Arizona republican., 1913-09-20
THE LAW MEANS
 WHAT II SAYS
Opinion by Attorney Gen eraI on Disposition of Some Arizona Towns to Exceed Ten Per Cent Increase of Taxes

At the request of the tax commis sion, Attorney General Bullard has rendered an opinion on the operation of the new tax law. known as Sen ate Bill No. 22. passed by the last legislature. This was the bill limit ing all towns to q ten per cent in crease of the levy. and since it's passage there has been some disre- gard of the orders of the commission u follow the provisions of the bill. and there has been much disI egard of the bill itself.
 The opinion, which is as follows, specifically states that all taxes must be levied under the provisions:
 Tn answer to your communication of September 18th, 1913, 1t is my opinion that the town of Williams, Arizona. and all towns and cities in the state of Arizona, must make their lew for taxes under Section 1, Sen ate Bill No 22. passed the last session of the legislature.
 The delegation of power to a tax municipality does not deprive the le- gislature of the power to control such taxing power. The legislature may repeal or change the power granted to the municipality to levy taxes. This l. eing true Section 564 of Chapter 9, Revised Statutes of 1901, was re- realed. in so far as it conflicts with Section of said Senate Bill No. -.
 II am forced to this construction if the law from the uniformity on the question and see no escape from il unless it might be if d city should obtaln q new charter, under the pro- visions of the constitution and of the laws of the state of Arizona. and un- del the statute which provides that all general laws applicable to cities shall be suspended upon the adoption ol such charter. In such d case the section quoted might not be applc- able l, however. do not officially pass upon this point at this particular time. IS you have not requested an opinion as to the effect of the adop ticn of new charter in your com munication-"
 The difficulty is in the fact that the law limits the increase of taxation to zen per cent. which is lower than the limit allowed under the charters ot several of the cities. This is es- recially true of the city of Williams which was the direct cause for the opinion above quoted.
 For some time there has been trou- lie in the northern city in regard L. the levy of taxes. The council of the city refused t) make out and publish d budget, which resulted in mass meeting of the citizens. and protest This in turn was followed by the resignation of part of the council, the appointmg of new members, and of q delegation of citizens to fix the budget Here is where the tax com mission left them when last Williams was visited Since then the correct levy has been made with many eX- captions Notable among these eX- captions is the failure of the council to levy a ten per cent increase on all city lots as ordered by the board Of equalization, in order that the levy of all city property would equal the levy of railroad property in the city limits The commission will imme- diately order the council to recanVass and place on the assessment roll this increase as prescribed by the board of equalization. The same order will also instruct the council to confine itself strictly to the ten per cent i'm CT ease provided in the general reVe- nue law.
 Ii the city of Williams or any Oth- CT city wishes to raise additional rev enue than that authorized by the tax law, it will have to do so by some other means For instance. the city may make a larger fund by Iopular subscription.
 The former rate. under the old