The Detroit times., 1911-04-05

priated for the purposes OF these various
funds must not exceed one pei Ss''s -
the assessed value OF the real ana Pss
sonal property In Detroit. anu "nS
amount OF money appropriated or a..
lowed IN excess OF that amount 10 re
extent OF the excess would Iehuei "'N
tax roll absolutely void. - 80,
There IL also, IN classifying TWO oths.
funds a fund called the sinking iuiu,
smother fund called the Tn,s lH * All sink
ing fund. and the provision or the cn isi.
ter governing the annual approp1a,on
20 be made for the sinking tuno aPplt,,s
10 these items as completely ana iulIS
as n IA was designated In the simple IAN
guage OF the charter, sinking fund, De-
cause the sinking fund Is cr'Aseu ~
take care Of the funded debt anu SUI"
y funded debt as we have assumed, DC
cause Of the annexation OF the various
pieces OF land on the north, east ana
west becomes. by operation OF law, our
funded debt as fully as II erea'eu os
| the city itself. i.
The library fund is limited 60 10 81
one mill on every dollar of valuauoh -
/ the real and personal property o1 tae
city. There Is no limitation IN speclHS
/ figures upon any other OF the chattS'
\ funds In few an amount - speclhSv'
| like the public entertainment iunu, "h'. -
cannot exceed the sum or s-vvo sds ~
/ the remainder the limit Is the needs NI
the departments. and the amount IL W
be fixed within the discretion OF ,pe
Common Council and boaTu oi $50
The possible exception TO this general
| statement is the public sewer Iuhu
| which II limited 10 S2oo Veo an"ua, .i
| This limitation, however does ho' aPs ~
| 10 The power elsewhere given ~ az ~
charter to issue bonds for the puliu.ns
OF public sewers and insofar a. ma
power has not been exhausted IL may
still be exercised by me CIV question
| From the foregoing the Qus'- a..
/ ma turaiIy arises. Outside or the luhus
/ which the charter limits at one per
cent, Is there no limitation upon the psi
OF the Council and board OF estimates
| THE revised constitution says IN Sec-
| ,ion 90 Article s. that the leglsidlure
| shall pass a general law TOT the nSsir
poration OF cities, and therein lih,t 'r ,his
| constitutional mandate the lesis'at .la .
nassed the home rule act In two sepee-
rate provisions OF this act reisIs"0e
made 10 tho taxing power VI '
.sEarh city may IN it's charter pro-
| v4de FOR annually laying and conectlns
taxes in a sum not 70 exceed WI md
| cent OF the assessed value OF al 'e@' "
| personal property In the city
.So city, shall have power 10 In,
crease the n rate , Sf ; SuthoTity to do 50
sSaii be given by a majority vote OF
the electors OF said city -, ., he
the increase in any case sI ta axceea 3
sucn as -, tbs assessed value OF the
| real and personal property IN tne n,''
Section s. Just reis erfns 'o Of the act.
| BY its terms II absolutely divests ci'ie ,s
! OF certain powers, and 1oroius a.
! enumerated number or ACTS upon 49,, ,tnn
mari In constituting a different section
| of the home rule act. the supreme
Court, in the case OF Graves VS. ADRIAN
Common Council. said -, ~,
=. me aet % That section
| section ls) IL a general law made APP
piicable TO cities. and SO Tar as pr!or
charter provisions are incohsis'eh' VIZ"
lit they must yield. -
sections OF the Detroit charter are In
consistent with the two provisions o.
the home rule act 10 which reference
| has been made but II would not De
logical to assume that Detroit couio, IN
view of the constitutional mandate. ana
In view OF the apparent Intent OF the
Legislature to limit the taxing power OF
cities TO per cent, go on indenntely
enjoying an unrestricted power OF TAXA
ton.
The presumption is always In favor
OF the validity OF every law. All
doubts about Its validity are resolved IN
favor OF the law. and the court ~ ooii
gated 10 give IL such a construction as
will render II valid rather than inVahd.
Under these circumstances IL IL my
Judgment that IL the court were called
to pass upon the situation which con-
fronts this city. II would very likely
hold that its maximum rate OF taxation
SO the situation is this: As to those
funds which i have specifically named
and pointed out the rate is as desig-
mated AS to the total amount includ-
ing the amount Appropriated for these
as well as for all other funds. the rate
cannot exceed per cent
This leads me TO the last point OF
your inquiry. The provisions or the
school board act as well as Section OF
Chapter IL OF the charter says that In
lieu OF raising the appropriations for
the building OF school houses, the con-
struction OF public buildings. etc. by
direct tax, the amount may be obtained
by an issue OF bonds.
The language here employed will not
permit the Common Council and the
Board of Estimates TO exhaust It's
power by way OF direct taxation up to
the limit OF 2 per cent and then fur
ther augment the expenditure by the
The bonds that are issued, aside from
the special sewer bonds to which ref
erence has been made. are issued IN lieu
Of taxation, and must take the place of
levy Of a tax and must be added to the
sum total In order that the maximum
per cent may not be exceeded. The 2
per cent here referred TO Is the limit
on rate OF taxation and has no refer
ence TO the limit OF bonded indebted
ness.
According TO the official records the
net total assessed value OF the City OF
Detroit at the present time Is s37207O,-
$4,000. Two per cent Of that sum and
no more may the city safely go In the
matter OF taxation. and the amount Of
ponds issued In lieu OF taxation must
computing this percentage.
Respectfully submitted.
+. J. NJ HALLY,
p,.ooa - an. Corporation Counsel