Town of Pelham v. Village of North Pelham
| Decision Date | 28 November 1962 |
| Citation | 237 N.Y.S.2d 253,38 Misc.2d 234 |
| Parties | TOWN OF PELHAM, Plaintiff, v. VILLAGE OF NORTH PELHAM and Robert A. Cremins, Defendants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court |
Emanuel Schwartz, New York City, for plaintiff.
Francis S. Quinn, Pelham, for defendant Village of North Pelham.
This action was tried before this Court without a jury. The plaintiff, Town of Pelham, has brought this action against the Village of North Pelham and Robert A. Cremins. No personal claim is made herein by plaintiff against defendant Cremins, the Receiver of Taxes of the plaintiff Town, who has been made a party for the sole purpose of having before the Court all parties in connection with the determination of this controversy, so that, as is stated in the complaint '* * * all orders, directions, decrees and judgments of the Court may be effectively enforced'.
The plaintiff Town seeks two-fold relief--the first cause of action is for a declaratory judgment relating to collection of North Pelham Village taxes by the Town Tax Receiver, acting as Village Tax Receiver; and the second cause of action is for the recovery of $2,999.00 for services in collecting the 1961 Village taxes.
In 1914 the Legislature of the State of New York enacted a County Tax Act for Westchester County, Laws 1914, c. 510. It provided, among other things, that a Town Tax Receiver would also collect taxes for a village in the Town. This particular provision of the Act was subsequently declared unconstitutional (People ex rel. Town of Pelham v. Village of Pelham, 215 N.Y. 374, 109 N.E. 513 (1915), because it imposed a town officer upon a village without its approval. To remedy this objection and cure it, Village Law, § 138-a was enacted in 1916 (now § 121) which provided that village electors could, at a special village election, direct the village board of trustees to adopt a resolution whereby the Town Tax Receiver would also act as Village Tax Receiver at a compensation not to exceed 1% of the village assessment roll. This action has been taken by the electors of the Village of North Pelham, and has never been rescinded.
Thereafter and until 1957 the Village Board each year, duly appointed the Town Tax Receiver the Village Tax Receiver, pursuant to statute.
The Westchester County Tax Act was incorporated into the Westchester County Administrative Code, in 1948, and § 544 of the Code confirmed the practice of designating the Town Tax Receiver to act as Village Tax Receiver, but expressly provided that designation and compensation were subject to Town Board approval.
In 1958 the Village Board sought to reduce the compensation of the Tax Receiver from 1% to 1/2 of 1%, and to fix a maximum compensation of $1,600.00 annually. The Town Board agreed to have its Tax Receiver act as Village Receiver of taxes, but objected to and refused to consent to the reduced compensation. The result was that the Village Treasurer collected the taxes. The following year, 1959, the Village adopted a resolution, pursuant to the Westchester County Code, designating the Town Tax Receiver as its Tax Receiver and providing that the compensation be paid to the Town, but set the compensation at 1/2 of 1%. Again the Town was willing to have its Tax Receiver act for the Village, but would not approve the reduction in compensation. That year the Village Clerk collected its taxes. In 1960, while the matter of compensation was still in dispute, the Town Tax Receiver duly filed his oath of office and bond as Village Tax Receiver, but these were rejected and returned to him because he had notified the Village Board that he had no authority to approve the compensation; that was a matter to be adjusted between the Town and Village Boards. Again, the Village Board had its Clerk collect the taxes.
In 1961, although the circumstances were very similar, the Town Tax Receiver did, in fact, collect the Village Taxes, and the Village Resolution designating the Town Tax Receiver provided for compensation of 1/2 of 1%, the Town Resolution provided for 1%.
The complaint seeks a declaratory judgment to the effect that the Village is required to continue the designation of the Town Tax Receiver as Village Tax Receiver until after it is authorized to discontinue such designation at a special election of the Village electors; that the compensation must be such amount up to 1% of the tax roll as is approved by the Town Board. In other words, as long as the resolution adopted at the November 7, 1922 special election in said Village pursuant to Village Law, § 138-a (now Village Law, § 121, as amended) remains in effect the Village is required to designate the Receiver of Taxes of the plaintiff Town, as its Receiver of Taxes, and to pay to plaintiff therefor such compensation authorized by statute as may be approved by the Town Board of the Town of Pelham. In addition, as stated above, the Town also seeks judgment for $2,999.00 against the Village for services heretofore rendered by its Receiver of Taxes in the collection of the Village taxes for the year 1961.
The facts in general, as stated above and as testified to upon the trial, are not in serious dispute. The issue presented to this Court, simply stated, is whether the defendant Village has the right to fix and pay the Town Receiver of Taxes the amount of his compensation for acting as Village Receiver of Taxes, so long as it does not exceed 1% of the tax roll as provided by § 121 (formerly § 138-a) of the Village Law, and the proposition adopted pursuant thereto in 1922, or were such powers repealed, modified or changed by the enactment in 1948 of the Westchester Administrative Code.
On the facts in this case, and until the Village electors revoke the proposition adopted by them in 1922, designating the Town Tax Receiver as their Tax Receiver, pursuant to Village Law, § 138-a, (now § 121) it is mandatory that the Village Board designate the Town Tax Receiver as the person to collect the Village taxes. Neither party to the action has raised any question relative to this fact.
What is in dispute here is whether or not the Town Board of the Town of Pelham has the right to dictate to the Village what shall be the compensation of Receiver of Taxes for collecting taxes for the Village.
The Westchester County Administrative Code (Laws of 1948, ch. 852) § 544, which became effective July, 1948, provides, in part, as follows, with respect to the Town Tax Receiver:
(Italics by the Court.)
The contention of the Village is that since the original designation of the Town Tax Receiver as Village Tax Receiver was made under the Village Law, and prior to the adoption of the Westchester County Code, the rights and duties of the Village Tax Receiver are governed solely by the ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Edwards
...possible, in a manner that would give effect to both. Baines v. City of Danville, Virginia, 4 Cir., 337 F.2d 579 (1964); Pelham v. North 38 Misc.2d 234, 237 N.Y.S.2d 253. The legislature is presumed to intend to achieve a consistent body of law. Stevens v. Biddle, D.C., 298 F. 209. Accordin......
- Holifield v. Setco Industries, Inc.
-
Bloom v. Town Bd. of Town of Yorktown
...1 Statutes, § 397; Board of Coop. Educ. Servs., Nassau County v. Goldin, 38 A.D.2d 267, 328 N.Y.S.2d 958; Town of Pelham v. Village of North Pelham, 38 Misc.2d 234, 237 N.Y.S.2d 253). The further question is whether the two sections can be read together. Both statutes set forth different an......
-
Bloom v. Town Bd. of Town of Yorktown
...an inconsistency as would trigger the implementation of Code 611 and Code 615. Plaintiffs' reliance upon Town of Pelham v. Village of North Pelham, 38 Misc.2d 234, 237 N.Y.S.2d 253, as authority for the proposition that where similar statutes are involved, an interpretation thereof should a......