71 N.E.2d 333 | Ill. | 1947
This is an appeal from a judgment order of the county court of Cook county. The appellant, Swift Rich, paid his taxes for 1943, under protest. He filed objections to the application of the county collector for judgment and an order of sale against certain lands and lots returned delinquent for the nonpayment of taxes for the year 1943. The taxes objected to were levied by the Board of Education of the city of Chicago. The county court entered judgment overruling the objections. From that judgment this appeal has been perfected by the taxpayer.
The objections are based upon certain items included in the 1943 appropriations for school building purposes, as follows: *87
(1) 3-R-634 Auto Repairs .......................... $ 1,000.00 (2) 3-R-634 Auto Repairs .......................... 4,000.00 (3) 3-C-900 Postage and Carfare ................... 4,000.00 (4) 3-C-900 Auto mileage .......................... 8,640.00 (5) 3-C-900 Telegraph and Travel .................. 5,000.00 (6) 3-F-900 Advertising ........................... 2,000.00 (7) 3-H-900 Photos ................................ 2,500.00 (8) 3-J-900 Office Supplies ....................... 6,000.00 (10) 3-Z-900 Coal .................................. 5,000.00 (11) 3-Z-900 Electricity ........................... 1,000.00 (12) 3-Z-900 Supplies .............................. 100.00 (13) 3-B-900 Survey on Workmen's Compensation ...... 2,500.00 (14) 3-C-900 Postage and Carfare ................... 8,200.00 (15) 3-C-900 Auto Mileage .......................... 19,080.00 (16) 3-D-900 Auto Supplies ......................... 1,000.00 (17) 3-D-900 Auto License .......................... 372.00 (18) 3-G-900 Gas and Electricity ................... 3,500.00 (19) 3-H-900 Water, Ice, etc ....................... 500.00 (20) 3-I-900 Materials ............................. 250,000.00 (21) 3-J-900 Supplies .............................. 1,400.00 (22) 3-L-900 Fuel .................................. 3,500.00 (23) 3-M-900 School Plant Supplies ................. 550.00 (24) 3-N-900 Insurance ............................. 1,000.00 (25) 3-O-900 Office Equipment ...................... 300.00 (26) 3-R-900 Auto Repairs .......................... 3,000.00 (27) 3-R-634 Auto Repairs .......................... 600.00 (28) 3-R-634 Repairs and Replacements — Auto ................................ 290.00 (29) 3-R-641 Moving Mechanical Equipment ........... 5,000.00 (30) 3-R-641 Moving all other Equipment ............ 45,000.00 (31) 3-R-641 Stage Curtain Repairs ................. 20,000.00 (32) 3-R-650 Scale Repairs ......................... 20,000.00 (33) 3-S-725 New Blackboards ....................... 25,000.00 (34) 3-S-741 Inventory Equipment — New Seats and Desks ............................... 65,000.00 (35) 3-S-741 Lunch Room Equipment .................. 100,000.00 (36) 3-S-741 New Cots .............................. 1,000.00 (37) 3-S-741 New Curtains .......................... 1,000.00 (38) 3-S-741 Phys. Educ. Equip. — Rehabilitation ...................... 25,000.00 (39) 3-S-741 Other Equipment — Rehabilitation ...................... 25,000.00 (40) 3-R-641 Refinishing Seats and Desks ........... 65,000.00 (41) 3-R-641 Replace Stolen Equipment .............. 1,000.00 (42) 3-R-676 Workmen's Compensation ................ 15,000.00 (43) 3-R-676 Unused School Property ................ 6,500.00Of the foregoing, items (1), (2), (27), (29), (34), (35), (36), (37), (38), (39), (40), (41), (42), and *88 (43), are identical with items contained in the 1941 appropriations, which were held invalid by this court in Peopleex rel. Schlaeger v. Reilly Tar and Chemical Corp.
It is settled that under certain circumstances the legislature may validate an improper tax levy. (People ex rel. Toman v.Illinois Central Hotel Co.
The Board of Education had no power to levy taxes for building purposes the proceeds of which were to be used for educational purposes. (People ex rel. Schlaeger v. Reilly Tar and ChemicalCorp.,
As to the remaining twenty-eight items objected to, appellee argues that items (6), (7), (10), (11), (12), (18), (20), (21), (22), (23), (31), (32), and (33), are properly included in the levy for building purposes under the rule announced in People exrel. Schlaeger v. Reilly Tar and Chemical Corp.
In applying the above rule to the items objected to, it will be necessary to consider the several items separately. Item (6) has a code number "3-F-900." The first number, "3," refers to the fact that it is a building fund charge. The last number, "900," represents the function given by the index as "Architect's Office, Factory Repair Div. Bu. of Finance, Repair Cost Div." The letter "F" describes *90 the account, in this case, "Advertising." It is difficult to conceive of any advertising expense which the architect's office would incur, unless it was in connection with the advertising for bids on construction and repair of school buildings. It, therefore, appears that item (6) is a proper charge to the building fund. Item (7), "Photos," is to be paid out of account (H), which is "Special and Miscellaneous Service." This item does not have the direct connection with building purposes required to sustain it as a proper building fund levy. The same observation may be made as to items (10), (11), (12), (18), (21), (22), and (23), where the connection with building purposes is incidental rather than primary.
Item (20), "Materials," is charged to the "Materials" account. The nature of the materials, or the use to which they are to be put, is not specified. "Materials" is a term which includes everything used in the construction or repair of school buildings, and, used in that sense, the item is a proper charge against the building fund. The presumption is in favor of the validity of the tax, and the mere possibility that the fund, when collected, might be diverted to some other purpose, does not invalidate the levy. (People ex rel. Quisenberry v. Bates,
Item (31) is entitled "Stage Curtain Repairs," and is payable out of the "Construction and Betterments" account, in the "Furniture and Equipment" Fund, a subdivision of "Maintenance of Plant." It is essentially similar to the expense of refinishing seats and desks, which we have held properly chargeable to the educational fund. The same can be said of item (32), "Scale Repairs." This item is also *91
subject to the objection that its connection with a proper building purpose is only incidental and not direct. Item (33), "New Blackboards," is clearly an educational purpose under the rule announced in People ex rel. Risinger v. Cummins,
The remaining items, viz: numbers (3), (4), (5), (8), (13), (14), (15), (16), (17), (19), (24), (25), (26), (28), and (30), are not argued by the appellee. We assume appellee concedes their invalidity. They are so similar to the items held invalid inPeople ex rel. Schlaeger v. Reilly Tar and Chemical Corp.
Appellee contends that the amounts levied both for building purposes and for educational purposes were less than the maximum amounts which could be lawfully levied under the statute; that if the items levied for building purposes which are objected to as invalid were all subtracted from the building fund tax and added to the amount levied for educational purposes, the latter levy would still be less than the maximum which could be lawfully levied; that for this reason appellant cannot complain because he was not harmed by the fact that improper items were included in the building fund levy. Appellee cites People ex rel. Gleghorn v.Chicago and Alton Railroad Co.
The order and judgment of the county court is reversed. The cause is remanded to that court with directions to enter an order in accordance with the views expressed in this opinion.
Reversed and remanded, with directions.