Williamson v. Housing Authority, etc., of Augusta

• Decision Date: 21 September 1938
• Docket Number: 12519.
• Citation: Williamson v. Housing Authority, etc., of Augusta, 199 S.E. 43, 186 Ga. 673 (Ga. 1938)
• Parties: WILLIAMSON v. HOUSING AUTHORITY, ETC., OF AUGUSTA et al.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

199 S.E. 43

186 Ga. 673

WILLIAMSON v. HOUSING AUTHORITY, ETC., OF AUGUSTA et al.

No. 12519.

Supreme Court of Georgia

September 21, 1938

Error from Superior Court, Richmond County; A. L. Franklin, Judge.

Suit by A. R. Williamson against the Housing Authority, etc. of Augusta, and others to enjoin the Housing Authority of the City of Augusta and the City Council of Augusta from proceeding with the development and financing of a proposed slum-clearance and low-rent housing project for the city. To review an adverse judgment, the plaintiff brings error.

Affirmed.

RUSSELL C.J., and ATKINSON, P.J., dissent in part.

The housing authorities law and the housing co-operation law involve a "public purpose" as regards validity of the statutes. Laws 1937, pp. 210, 697; Const. art 7, § 2 par. 2.

Syllabus by the Court.

1. Neither the housing-authorities law (Ga.Laws 1937, p. 210) nor the housing-co-operation law (Ga.Laws 1937, p. 697) contains class legislation, contrary to article 1, section 1, paragraph 2 of the constitution of this State (Code, § 2-102), which declares that 'Protection to person and property is the paramount duty of government, and shall be impartial and complete.'

2. Neither of said acts, because applying only to cities of populations of 5,000 or more, violates the uniformity clause contained in article 1, section 4, paragraph 1, of the constitution (Code, § 2-401), which in part declares that 'Laws of a general nature shall have uniform operation throughout the State, and no special law shall be enacted in any case for which provision has been made by an existing general law.'

3. Neither of said acts refers to more than one subject-matter, or contains matter different from that expressed in the title, contrary to article 3, section 7, paragraph 8, of the constitution (Code, § 21-1808), which declares that 'No law or ordinance shall pass which refers to more than one subject-matter, or contains matter different from what is expressed in the title thereof.'

4. Nor does either of said acts delegate to the cities and counties of this State certain powers which are non-delegable legislative powers, in violation of article 3, section 1, paragraph 1, of the constitution (Code, § 2-1201), which declares that 'The legislative powers of the State shall be vested in a General Assembly, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.'

5. The slum-clearance project inaugurated by virtue of the two acts above referred to does not involve the taking of private property in violation of the due-process clause of the constitution of this State, Const.Ga. art. 1, § 1, par. 3, or of the fourteenth amendment to the constitution of the United States, U.S. C.A.Const. Amend. 14.

6. The contract of the City of Augusta here involved, made in pursuance of the housing-co-operation law, does not create a debt within the meaning of article 7, section 7, paragraph 1, of the constitution of this State (Code, § 2-5501), which prevents a municipality, except under certain conditions, from incurring a debt.

7. The conferring of the right of eminent domain upon the housing authority, by the housing-authorities law, was within the power of the General Assembly.

8. The exemption from taxation of the property of the housing authority, and its bonds, is not forbidden by the constitution of this State.

9. The project here involved is for public purposes, and affects the general public. The acts authorizing it, and the contract in pursuance thereof, are not subject to the attack that the legislation upon which the same is predicated is forbidden by the constitution of this State.

Lee, Congdon & Fulcher, of Augusta, for plaintiff in error.

Henry G. Howard and William T. Gary, both of Augusta, and Spalding, Sibley, Troutman & Brock and W. K. Meadow, all of Atlanta, for defendants in error.

Hirsch & Smith, J. C. Savage, Bond Almand, and Candler, Cox & McLamb, all of Atlanta, Spence M. Grayson, of Savannah, Wright & Covington and Chastain Parker, all of Rome, J. D. Bradwell and Lamar C. Rucker, both of Athens, Theo. J. McGee, and Wm. DeL. Worsley, both of Columbus, Blair & Gardner, of Marietta, Ellsworth Hall, Jr., and E. W. Maynard, both of Macon, B. H. Burgess, of Decatur, E. R. Hines, of Milledgeville, and B. N. Nightingale, of Brunswick, for parties at interest not parties to the record.

