Case ID: ohio-law-abs_6/html/0239-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "MARSHALL, CJ.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

COLUMBUS BD. ED. v. CITY OF COLUMBUS.
    Ohio Supreme Court.
    No. 20903.
    Decided April 4, 1928.
    801. MUNICIPALITIES — 1065. Schools and School Dis-tries — 973. Public Utilities — 1104. Statutes — 291. Constitution Law.
    1. Portion of 3963 GC. prohibiting city or village waterworks department from charging public school buildings for water, is violation of Section 4, Art. XVIII, Ohio Constitution.
    2. Such portion of such statute is also in violation of Section 19, Art. I, Ohio Constitution.
    3. Municipalities derive right to acquire, construct, own* lease and operate utilities from Sect. 4, Art. XVIII Ohio Constitution and legislature is without power to impose restrictions or limitations upon that right.
    Error to Franklin Appeals.
    Judgment affirmed.
   MARSHALL, CJ.

1. That portion _ of Section 3963, General Code, which prohibits a city or village or the waterworks department thereof from making a charge for supplying water for the use of the public school buildings or other public buildings in such city or village, is a violation of the rights conferred upon municipalities by Section 4 of Article 18 of the Ohio Constitution, and is unconstitutional and void. (East Cleveland v. Board of Education, 112 Ohio St., 607, overruled.)

2. That portion .of • Section 3963, General Code, above referred to is unconstitutional and void for the further reason that it results in taking private property for public use without compensation therefor, in violation of Section 19, Article 1, of the Ohio Constitution.

3. Municipalities derive the right to acquire, construct, own, lease and operate utilities the product of which is to be supplied to the municipality or its inhabitants, from Section 4 of Article 18 of the Constitution and the legislature is .without power to impose restrictions or limitations upon, that right. (Euclid v. Camp Wise Assn., 102 Ohio St., 207, approved and followed.)

(Allen, Kinkade, Robinson and Matthias, JJ., concur.)