State ex rel. Fatzer v. Kansas Armory Board

256 P.2d 143, 174 Kan. 369, 1953 Kan. LEXIS 321
CourtSupreme Court of Kansas
DecidedApril 11, 1953
DocketNo. 39,092
StatusPublished
Cited by30 cases

This text of 256 P.2d 143 (State ex rel. Fatzer v. Kansas Armory Board) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State ex rel. Fatzer v. Kansas Armory Board, 256 P.2d 143, 174 Kan. 369, 1953 Kan. LEXIS 321 (kan 1953).

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Smith, J.:

This is an action in quo warranto wherein the state on the relation of the attorney general questions the authority of the Kansas Armory Board and the members thereof to issue revenue bonds pursuant to G. S. 1949, 48-317 to 48-321 on the ground the above statutes are unconstitutional and hence void and do not confer power upon the Kansas Armory Board to issue bonds thereunder.

The petition alleged first that the board was made a body politic and corporate by G. S. 1949, 48-315 to 48-321, and had power to build, establish and maintain armories throughout the state; that at a called meeting on January 13, 1953, the board adopted a reso[370]*370lution in which it proposed to issue $25,000 worth of revenue bonds for the purpose of paying all or part of the cost of constructing, remodeling and improving the armory building at Leavenworth, such being the first resolution to be adopted in a program involving a number of such projects throughout the state, all of which would aggregate more than a million dollars; that this particular issue was to be known as the Kansas Armory Board Revenue Bond Series B and was to consist of 50 bonds of like date and tenor and to carry a rate of 31 percent interest and to run for a period of eleven years; that the resolution provided these revenue bonds would be payable solely and only from the revenue derived from the rental operation of the armory; that G. S. 1949, 48-317 provided in Section “H” thereof that in order to secure the payment of principal and interest of such securities the armory board was empowered to execute and deliver a lease to the State of Kansas through the adjutant general, who should execute a lease for the state for the building to be used for armory purposes and for no other purpose. A copy of the proposed lease was attached to the petition.

The petition further alleged that in preparing the bond transcript and passing the resolution the board purported to be acting pursuant to G. S. 1949, 48-315 to 48-321 and would unless ousted from exercising such power issue and sell Kansas Armory Board Revenue Bonds in accordance with such transcript and resolution.

The petition then alleged' that G. S. 1949, 48-315 to 48-321 is unconstitutional and void and wholly fails to invest the Kansas Armory Board with power and authority to issue such revenue bonds and to create an indebtedness by reason of the fact that: First, in purporting to confer upon the board the power to issue and pledge revenue for the payment thereof the sections violated article 11, sections 6 and 7 of the constitution of the state, which sections specifically prohibit the state of Kansas from contracting a debt except as therein provided and unless the proposed law for creating the debt be submitted first to a direct vote of the electors of the state at some general election that the proposal to create an indebtedness for reconstruction, remodeling and improving an armory at Leavenworth and the plans to do so in a number of Kansas towns had not been submitted to a vote of the electors and had not been approved by them; second, that G. S. 1949, 48-319, provides that once the revenue bonds have been paid, the armory board shall donate, transfer and convey such property by appropriate instru[371]*371ment of transfer and conveyance to the state and this shows the Kansas Armory Board is in fact and in law an arm of the government of the state and is not a separate entity or body politic, and that the scheme is a subterfuge to allow the state to do indirectly what it cannot do directly; third, the state of Kansas through the adjutant general would rent these buildings and the adjutant general contemplates paying each and every partial payment of rent from an appropriation made to him by the legislature. Hence the state will actually be renting the buildings and actually be paying for them and thus be doing indirectly what it cannot do directly; fourth, the above being true, it will be a violation of article 2, section 24, of the constitution, which provides that no money shall be drawn from the treasury of the state except in pursuance of a specific appropriation made by law and no appropriation shall be made for a longer period than two years; that the law purports to empower the armory board to make a permanent appropriation for a period of time exceeding two years and pledges the income and revenue of the state for a period of eleven years; fifth, that G. S. 1949, 48-317 (/) purports to exempt revenue bonds issued by the board and the income derived therefrom from taxation by the state, counties and municipalities therein except inheritance taxes of the state; that such exemption was an unconstitutional discrimination and classification of property for taxation purposes and was in direct violation of the prohibitions contained in article 11, section 1 of the constitution.