GRICE Justice.

A. R. Williamson filed his petition seeking to enjoin the Housing Authority of the City of Augusta and the City Council of Augusta from proceeding with the development and financing of a proposed slum-clearance and low-rent housing project for that city. The action was dismissed on general demurrer, and the plaintiff excepted.

The petition attacks the constitutionality of the act approved March 30, 1937 (Ga.Laws 1937, p. 210), known as the housing-authorities law, and also the housing-co-operative law (Ga.Laws 1937, p. 697).

The contract between the housing authority of the City of Augusta and the United States Housing Authority is set forth, the latter acting in pursuance of the Federal Housing Act (42 U.S. C.A. § 1401 et seq.). The contract sets forth, among other things, that the United States Housing Authority will purchase from the local authority its bonds, these bonds to be secured only by a pledge of the income of the property itself which is to be acquired from the proceeds of the sale of these bonds and from a pledge of the annual subsidy which is made by the United States Housing Authority to the local authority. The bonds are not secured by a deed or lien upon the physical properties of the project. The contract expressly provides that the indenture securing the bonds shall not confer a power of foreclosure and shall prohibit the sale or other disposition of the project. It is also provided that the United States Housing Authority will make an annual contribution to the housing authority of the City of Augusta in a sum not to exceed $58,555 each year for a period of sixty years, which constitutes 3 1/2 per cent. of the entire estimated development cost of the project, plus ten per cent. The bonds draw 3% interest and are payable in annual installments running from two to sixty years. The annual interest on all of the bonds to be issued by the local authority is $50,190, based on the aggregate amount of bonds of $1,673,000. The rents derived from the operation of the project will be utilized to pay ordinary operating expenses and repairs and to supplement the annual contributions for the payment of the principal and interest on the bonds. Section 17 of the contract provides that 'pursuant to the provisions of the United States Housing Act of 1937, the faith of the United States Government is pledged to the payment of the annual contributions contracted for under this agreement and appropriations are authorized to be made in each fiscal year out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated in the amounts necessary to provide for such payments.'

The housing-authorities law (Ga.Laws 1937, page 210) declares that there exist in this State insanitary and unsafe dwelling accommodations, and that persons of low income are forced to reside in such unsafe accommodations; that there is a shortage of safe dwelling accommodations available at rents which persons of low income can afford, and that they are forced to occupy overcrowded dwellings which cause an increase in the spread of disease and crime and constitute a menance to the health, safety, morals and welfare of the residents of the State and impair economic values, necessitating excessive and disproportionate expenditures of public funds for crime prevention and punishment, public health and safety, fire and accident protection, and other public services. The General Assembly further declared that these slum areas can not be cleared nor can the housing shortage for persons of low income be relieved through private enterprise, and that such clearance and reconstruction of safe and sanitary dwelling accommodations for persons of low income are public uses and purposes. This law provides for the creation of public bodies corporate and authorizes such bodies to acquire and operate housing projects and to finance such properties by issuing bonds secured either by pledge of the income and revenue from the housing projects or a mortgage on the properties. The authorities are expressly authorized to borrow money or accept grants or other financial assistance from the Federal government. The statute is substantially like those adopted in many other States, and is designed to enable these local housing authorities to attain their objects by means of assistance from the Federal Housing Authority.

The housing-co-operation law (Ga.Laws 1937, p. 697) is designed to enable municipalities to co-operate and assist housing authorities and authorize certain advances and assistance. It further creates a State Housing Authority Board which must approve all housing projects undertaken within the State.

1. The plaintiff in error's first specific ground of attack is that the two Georgia acts here involved constitute class legislation, contrary to article 1, section 1, paragraph 2 of the constitution of this State (Code, § 2-102), which declares that 'Protection to person and property is the paramount duty of government, and shall be impartial and complete.' The argument is that the actual benefits to be derived from the proposed slum-clearance and low-cost housing project are limited to those individuals or families 'who lack the amount of income which is necessary to enable them, without financial assistance, to live in safe and sanitary dwellings without over-crowding,' and that thus the housing act provides special privileges and advantages for a...