The Detroit times. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1903-1920, 1911-04-05

the assessed value or the real anu peI-
sonal property In DetrolL u =, az"
lowed I'm excess OF that amount 70 me
extent OF the excess would render the
| tax roll absolutely void. -
funds. a fund called the sinking fund.
another fund called the sinking Iuho
for annexed territory, This - all SINK
ling fund. and the provision OF the cnar-
| ter governing the annual appropriate
10 be made Tor the sinking fund applies
! 10 these items as completely ana fuhy
as m IL was designated In the simple Ian
| guage OF the charter, sinking lund De
/ cause the sinking fund Is created 70
\ take care OF the funded debt; and such
/ funded debt as we have assumed. be-
cause of the annexation OF the various
pieces Of land on the north. east and
vest becomes. by operation OF law. our
| funded debt as fully as " created oy
| the city itself
The library fund IL limited to l-b Of
one mill on every dollar of valuation or
the real and personal property OF inc
city There IL no limitation In specinc
figures upon any other OF the charter
funds. In a few an amount IL specineu,
like The public entertainment fund which
cannot exceed the sum OF s2OoV. an
the remainder. the limit - the needs of
the departments and the amount IL 10
be fixed within the DISCRETION OF lne
Conn ION Council and board Of estimates
The possible exception To this genera
statement rs the public sewer fund
which A. limited 10 100000 annually.
This limitation however does not apply
TO the power elsewhere given In the
charter tc Issue bonds for the puiloine
OF public sewers and insofar as that
power has not been exhausted, may
stiil be exercised BY the city.
From the foregoing the aussu1Sn
which the charter limits at one per
cent A. there no limitation upon the part
Of the Council and board or estmates
The revised constitution says In sec
ton ls, Article snsr., 'n law fcr the Moor
porat,on Of cities. and therein limit tneir
fate OF taxation. In response 20 tnr
eonstitutionai mandate the lesisiature
t,asaed tho home rule act. In two sepe-
hate provisions Of this act reference -
made TO the taxing power OF clues
Section 4 says:
"fach oity may In Its charter PR
vide for annually laying and n.o 1 rss
oent of the assessed value OF All real ana
personsl property In the city
sSo ni,S shall have power TO In,
crease the rate of taxation now nxed
by law. unless the authority 10 90
shall be given by majority Ve'e bur
the electors Of said city .,.u no, be
sueh as to cause such rate 10 ehcseu
per cent OF the assessed value OF the
real and personal property In the cry
4antI0n o..
the mandatory provisions OF the act.
Nv its terms II absolutely dtvssts cities
OF certain powers. and foroids an
enumerated number OF asn upon .ns
Of the home rule act. the Supreme
Court. IN the case OF Graves va Adrian
common Council, said
'rhs e, Of 1899 9Th: hS TSs, ro ssc eSs
es.otion isS e a general law made APP
pioAbie to cities. and so far as prior
Charter provisions are Inconsistent with
n O.nnot 5. truthfuiiy said that the
sections OF the Detroit charter are IN
conslstsnt with the two provisions OF
n. home rule act to which sei Ter, DE
logical 60 assume that Detroit could. In
View. Of the constitutional mandate, and md
IN view Of the ,.Iins ., 'n of
Gle. TO ! Der cent 20 on indefinitely
enjoying an unrestricted power Of taxa
The presumption L. always in favor
doubts about Its validity are resolved In
favor Of the law. and the court 10 ooli-
gated TO give IL such construction a.
win render IL valid rather than invana:
Judgment that II the court were called
to pass upon the situation which con-
fronts this city. II would very likely
could coad mot not exceed the Gum Of ! per cent
90 the situation IL this: As TO those
funds which ! have specifically named
and pointed out the rate 10 as desiE-
ing the amount appropriated for these
a. well a. for all other funds. the rate
cannot exceed per cent.
This leads me TO the last point OF
your isSuiry The provi:i ss.,,o OF the he
Chapter IL OF the charter says that in
Lieu Of raising the approximations for
s:ruetion Of public ss Ss and the con
direct tax. the amount may be obtained
by an issue OF bonds.
The language here employed win not
permit the Common Council and the
power by way of direct taxation up to
the limit Of per cent and then FUR
Their augment the expenditure by the
issue OF bonds.
the special sewer bonds to which ref
erence has been made. are Issued In lieu
OF taxation. and must take the place OF
an appropriation made for the direct
levy or tax and must be added TO the
sum total In order that the ma ximum
per cent may not be exceeded. The 2
per cent here referred to In the limit
on rate OF taxation. and has no refer
ence TO the limit or bonded indebted
ness.
According to the officiai records the
net total assessed value OF the City of
Detroit AZ the present time 10 S3f2, 07o,-
$4,000. Two per cent OF that sum and
no more may the city safely 20 In tho
matter OF taxation, and the amount Of
bonds issued In lieu OF taxation must
be treated as direct appropriations in
computing this percentage
Respectfully submitted,
p. J. M. HALLY,
Corporation Counsel.