Grant County herald. [volume] (Lancaster, Wis.) 1850-1968, 1924-03-19
HIGH COURT
THROWS OUT
MINER BILL
Consolidation Law De-
clared Unconstitutional.

me state Supreme Court rendered
decision last week invalidating the
MINER consolidation law framed by
the last legislature on the grounds of
unconstltutionality. One of the causes
OF the bill was a retroactive feature
providing that where, subsequent to
Jan. l, 1921, school district consolida-
lions had been effected without a vote
OF the electors of the districts, the dis
trlcts so altered should automatically
revert to their former status.
Some Face Bankruptcy.
Under this clause 172 districts that
nave reported to the state superinten-
dent found themselves resuming their
former boundaries. They were affect
ed in all sorts Of degrees. Some which
had borrowed money with which to
finance new buildings were in per-
pleXity because the district that had
borrowed the money had vanished;
others had buildings in process of
erection, others own completed build
ings and equipments.
The officials of these ghost districts
were further confused and in some in
stances plunged into litigation because
OF another clause which required the
districts dissolved by the law to APP
portion and assign the assets of the
district
That meant that if a village and
three or four outlying districts had
consolidated and erected in the village
an expensive building, the outlying
districts were cut off and restored to
their original status. The village was
left with costly building on it's
hands, and the villagers were requir-
ed to levy tax upon themselves to
pay to the outlying districts their por-
ton of the value of the building. In
extreme cases, that meant bankruptcy.
Prentice Has Big Load.
Districts extensively affected were
at Prentice, Bloomington, Fennimore
and Ashland. The village of Prentice
was first to reach the supreme court.
The court Tuesday declared unconsti-
tutional so much Of the MINER law as
created the troubles of the consoli-
dated districts.
FennimOre Breathes Easier.
That some districts were, under the
MINER act arbitrarily to share in
property paid for by other districts
was the complaint in a number of To-
calities and the 18th amendment
figured prominently in all such con-
troversies.
Parts of several districts had been
attached to- the Bloomington district
in Grant county, and the electors had
voted to erect a new school building.
For 40 years it had been the custom
for pupils from outlying territory to
attend the village school and the ter
ritory was finally grouped together for
purposes of taxation. This district
was also threatened with disintegra-
ton
The Fennimore case resembled that
at Bloomington except that no new
building was projected, Fennimore be-
ing already provided with ample ia
cilities. In this case, adjacent terri
tory was annexed because the, resi-
dents desired to utilize the Fennimore
school, and it was desired to obtain
more tax revenues with which to
maintain it. Had the law been sus-
tanned, the Fennimore district would
have been disrupted, and the city
would have been required to levy tax
sufficient to raise about $4,000 to give
to the outlying districts, though these
territories had not built the school.