Wyoming State Treasurer v. City of Casper

551 P.2d 687, 1976 Wyo. LEXIS 202
CourtWyoming Supreme Court
DecidedJune 22, 1976
Docket4521
StatusPublished
Cited by64 cases

This text of 551 P.2d 687 (Wyoming State Treasurer v. City of Casper) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wyoming Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Wyoming State Treasurer v. City of Casper, 551 P.2d 687, 1976 Wyo. LEXIS 202 (Wyo. 1976).

Opinion

RAPER, Justice.

This case involves assessment procedures for the firemen’s pension fund, followed by the appellant-plaintiff as its statutory trustee with respect to a claim against the ap-pellee-defendant in the sum of $20,433.87 for its pro-rata share of a 1973-74 fiscal year deficiency.

The legislature of the State of Wyoming created a firemen’s pension fund for the purpose of paying various awards, benefits and pensions to city, town and county fire fighters. 1 The fund is administered by the treasurer of the State of Wyoming through the Workmen’s Compensation Department. 2 The plan is financed by various means: 50% of the gross annual tax collected upon fire insurance premiums, gifts, donations and contributions; 3 since the legislative session of 1975, 8% of *690 the salary of every paid fireman is deducted monthly and paid into the fund; 4 an annual assessment share against cities, towns and counties based on a formula of benefit units 5 and interest on fund money invested in United States, state, county, district and municipal bonds. 6

In 1973, the legislature established additionally a firemen's contingency fund to be maintained in an amount of $100,000.00 to be expended by the state treasurer as needed to pay unanticipated obligations of the firemen’s pension fund. 7 It is established and maintained from the same sources as the firemen’s pension fund; but principally from the city, town and county assessment. 8 It was an initial misunderstanding of the use of this fund by the state treasurer that generated the dispute between the litigants. The facts are stipulated. We shall mention them as required.

Sections 15.1—305 (b) and (c) require that prior to July 1 of each year, the state treasurer “shall” compute the amount of the annual assessment share of each city, town and county and prior to July 1 “shall” notify each entity of the assessment share computed, payable in 12 installments. 9 On July 24, 1973 for the 1973-74 fiscal year, the state treasurer computed the minimum annual cash requirements of the firemen’s pension fund, computed the number of benefit units 10 attributable to each city, computed the value of a share, 11 computed the annual assess *691 ment share 12 of each city, and assessed each city in accordance with those computations. The assessment will be here referred to as the original assessment. That original assessment was based on annual known total figures. Thereafter, during the 1973-74 fiscal year, the state treasurer discovered what he believed to be an erroneous use of cash from the firemen’s contingency fund, as a back-up source to meet the monthly obligations of the firemen’s pension fund which for several months during the fiscal year was essentially depleted. By the end of April, 1974, only $28,864.76 13 remained in the firemen’s contingency fund and up to that time no unanticipated expenditures had arisen or been paid. The contingency fund was created by legislative fiat in 1973 to be used only for unanticipated expenditures, not known requirements. The reason for the fund being depleted was because the fire insurance tax money was not available for pension fund use until April, May and June, 1974.

About May 9, 1974, the state treasurer recomputed the minimum cash requirements of the firemen’s pension fund and the firemen’s contingency fund, recomputed the number of benefit units attributable to each city, recomputed the value of a share, recomputed the annual assessment share of each city as of July 1, 1973, for the fiscal year 1973-74 and reassessed each city in accordance with such computations. That assessment will be referred to as the reassessment. 14 The difference between the original assessment for the city of Cas-per and the reassessment comes to a claimed balance of $20,433.87, unpaid by that city and for the recovery of which this suit was brought in the district court.

While all of the foregoing seems complex, it simply boils down to the proposition that the state treasurer is each year authorized and required to compute and assess each city for a pro-rata portion of the firemen’s benefit and contingent fund requirements, after crediting other income sources. The original assessment did not take into consideration the months when the benefit fund was without money and the contingent fund was used. The reassessment was to make up that shortage.

The trial court held that the state treasurer had authority to assess cities, towns and counties prior to July 1 of each year with an annual assessment share. The trial court also held that the use of the firemen’s contingency fund as a “back-up” fund is contrary to the terms of § 15.1— 303 (k). But it finally held that the state treasurer had no authority to assess or make a reassessment after July 1, 1973, for the fiscal year 1973-74, and specifically adjudged that the reassessment for the annual assessment made by the state treasurer on May 9, 1974, for the fiscal year July 1, 1973 to June 30, 1974, was made without statutory power to do so.

The district court apparently accepted the argument of the city of Casper made there and here that §§ 15.1—305(b) and (c) are mandatory as to date and that prior to July 1, the treasurer must compute and notify of the assessment for the ensuing fiscal year and he has no power thereafter in that fiscal year to recompute and reassess. In that connection, it was in the district court and is also urged here that the rea *692 son for that deadline rests in §§ 9-533, as amended, and 9-535(c), W.S.1957, of the municipal budget act, then in effect, which makes it incumbent upon municipalities to prepare their budgets prior to the fiscal year commencing July 1, upon the basis of proposed expenditures. The tentative budget must be prepared by June 15 for hearings on the fourth Tuesday in July and adopted by at least the next day thereafter. 15 However, in fairness at this juncture it must be pointed out provision is made in the budget act for unanticipated expenditures as well. Sections 9-534(a) and 9-535 (a) 16 provide for a cash reserve fund, within budget requirements, to maintain the municipality on a cash-operating basis and to meet unanticipated requirements. We opine this was the source from which Cheyenne, Laramie, Rock Springs and Sheridan were able to meet the unexpected expenditures required by the reassessment.

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

Related

DH v. Wyoming Department of Family Services
2003 WY 155 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 2003)
In Re" H" Children
2003 WY 155 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 2003)
Campbell County School District v. Catchpole
6 P.3d 1275 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 2000)
Murray v. State
855 P.2d 350 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1993)
Racicky v. Simon
831 P.2d 241 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1992)
In re A.N.S.
828 P.2d 1357 (Montana Supreme Court, 1992)
Matter of A.N.S.
Montana Supreme Court, 1992
Rodabaugh v. Ross
807 P.2d 380 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1991)
Billis v. State
800 P.2d 401 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1990)
Julian v. New Hampshire Insurance
694 F. Supp. 1530 (D. Wyoming, 1988)
K N Energy, Inc. v. City of Casper
755 P.2d 207 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1988)
Broyles v. Broyles
711 P.2d 1119 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1985)
Weyerhaeuser Co. v. Walters
707 P.2d 733 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1985)
Hurst v. State
698 P.2d 1130 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1985)
State Board of Equalization v. Tenneco Oil Co.
694 P.2d 97 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1985)
White v. Fisher
689 P.2d 102 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1984)
State, Department of Revenue & Taxation v. Guadagnoli
677 P.2d 823 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1984)
Buckley v. Holstedt
672 P.2d 829 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1983)
Matter of Estate of Reed
672 P.2d 829 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
551 P.2d 687, 1976 Wyo. LEXIS 202, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wyoming-state-treasurer-v-city-of-casper-wyo-1976.