Court Opinion

ID: 9726652
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 13:02:25.617186+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:25:29.588238
License: Public Domain

Bosl-augh, J.,
concurring.
I concur fully in the holding that the various statutes challenged in this case are constitutional.
I agree that the Duis amendment only prohibits the state from levying a property tax and then only for state purposes. It did not repeal the rest of the Constitution and it does not affect the use of property taxes by local subdivisions.
This case involves a difficult area, and questions which relate to counties are complicated by the fact that a county has no private character but is governmental only and acts purely as an agent of the state. State ex rel. City of Omaha v. Board of County Commissioners, 109 Neb. 35, 189 N. W. 639. Nevertheless, purposes which are substantially local may be financed by a property tax. Historical and traditional patterns are matters to be considered, but in my view they are not controlling. I do not interpret the Duis amendment as a complete restriction upon the power of the Legislature to allocate the functions and activities of government between the state and various local subdivisions.
Spencer, J., joins in this concurrence.