Arizona republican., 1914-05-11
FULL TEXT OF
 COMMUNICATION
Attorney General Bullard Hands Down Opinion on Powers of the State Tax Commission Over City As sessOr of Phoenix

The following is the full text or the letter transmitted to the state tax com mission by the attorney general rela- tive to the powers of the central body over the assessors and tax collectors of the city of Phoenix under the new city charter:
 Phoenix, AriZ., May 9, 1914. State Tax Commission,
 Capitol Bldg,
 Phoenix, AriZ.
 Gentlemen:-
 In response to your communication of May Sth. 1914. I have this to say
 Paragraph 2036 of the Civil Code 1913 provides as follows:
 When the charter of any such city in this state shall have been framed, adopted and approved according to the provisions of this chapter, and any provisions of such charter shall be in conflict with any law or laws relating to cities now or hereafter containing a population of more than three thousand five hundred inhabit- ants. in force at the time of the adoption and approval of such char ter. the provisions of such charter shall prevail and be in full force not withstanding such conflict, and shall operate as a repeal or suspension of such state law or laws to the extent of such conflict; and sach state law or laws shall not thereafter be oper- ative in so far as they are in con fIict with such charter; provided that such charter shall be consistent with and subject to the provisions of the state constitution and not in con flict with the provisions of the state constitution and laws relating to the exercise of the initiative and refer endum and other general laws of the state not relative to such cities. Section of Article 9 of the Con stitution provides:
 Tn cOrporated cities, towns and villages may be vested by law with power to make local improvements by special assessments or by special taxes of property benefited. For all corporate purposes, all municipal cor ! porations may be vested with au- thority to assess and collect taxes" Here we have a direct constitu- tional provision. that power may be vested in municipal corporations to assess and collect taxes for corpor ate purposes
 The legislature by Chapter if of title of the Civil Code of 1913. has provided for the adoption of a char ter in incorporation of cities having population of more than 3500 in habitants, and by paragraph 2036 hereinabove quoted. which is one of the sections of said Chapter l6 it is provided that if the provisions Of a charter shall be in conflict with any i law or laws relating to cities now or l hereafter containing a population of more than $500 inhabitants, in force | at the time of the adoption and ap- proval of such charter, the provisions | of such charter shall prevail and be l in full force, notwithstanding such conflict. and shall operate as a re- peal or suspension such law or laws 1 to the extent of such conflict Paragraph 2O3G of the Civil Code | 1913 is a verbatim copy of a similar | law passed by the State of Oklahoma
 which state has similar constitu- tional provision to ours relative to
 the adoption of charters for incor- i pOrated cities.
 ! The Oklahoma law has been con- l strued by the Supreme Court of the
 State of Oklahoma, in the case of
 Lackey vs. the State, reported in 116th Pac. Rep. on page 913, and in the case of Alder vs. Jenkins. report ed in 124th Pac. Rep page 30
 In passing upon this question. ir the case of Lackey vs State Supra.
 the Supreme Court of the State oi Oklahoma has said:
 "To the extent that the cha rte,
 form a government adopted by Gt'a
 homa city, nrOyides that the powe,.s
 grarted to the cornoration shall h.
 administered by a Board of Commis-
 sioners elected from the cifv at large it is in conflict with the statute Bur
 whether the powers of such city art
 exercised by mayor and a city
 counsel. or by a Board of Commits
 sioners. is purely matter of munici.
 pal and local concern. II in no man.
 her interferes with or infringes upor
 -'atters of the State at large or af.
 fleets it's people generally. and in th' absence of such provision of q char. ter bein sir conflict wit hany pro
 vision of q constitution, it supersede the statute"
 In the case of Alder vs. Jenkins Supra, the Supreme Court of tn State of Oklahoma said:
 Wherever q freeholdcr's charte
 has been adopted under the pro
 visions of the constitution and con
 flicts with any law of the state re
 latine to municipal matters of ctic lCf the first class, that the provision of such charter shall prevail We are therefore forced to tn