MID-CONTINENT PIPE LINE CO. v. OKMULGEE COUNTY EXCISE BD.

MID-CONTINENT PIPE LINE CO. v. OKMULGEE COUNTY EXCISE BD.
1942 OK 353
131 P.2d 753
191 Okla. 572
Case Number: 30859
Decided: 10/20/1942
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

MID-CONTINENT PIPE LINE CO. et al.
v.
OKMULGEE COUNTY EXCISE BOARD

Syllabus

¶0 SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL DISTRCTS--Excise board in calculating rate of tax levy for school district should use as factor the assessed valuation of peoperty in district as reflected by assessment rolls of counrty assessor and abstract thereof furnished excise board--Tax levy not subject to protest because portion of area of district was detached therefrom after assessor compiled his abstract.
In calculating a rate of ad valorem tax levy for a school district the excise board must use as a factor the assessed valuation of taxable property within the taxing unit as reflected by the assessment rolls of the county assessor and the abstract thereof as furnished to the excise board. When that is properly done, a tax levy for the school district may not be successfully attacked on protest by showing that since the assessor compiled his transcript, a portion of the area of the district has been detached therefrom, when the assessed valuation of such detached territory is in no manner subtracted from the aggregate assessed valuation of the district as shown by the assessor's transcript, nor presented in authentic manner to the excise board.

Appeal from Court of Tax Review: James T. Shipman, Clarence Mills, and Marvin Shilling, Judges.

From judgment denying protests of certain tax levies for school districts in Okmulgee County, the protestants, the Mid-Continent Pipe Line Company et al., appeal. Affirmed.

Mastin Geschwind, of Oklahoma City, for plaintiffs in error.
Jack Pitchford, County Atty., of Okmulgee, for defendant in error.

WELCH, C. J.

¶1 This appeal involves protests based upon the contention that appropriations for school districts Nos. 8, 12, and 45 of Okmulgee county are excessive because total valuations in the district were not as great as the total assessed valuations employed by the excise board in calculating the rates of levy.

¶2 These are the same school districts from which parts of territory were taken by annexation as shown and discussed in case No. 30860, the Texas-Empire Pipe Line Co. v. Tulsa County, Excise Board, decided this date by this court, 191 Okla. 586, 131 P.2d 745. That case and the present case are briefed as one on the issues herein. Our views and conclusion therein dispose of the question presented here.

¶3 Judgment affirmed.

¶4 OSBORN, BAYLESS, DAVISON, and ARNOLD, JJ., concur. HURST, J., concurs in result. GIBSON, J., dissents. CORN, V. C. J., and RILEY, J., absent.