*1 mitigation having been and no evidence
offered; of this Court that it is Order Keen, BE
Respondent, Walter Edmund
DISBARRED. arrived at decision herein
Notice to the given by the Chief Justice Bar Asso- and the Oklahoma Respondent O.S.1971, Ch. with
ciation accordance 10, 16(c).
1-App. Art. Sec. DISBARRED.
RESPONDENT
DAVISON, LAVENDER, BARNES DOOLIN, JJ., concur.
WILLIAMS, HODGES, J.,C. J., V. C. BERRY, JJ., IRWIN concur in
results.
STATE of ex Oklahoma rel. William F. POULOS, Petitioner, Area Vocational-Technical al., School District No. 18 et Intervenors,
STATE EQUALIZATION, BOARD OF Respondent.
No. 48202.
Supreme Court of Oklahoma.
April 21, 1975.
H35 Tulsa, petitioner. McCune, for John intervenor, Tulsa, for Levy, Louis County Area School Vocational-Technical No. District Hewett, Fagin, by
Fagin, & Mathews Mathews, City, in- for Eugene Oklahoma Assn, tervenor, Inc. Oklahoma Education intervenor, Smith, Tulsa, Jerry L. for Dougherty. Bruce P. Gen., by Larry Derryberry, Atty. James Nevard, Gray and B. At- Donald Asst.
H. Gen., respondent. tys for HODGES, Vice Chief Justice. Origi- Assume Application is an to This Jurisdiction, and for a Manda- nal Writ the the failure of State mus because of adjust to Equalization (Board) Board real and equalize the valuation of and throughout the counties property sonal the State Oklahoma. that the petitioner asserted
It equalization of has ordered the Board personal properties real and the value of since and of the several counties complied with its clear Board has statutory duties since and constitutional requesting is not petitioner that time. The any compelled act in the Board be equalize the value of manner to certain according any formula. property has not taken complaint is that the Board action, re- that it is and any affirmative correct, adjust the and quired equalize, an- on an between counties assessments nual basis. Art. 10 Constitution
provides: Equali-
There shall be a State Board Governor, consisting of State zation Treasurer, Secretary of Auditor, State Inspector State, General, Attorney State Examiner, and President of duty said Agriculture. Board adjust equalize the personal real and valuation of State, and in the the several counties duties as such other it shall by law, prescribed they be shall as- change said shall have given been public sess railroad all service cor- Board of Commissioners said poration property. county and given an opportunity for hearing change. on said duty imposed by statute, This is likewise 68 O.S.1971§2463: legislature has recognized *3 Governor, Auditor,
The system equalize State a not State which does ad valo- Treasurer, Secretary State, Attorney throughout of rem assessments the state is General, Inspector Examiner invidiously discriminatory. State and unfair and It and Agricul- provided by President of the Board is of the School Code of ture shall constitute of the State Board 18-102: O.S.1971§ Equalization, and said of State Board Legislature recognizes it that would Equalization must hold a session the at taxpaying be unfair to the citizens of the Capitol State, commencing of the at ten system state to base a of state financial on o’clock a. m. the in Monday fourth upon to of aid schools the amounts local year purpose of each for the of June ad taxes collected for education valorem equalizing property the of the several equalizing as this ad act does without shall, counties. The State Auditor throughout the valorem assessments later than Monday June, the third of no- Legisla- is state. It the intention of the tify all other members said of Board of equalize ture to ad valorem assessments place the time and of said annual session every parcel so that and of taxable item required. as herein The Governor shall in at property will be assessed the state serve as chairman and the State Auditor percentage the same of its fair cash val- shall serve Board, as * * secretary of * said ue. and a vice-chairman shall be elected The duties of the Board are man from the other In members. case of the datory. provided by It is 68 O.S.1971 § absence or failure of said chairman and 2476: secretary, them, or of either to so act on the Monday any provisions relating fourth of to June, of this Code four or officials, more members thereof and the proceed shall the duties of various on said be date to shall conduct the time within which such duties Board’s session carry and be performed, hereby on its required, work as herein are declared provided, any any mandatory; such by official said and the failure of action commission, require approval official, Board shall by major- a board or ity herein, of all the prescribed members within of the It the duties Board. shall duty subject be re- specified, the of shall them to said State Board to time duty; neglect examine of county the various from for office assessments moval remuneration, equalize, and to adjust they correct and and shall receive no compensation salary same as their serv- by between the counties or for increas- ing decreasing ices, or fixed for the aggregate time herein assessed after the value until property performance of the and any or of such duties class there- of, any them, completed in or all or of shall have been conform to same the fair be cash value them shall also sub- thereof as de- formed. Each of herein fined, ($5.00) and ject penalty to order Dollars and direct to a of Five the assess- any ment rolls day day’s delay in for such ne- county per this for State to each failure; duty be so corrected as to adjust equalize glect or it shall be the and and Attorney county of- personal County valuation the real and as to counties; ficers, of the as to Attorney several pro- and the General vided, change proper that no officers, action the assessed to institute state any valuation penalty; provided, county any this such State to collect or binding days validity any until assessment ten notice of that the
H37
precise
is
Although
uniformity
any
not be
because of
levy shall
affected
required,
County
delay
insufficiency, informality or
in the
[see
Canadian
any duty imposed upon Commissioners
performance of
official,
Equalisation,
State Board
363 P.2d
any
Board or Commission.
