of a bond ordinance passed February 14, 1922, and authorizing bonds in a maximum principal amount of $100,000 for the purpose of enlarging, altering, repairing, and equipping school buildings and acquiring land or land and buildings for school purposes, or for any one or more of said purposes, and at said election the said bond ordinance was not approved.

(7) The assessed valuation of property for taxation in the territory embraced within the boundaries of the alleged Burlington city graded school district as fixed for the year 1922 is in excess of $9,500, 000, and that the only bonds which have been issued for schools within said territory are the $40,000 bonds issued pursuant to chapter 268, Private Laws of North Carolina, session of 1913, as hereinbefore set out.

(8) It is the declared intention and purpose of the board of commissioners of Alamance county to hold said election as order-ed and, if a majority of the qualified voters at said election vote in favor of issuing said bonds, to levy annually a special tax ad valorem on all taxable property within said alleged Burlington city graded school district for the purpose of paying the principal and interest of the bonds.

(9) The plaintiff contends that upon the foregoing agreed facts the territory embraced within the corporate limits of the city of Burlington and its inhabitants do not constitute a school district, and that chapter 87, Public Laws of North Carolina, Extra Session of 1920, has no application to the schools within said territory, and that therefore the defendants should be perpetually enjoined, and restrained from holding said election under said chapter 87 and from taking any further steps in the premises, and that in any event an election upon the question of issuing bonds for schools within the city of Burlington cannot be held within two years from April 4, 1922, the date of the last election upon that question.

(10) The defendants contend that upon the foregoing agreed facts the territory embraced within the corporate limits of the city of Burlington, and the inhabitants thereof, constitute a school district, and that under chapter 87, Public Laws of North Carolina Ex. Sess. 1920, they have full right and power to order and hold said election, and in the event that the same results favorably and said bonds are sold, to levy a tax upon all the taxable property within said school district for the purpose of paying and sufficient to pay the principal and interest of such bonds, and that no injunction should be granted, and that there is no law preventing the holding of said election within two years after the election held April 4, 1922.

Upon the hearing his honor adjudged that the petitioner is not entitled to have the holding of said election enjoined and denied the plaintiffs application for an injunction. The plaintiff excepted and appealed.

Carroll & Carroll, of Burlington, for appellant

Parker & Long, of Graham, and Coulter & Cooper, of Burlington, for appellees.

ADAMS, J. The purpose of the action is to enjoin the defendant from holding a special election in the city of Burlington on the question of issuing bonds for the benefit of the schools conducted in a school district which is coterminous with the corporate boundaries of the city. The order of the defendant authorizing the election was made pursuant to the provisions of an act passed by the Legislature at the extra session of 1920. Pub. Laws Ex. Sess. 1920, c. 87. The plaintiff contends that the order was ultra vires and that any bonds issued as the re sult of the election would be invalid. His contention involves three propositions: (1) The city of Burlington is not a school district. (2) The election can be ordered only in pursuance of section 5523 of the Consolidated Statutes, or in any event not by virtue of chapter 87 of the Public Laws Ex. Sess. 1920. (3) That on April 4, 1922, the municipal authorities of the city of Burlington held an...