Show HIGH HIGH 1 COURT ENDS DISPUTE OVER LEVIES I Directs Writ rit on Vl Weber County County County Coun Coun- ty ty Commission in School j Tax Dispute SCHOOL BOARD WINS Con Conflict of Laws Adjusted in inDecision inDecision inDecision Decision Handed Down by Supreme Bench 4 f KH 4 4 kt 4 EFF EFFECT Cl OP OF Vise in tO mill maximum Ie levy f 4 mii- mii l be c mode b by bT county f commissioner loD r for lor of off f hool In cItie o of ot the oDd f ff f- f cInn w. w f 4 null ond and old ord that re nrc- ref e f 4 lon tion of or chapter III of ot the UH Sell Sees f 4 4 lon Irn to 10 fix f 4 limit for lor Mleh levy le nt nf 3 35 f ff f 4 Oil nil but one ODe of off f 4 chapter chanter 11 4 Writ rit of 01 ordered direct direct- t f ff f Ing r count county f 4 4 to 13 Ie le for or Ogden 4 f rn c e f iii T f t t 4 T N apparent conflict between two t A. A AN laws laWR passed pl erl by hY the le at atita Its ita last session both of or which were signed slimed b by the governor So the same day d was vas removed remO in a decision handed down lown yesterday b by the state tato supreme court courtin in the case ease of or th the the- board of or education of oC Olden Ogden 1 against tho the Weber county commission The board of education had flad asked SUlked the court to Issue IzUe a peremptory I writ of oC mandate directing the tho county count commissioners to levy y EI LI mills for the I of oC the Osden Ogden city s schools The I decision directs the tho Issuance of or the writ n as asked The Weber eber county commissioners had bad refused to make R such ch a le levy on the ground that chapter 11 of oC the InS 1015 Session Session Ses Ses- sion Laws forbade them to le levy lemore more I than 35 36 mills Tn 0 school board took the position the board had hall the therl I I rl right ht to make tho ho larger levy y In accordance accordance accordance ac ac- ac- ac with authority given gl b uy by chapter chapter chapter chap chap- ter of ot the same v volume lumc of oC Session Laws 81 1 which fixed the limit which might be levied Je for cities of or Ogden's valuation and claps cIas at it 10 mills Roth Rotia chapters were enacted to amend section 1938 of or the Revised Re Statutes The different levy len limits fixed by 11 the two amendments apparently presented n ft conflict especially since the two acts were ere signed on th the same day but tho the supreme court held that there was no conflict since It was WaB 08 definitely stated in the text of ot tho the bill bUt which enacted chapter that It did not go so Into ef effect or- or feet until January 1 I 1910 1916 while the tho apparently conflicting chapter went Into eff effect ct as provided b by the constitution constitution constitution I shortly after It was signed b by bythe bythe the governor I IJ J Repealed ays ap Court Coart The supreme court therefore took the position that any any portion of or chapter chapter chap chap- i t ter r ll which with chapter I ill was repealed when the latter be became became became be- be I came effective The classification of or I cities provided for Cor in chapter Ill however how how- ever the supreme court held to be unconstitutional unconstitutional unconstitutional un un- un- un constitutional because it meant a discrimination discrimination discrimination dis dis- crimination a against cities of or tho eec MC- sec second ond class clas having ha an asses assessed ec valuation of ot less than It therefore held heM that that section of chapter relative e to the thie levying limits of such cities clUes is of no io effect and the tho limit of 10 mills fixed by chapter is Is al allowed al- al lowed to stand The writ t of mandate was wall therefore ordered issued The Ogden board of ot education no notified no- no the county commission that must be raised by taxation to support supPort support sup- sup Port the schools for tho the current year The mill levy would have produced only 7 The peremptory writ directs the commissioners to make whatever lev levy lew is required to meet the Amount tho the board stated will be re re- re The decision was as written b by Justice J. J E. E Frick and concurred in b by Chief Justice D D. N. N and nd Justice William Willlam Will Will- ia lam iam m McCarty McCart |