*1 630 Politic, COUNTY, Body
SALT LAKE a Plaintiff,
v. ex
TAX COMMISSION of the State of Utah rel. GOOD SHEPHERD LUTHERAN Dam, County R. Paul Van Lake Salt CHURCH, Defendants. Peters, Atty., Sp. Bill Salt Lake Thomas 14142. No. City, Atty., for County Deputy Lake Salt Supreme of Court Utah. plaintiff.
April 7, 1976. Gen., Atty. Romney, B. Vernon G. Davis, Deamer,
Blaine Michael L. Asst. Gen., Attys. City, for defend- Lake Salt ants.
TUCKETT, Justice: to the State Tax Commission Certiorari by a the to review decision Commission Shep- by the a residence owned that Good pas- by its and used herd Lutheran Church exempt is from taxation. tor question The here in consists residence garage two-story of a home with attached a liv- comprising square space, feet of 1750 area, room, four bed- ing kitchen-dining The rooms and one and one-half baths. by and is is the Church parsonage owned three occupied by pastor, his wife and its is located one parsonage The children. Church, and the and one-half miles from by on are carried some activities Church residence, as those as well pastor in the the Board of at The on the Church. carried County made Lake Equalization of Salt was the home a decision that and entered for the exempt valorem taxes from ad not that Board decision of The year 1972. Tax Com- State appealed to the Utah was of the decision mission, which overruled de- and Equalization of County Board the was ex- question home in that the termined empt from taxation. of the Utah XIII, 2
Article Section law the basic contains Constitution State involved. problem here with the dealing is as fol- section part of that pertinent The lows : counties, state, of the property The corpo- municipal districts,
towns, school the libraries, with lots public and rations *2 631 buildings exclusively residence, used parsonage thereon for ei- was used as a and pur- religious worship though ther or charitable even some church functions were exempt poses, there, . shall be from . . carried on it cannot be classified as [Emphasis being taxation. exclusively religious used for wor- added.] ship. terminology The “used exclusive invites our Counsel attention to the ly worship” is religious for before the provisions 31, of Sections 59-2-30 and U. for long court the first time. It has been C.A.1953, expand exemp which seem to kind, property every held that all of nature spelled tion out in the Constitution above description subject and is taxation re to by adding referred to “incidental to and ownership. gardless proposi of its That accomplish reasonably necessary for the concept spe upon tion is the that all based worship religious ment of or charita such propor property equal of shall bear its cies purposes.” beyond ble It is the constitu An government. tion of burden of the powers legislature of the to amend tional exemption the owner who claims an has the modify provisions or to the of property showing burden of that the falls the appears It to us that Constitution.3 exception. provisions of within an Those problem interpreta here involved is one of dealing and the statutes the Constitution implementation. tion rather than exemptions strictly with are construed is The decision of the Tax Commission claiming exemption and against the an one No costs awarded. reversed. the claim of against all doubts are resolved exemption.1 HENRIOD, J., and and CROCKETT C. conflict, is the MAUGHAN, there some JJ.,
While
concur.
supports the
weight
authority
decided
of
ELLETT,
(concurring).
Justice
of minis
parsonages,
rule that
residences
that the
by brothers
I concur but remind
ters,
parish
by a
and
houses owned
church
in the
have been made
ruling should
same
by
pastor
occupied
and
as a residence
the
Order
and Protective
of Benevolent
case
exempt
priest
a church are not
from
or
of
Commission,
1214
P.2d
Elks
536
v. Tax
The
in the case be
property taxes.2
facts
of
1975).
(Utah
that the
fore the court are without conflict
Blood,
Ops. 293,
N.E.2d
cious
71
34 Ohio
Quinn,
332,
v.
961.
1. Parker
64 P.
23 Utah
;
278;
Rev.
49 Col.Law