Opinion

Grimes v. City of Oklahoma City

  • 49 P.3d 719
  • 2002 OK 47
  • 2002 WL 1174057
Court
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Filed
Jul 8, 2002
Status
Published
Author
Kauger
On the bench
Winchester, Kauger, Coneur, Hargrave, Watt, Hodges, Lavender, Boudreau, Summers, Opala, Writing
Cited by
27 cases
Authority
More cited than 11.3%

"`Shall' signifies a mandatory directive or command."

How later courts described this case

  • "`Shall' signifies a mandatory directive or command."

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

KAUGER, J.,

concurring in result.

1 1 I agree with the majority that a municipal vote of the public in support of public schools pursuant to 11 0.S$.2001 § 22-159 1 should be upheld. I write separately to emphasize that because the levy has been voted upon by the people, it does not present the constitutional debt limitations problem asso-clated with our decision in Oklahoma City Urban Renewal Auth. v. Medical Technology & Research Auth. of Oklahoma, 2000 OK 23 , [ 13, 4 P.3d 677 .

12 In Medical Technology, we considered the nature and constitutionality of tax inerement financing utilizing ad valorem financing. In doing so, we determined that although the taxing scheme was not facially invalid, it was subject to voter approval under the Okla. Const. art. 10, § 26. 2 Here, the step missing in Medical Technology is supplied-the election process has taken place and the voters have spoken in favor of supporting public schools.

. Title 11 0.$.2001 § 22-159 provides:

Municipalities may support any public school system located in whole or in part within the corporate limits of the municipality, including without limitation by the expenditure of municipal revenues for construction or improvement of public school facilities. In furtherance of municipal support for any public school system, as authorized by this section, the municipal governing body may take all actions necessary to effectuate such support.".

. The Okla. Const. art. 10, § 26 provides in pertinent part:

"(a) Except as herein otherwise provided, no county, city, town, township, school district, or other political corporation, or subdivision of the state, shall be allowed to become indebted, in any manner, or for any purpose, to an amount exceeding, in any year, the income and revenue provided for such year without the assent of three-fifths of the voters thereof, voting at an election, to be held for that purpose, nor, in cases requiring such assent, shall any indebtedness be allowed to be incurred to an amount, including existing indebtedness, in the aggregate exceeding five percent (5%) of the valuation of the taxable property therein ..."

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.