Indiana daily times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1914-1922, 1920-07-07
COMPLAINT SHOWED
LEVIES WERE UNEQUAL.

|
In regard to the former question the
| complaint showed that more than 800 tax
payers of Washington township, Marion
county are Similarly affected by an IL
/ legal order of the state board of tax COM
missioners, made and issued on the pre-
tense Of equalizing the aggregate assess
ments in that township of all lands and
lots 30 per cent, all improvements 80 per
cent, and all personal property, excepting
! certain items, 80 per cent.
All this property had previously been
assessed at its full value
AT the same time by the alleged void
order the same classes of property in In
corporated towns in that township vera
increased only 20 per cent above their
own true value.
The decision stated that it was the
| opinion Of the court that 1t was NOT the
intention Of the general assembly to con
| Ter on the board of tax commissioners.
Jurisdiction over the class Of property
which this suit relates
1t continued that "if the state board
OF tax commissioners is not given all
powers Of the county board, then there
Is no provision giving the state board
power on its own motion TO eQualize the
various taxing units of county nv
I
The only business which could prom
erly come before the state board, at an
extended session. according to the op!n-
ION or the court was the equalization Of
assessments Of the several counties.
which were too low.
For that purpose alone the mandate
Of the legislature requiring the board TO
adjourn on the third Monday In August
gave the board permission to extend its
session not to exceed ten days" the opin-
ion reads.
HAS RULES WHICH
MUST BE FOLLOWED.
he supreme court held that the ap-
pellants' petition could not be sustained
Ior the reason that the legislature fur
nished the board plain rules, which must
be followed.
when the board assumed the mower
to equalize the various taxing units Of
the counties at that time~it exceeded its
authority, in that it assumed to exercise
statutory functions not within its pow
err the court held
I'm so far as the legislature prescribed
rules which the tax board must follow.
the board must rely on them, and the
taxpayers have a right to rely on their
being followed" .
COURT RULING Is
CLIMAX OF BATTLE.
The ruling of the court is the climax
of a long standing legal battle between
Marion county taxpayers and the state
as result of horizontal increases In
valuations of taxable property ordered
by the tax board.
These increases in the various counties
| of the state range from 10 per cent to
100 per cent.
In Marion county they amounted to
from 20 per cent to so per cent.
An injunction was sought by Marion
county taxpayers against the county
treasurer to prevent him from collecting
taxes on the basis of horizontal in
creases
Judge Linn Hay of superior court,
room 2, granted the injunction.
This ruling on the part of the court
held up the collection of any taxes In
Marion county for weeks.
COLLECTION AGREEMENT
Is FINALLY REACHED.
An agreement on the part of the Plain
tiffs, the defendants and the court was
finally reached whereby the county
treasurer could collect the first INSTALL
ment of taxes.
1t twas provided, however, that the
treasurer should agree to deduct from
the final installment the excess paid ON
the first installment because of the hori-
zontal increases in valuations.
This agreement was stamped on every
tax receipt.
Following the decision of the lower
court the case was appealed to the ap-
pellate court.
This court reversed the lower court
and the action of the tax board was
legalized for the time being.
The Marion county taxpayers imme-
diately petitioned for a transfer to the
supreme court.
This petition resulted in the formal
transfer and today's ruling, which were
entered within few minutes of each
other
COURT DECISION
MOST SWEEPING.
The decision of the supreme court is
one of the most sweeping in its effect
of any that has been handed down by
the court in recent years.
The decision viii necessarily compel
a complete reversal of the attitude of
the state board of tax commissioners,
which contended it had the power to in
crease levies in cases where 1t believed
them to be too low.
The most serious effect, however,
will be upon the financial condition OF
the state, cities, counties and townships,
which will not receive the, amount of
taxes contemplated and which for this
reason must be given some relief in or
CONTINUED on Page Two.l