The petition further alleged the board was purporting to exercise powers and privileges purported to be conferred upon it by G. S.' 1949, 48-317 to 48-321 and by so doing was usurping powers not authorized under the constitution, and such sections were wholly unconstitutional and void in all particulars and did not confer any such power upon the Kansas Armory Board; that unless ousted from the exercise of such purported powers the Kansas Armory Board would issue and sell its present issue of revenue bonds, and would continue to issue and sell such bonds in the future.

The prayer was that the court oust the board from carrying out the terms and provisions of the transcript and resolution and from attempting to issue any revenue bonds which might become a debt of the state and be ousted from pledging of revenue from such works to pay the indebtedness.

The bond, a copy of which was attached to the petition, provides [372]*372that it should bear a rate of interest of 31 percent per annum; that it was one of a series of fifty bonds of like tenor and amount issued by the Kansas Armory Board providing funds to reconstruct, remodel and improve an armory building for the use of the Kansas National Guard; that the bonds were issued under the authority and in full compliance with the constitution and statutes of the state, particularly sections 48-315 to 48-321; that the bond and the income derived therefrom should be exempted from all state, county and municipal taxation except inheritance taxes of the state and that for the prompt payment of the principal and interest there the Kansas Armory Board had covenanted and irrevocably pledged the income and revenue arising from the operation of such armory building; that such armory board revenue bond was not and should not become an obligation of the state of Kansas, or of the Kansas Armory Board, or of the individual members or officers thereof and could not be paid from any general tax levied by the state. The bond further provided that all acts, conditions and tilings required to be done to exist, happen or be performed precedent to and in the issuance of this Kansas Armory Board Revenue Bond had been done and until the bond was paid the board would to the best of its ability keep the armory building leased and occupied, collecting all rents and profits therefrom adequate to meet all requirements of principal and interest on such bonds.

The defendants answered by first denying all of the allegations except those specifically admitted. They admitted the allegations with reference to the issuance of the bonds but denied that G. S. 1949, 48-315 to 48-321 were unconstitutional for any of the reasons given in the petition.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Fults v. City of Coralville
666 N.W.2d 548 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 2003)
Lonegan v. State
809 A.2d 91 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2002)
In Re the Oklahoma Capitol Improvement Authority
1998 OK 25 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1998)
Petition of University Hospitals Authority
953 P.2d 314 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1998)
In Re Anzai
936 P.2d 637 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1997)
Attorney General Opinion No.
Kansas Attorney General Reports, 1996
Carr-Gottstein Properties v. State
899 P.2d 136 (Alaska Supreme Court, 1995)
Department of Ecology v. State Finance Committee
804 P.2d 1241 (Washington Supreme Court, 1991)
Caddell v. Lexington County School District No. 1
373 S.E.2d 598 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1988)
Gude v. City of Lakewood
636 P.2d 691 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1981)
Opinion to the Governor
308 A.2d 802 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1973)
City of Pocatello v. Peterson
473 P.2d 644 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1970)
Clayton v. Kervick
244 A.2d 281 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1968)
City of Phoenix v. PHOENIX CIVIC AUD. & CON. CENT.
408 P.2d 818 (Arizona Supreme Court, 1965)
Petition of Board of Public Buildings
363 S.W.2d 598 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1962)
State Ex Rel. Anderson v. Hodgson
326 P.2d 752 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1958)
McArthur v. Smallwood
281 S.W.2d 428 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1955)
State Ex Rel. Fatzer v. Kansas Turnpike Authority
273 P.2d 198 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1954)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
256 P.2d 143, 174 Kan. 369, 1953 Kan. LEXIS 321, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-fatzer-v-kansas-armory-board-kan-1953.