inherently
is
and
a rate which
(Okl.1961)],
Constitution, Article 10
by
is
basically
all citizens mandated
fair to
provides
any
authorized
8 also
officer
of the United
the Constitutions
States
for
subjects
values or
taxation
to assess
patently
It
the State of Oklahoma.
any
commit
error in the
who
wilful
shall
of the
meet the standards
clear
duty
be
performance of his
deemed
shall
statute,
ad
and of the
Constitutions
malfeasance,
upon
guilty of
conviction
equalization
valuation
justment
and be
thereof shall forfeit his office
oth-
properties
personal
real
of all
provided
punished
erwise
as
be
made
this state must be
several counties of
law.
*4
on an
and uniform basis.
annual
Article 10
Constitution
§
dictates that
cannot be
8
assessed
complete
noted that a
It should be
thirty-five percent
than
of
at more
its fair
adjustment
example,
increase)
(for
300%
1960,
In
cash value.
the Board determined
hardship
year may
in
an undue
one
work
average
approxi-
that the state
should be
Therefore,
on
some counties.
citizens of
time,
mately
disparity
Since that
20%.
practical
perhaps,
reasonable and
a more
an incre-
between
counties has reached
this rea
approach
utilized. For
should be
dibly disproportionate ratio.
son,
gradual
may desire to set a
the Board
application
alleges
The Board
that
in
adjustment
an annual basis
order
on
premature;
for the writ is
that
is a
there
taxpayer.
to the
the initial shock
lessen
presumption
public
legal
that
officials and
perform
duty;
legal
boards will
jur
their
in this
The rule is well settled
petitioner
has
exhausted
his ad-
in
considering
action
isdiction that in
an
pursuant
ministrative remedies
officials,
68 O.S.
against public
this
mandamus
petitioner
by
1971
counters
anticipation
The
the writ in
court
withhold
alleging that
has
the Board
failed to act
performance
the de
good
their
faith
of
of
years,
expect
for fourteen
and that to
them
Dept.
statutory duty.
clared
State v.
of
year is
to act this
futile.
583,
Welfare,
Public
206 Okl.
245 P.2d
(1952).
presented
publici
matter
is
juris, and of immediate
concern
all tax
as
In view
the fact
the Board
apparent
payers.
It is
from the exhibits
oppor-
presently
has not had an
constituted
presented before this court that the assess
meet,
tunity
having
confidence
by
ments made
the Board do
meet the
orig-
good
performance,
its
we assume
faith
statutory requirements
constitutional and
jurisdiction,
inal
withhold the issuance
but
equalization. Any
delay
as to
further
will
issuance
of a
a Writ
writ.
only compound
past.
the failures
abeyance
in
Mandamus is therefore held
circumstances,
Under such
this court will
pending
meeting of the
on
Board
June
by
statutory pro
not be saddled
the usual
1975,
23,
anticipation
action at
in
that its
cedures of administrative remedies. The
unnecessary.
that time
render
writ
will
exigency of time
our
demands
immediate
denying
awarding
In
or
writs
action.
IRWIN,
DAVISON,
WILLIAMS,
mandamus,
judicial
courts exercise
discre
LAVENDER,
BERRY,
BARNES
governed by
and are
tion
what seems nec
DOOLIN, JJ., concur.
proper
essary and
to be done under the
of each
facts
case for the attainment of
in
part,
in
dissents
SIMMS, J., concurs
justice. Austin
Educa
v. State
.
tion,
part.
1972).
(Okl.
SIMMS, Justice, concurring dis-
senting part. in wholly part in that I concur
While opinion majority whereby this Court original jurisdiction, respectfully
assumes I holding abeyance
dissent to this Court’s peremptory
the issuance of the writ
mandamus. majority anticipates good faith Equaliza-
formance the State Board of
tion their mandatory constitutional
statutory duty. Unquestionably, this antic-
ipation upon long recog- founded presumption legal public
nized officers public
will their duties accord- with their
ance trust. oversight part
Either or inaction on the
of the Board since as distinguished thereof,
from the new members renders presumption
this nugatory. majority
If the believes the Board will
now in accordance with the Con- statutes,
stitution and deny we should man-
damus.
I submit we adjudicate should the matter finality
now before us to and issue the
writ of mandamus.
STATE of Oklahoma ex rel. William F. POULOS, Petitioner, Area Vocational-Technical al., School District No. 18 et Intervenors, EQUALIZATION,
STATE BOARD OF Respondent.
No. 48202.
Supreme Court of Oklahoma.
March