Court Opinion

ID: 9531267
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 04:09:22.582979+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:28:23.359708
License: Public Domain

ELLETT, Justice
(dissenting) :
I dissent.
There is no question but what the individual members of the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks, hereinafter referred to as “Elks,” do a lot of charitable work. However, the problem before us is whether or not the building is “used exclusively for . . . charitable purposes” as required by Art. XIII, Sec. 2, of the State Constitution.
The gross revenue per year approximates $300,000, and of this sum, less than $30,000 was spent for charity. I am unable to believe that an institution which spends less than 10 per cent of its income for charitable purposes is entitled to have a six-story building exempt from taxes on the ground that it is being used exclusively for charitable purposes.
The main opinion sounds like a bull elk trumpeting its virtues in the forest. The court should accord to the Tax Commission the privilege of finding the facts and affirm those findings unless they are capricious, arbitrary, and not based on evidence. The Tax Commission, on competent evidence, found that the building was not used exclusively for charitable purposes. I would affirm that finding.