Court Opinion

ID: 9720688
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 08:39:33.059424+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:24:20.632269
License: Public Domain

Boslaugh, J.,
dissenting.
I do not agree that the charge imposed by section 14-1041, R. R. S'. 1943, upon the gross revenue of the Metropolitan Utilities District of Omaha is not a tax. It is clearly a revenue measure. To classify it as something other than a tax is to ignore reality and exalt form over substance.
In a number of cases this court has recognized that the Metropolitan Utilities District of Omaha is a municipal corporation in the broader sense of the term. See, Nelson-Johnston & Doudna v. Metropolitan Utilities Dist., 137 Neb. 871, 291 N. W. 558; Keystone Investment Co. v. Metropolitan Utilities Dist., 113 Neb. 132, 202 N. W. 416, 37 A. L. R. 1507; Metropolitan Utilities Dist. v. City of Omaha, 171 Neb. 609, 107 N. W. 2d 397. The Metropolitan Utilities District performs the functions, both governmental and proprietary, that otherwise would be performed by the City of Omaha in regard to a water and gas system. The district has all the powers granted to cities and villages by the general statutes for the construction or extension of waterworks and other utilities. The district fixes all rates including those for services furnished by a private utility, and its rules and regulations have the force and effect of a city ordinance.
The Constitution provides that: “* * * The Legislature shall not impose taxes on municipal corporations, or the inhabitants or property thereof, for corporate purposes.” Art. VIII, § 7, Constitution of Nebraska. Such a provision is generally construed to mean that the Legislature has no power to impose a tax for the ordinary purposes for which taxes are levied by municipalities. 16 McQuillin, Municipal Corporations (3d Ed.), § 44.18, p. 58: Metropolitan Utilities Dist. v. City of Omaha, 112 Neb. 93, 198 N. W. 858; 62 C. J. S., Municipal Corporations, § 194, p. 352.
*274By section 14-1041, R. R. S. 1943, the Legislature has imposed a tax on one municipal corporation for the benefit of another with no restriction upon the use of the revenue. The statute compels a diversion of utility revenue for non-utility purposes. Its effect is to impose a levy for city purposes upon the ratepayers of the district without regard to their place of residence.
White, C. J., joins in this dissent.