County Library Districts and City Libraries established under Chapter 182 1959 are required to prepare annual budgets under the provisions of Chapter 67 Cum. . 1961.

... _ .. LIBRARY: - .· County Library Districts and City Libraries established under Chapter 182 RS 1959 are required to prepare annual budgets under the provisions of Chapter 67 Cum. Supp . 1961 . CITY LIBRARY: COUNTY LIBRARY DISTRICTS : (Opn . No . 307 - 61) No . 11 - 62 Mr . Paxton P. Price State Librarian Missouri State Library State Office Building Jefferson City, Missouri Dear Mr. Price: April l8J 1962 /l_. This office is in receipt of your request for a legal opinion, \'lhich reads as follows : "Will the provisions of .Senate Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No . 171, 7lst General Assembly, apply to public libraries established and operated under the library la\·Js of Missouri, when the bill goes into legal effect'! 11 Further inquiry indicates that your request relat es to those pulUic libraries which may be established under the provisions of Chapter 182, RSMo l9J9 · As we understand it, the question is - does Co~ttee Substitute for wenate Bill No . 171, Ilst General Assembly (67.010 to 67 . 100, Supp. RSMo 1961 , apply to publ ic libraries established under Chapter 1 2, RSMo 1959, so as to require such libraries to prepare annual budgets. Section 67 .010, RSMo 1961 Cum. Supp. provides, in part, as follO\'lS : Mr •. Paxton P. Price "Each political subdivision of this state, as defined in secti on 70. 120, RSMo, ex- cept thOse required to prepare an annual budget by chapter 50, RSMo, and sections 167.130, 167.160, 167 . 200, ana 167.240, RSMo, shall prepare an annual budget. • • *" The exceptions above mentioned in this statute are immaterial to your inquiry. Section 70.120, RSMo 1959, defines "political subd1vision 11 as followsz "(2) ' Political subdivision • shall mean any agency or unit or this state which now is, or hereafter shall oe, authorized to levy taxes or empowered to cause taxes to be levied. u Chapter 182, RSMo 1959, deals with several types of libraries. We dll deal first with county libraries which are covered by Sections 182.010 to 182. 120, RSMo 1959. Section 24, Article VI of the Constitution provides that as prescribed by lau, counties, cities and other legal subdivisions of the state shall have an annual budget and file annual reports of their financial transactions. This constitutional provision is expreas1ve of the policy of Missouri. Chapter 67 accords with thin policy. Our Constitution and otatutes contain a number of different definitions or "political subdivisions' • There is no reason why the legislature may not define "political eubdivisions" differently ror some purposes than for others except only where a specific constitutional definition is applicable. The legislative purpose in defining "political subdivision" is pr~rily to assure that a particular agency, unit or instrumen- tality will be governed by the particular statute in question. Hence, whatever may be the classical concept of "political subdivision", it is irrelevant in ascertaining the legislative intent in enacting a statute related to political subdivisions as defined in such atatute . - 2 - Mr. Paxton P. Price The obvious purpose of Senate Co~ttee Substitute for Senate Bill 171{ 7lst General Assembly (Chapter 67, RSMo, 1961 Cum. ~upp .J is to require every agency or unit of the state except those specifically excepted to prepare budgets, provided only that such agency or unit is either authorized to levy taxes or empowered to cause taxes to be levied. This legislative intent is manifested by incorporating into Chapter 67 the definition or "political subd1vlsion" contained 1n Section 70.120, RSMo . Such definition is extremely broad and comprehensive. Moreover, by simply incorporating the definition of the term as contained in ~ection 70.120 the Legislature evi denced an intent to exclude the balance of the provisions or Chapter 70 insofar as they relate to rural resettlement or rehabilitation agreements from consideration in ascertaining the meaning to be ascribed to the term "political subdivision" . It follows, therefore, that the question to be determined is \1hether a county library district established under Chapter 182 io an ''agency or unit of this state wh.ich now is • • * authorized to levy taxes or empowered to cause taxes to be levied. " Section 182.010, RSMo 1959, provides for the creation of a county library district, a unit distinct and separate from the county. Excluded from such districts are those municipalities \'thich have established their own municipal libraries . The district is created by the majority vote of the voters of the district rather than the voters or the county. So too, the tax rate is voted on and must be approved by the votera of such district. A brief revie\·1 of the applicaole statutes makes it clear to us that a county llbrary district is a political subdivision within the meaning of the te~ as used in Chapter 67. Seetion 182. 010, RSMo 1959, specifically provides for the creation of a library district. Prior to its amendment 1n 1955 this section specifically provided that the county library district "shall be a body corporate and lalOl'ln as such'* . Although thio language is not in the amended section, there is no change in the law, inasmuch as Section 182.070 as amended by the laws of 19~5 specifically provides that the district is a body corporate. - 3- Mr. Paxton P. Price Hence, there can be no question but that the county library district is a public corporation separate and apart from the county i tself. It is an agency or unit of the state for the purpose or providing the educational benefits to be derived from a free public library. Section 182. 010, RSMo 1959, provides that the voters in the county library district may vote for a mill tax for a county library and for an increase in such tax. Section 182.020 provides that 1f a majority of the votes cast in the district is in favor of the proposed tax, then the tax specifi ed shall be levied and collected from year to year. The tax so authorized by the voters of the district may be reconsidered at an election of said district held at least five years after the district has been established. Sect i on 182. 100 provides means whereby the district may vote upon the question of whether or not a library building should be erected and a tax levied therefor. Section 182.105 which authorizes the voters of a district to pass upon the question of issuing bonds for the purchasing of grounds and erection or public library buildings specifically provides that before incurring any such indebtedness the county library board shall provide for a tax sufficient to pay the interest and principal or such indebtedness. The fore- going provisions clearly authorize the voter s of the district to cause taxes to be levied for the various purposea and functions of operati.ng the l ibrar:r district. In some circumstances the sub~ss1on of such issue to the voters is caused by the action of the library board, which is expressly declared to be in exclusive control of the property and affairs or the district. Inasmuch as it is required by the statute that the voters of the district as such must approve the levy of the tax, this can only mean that the district itself causes such taxes to be levied. It is true that the district has no authority to levy taxes for library purposes, inasmuch as only the county court can do so. However, in detemining whether the "district" is empowered to cause taxes to be levied, there is no reasonable basis for attempting to distinguish between the "district" as such and the voters of the district. Obviously, a "district" can act only through people, and the voters of the district are in truth and in fact such district for the purpose of dete~ning whether the district is nempowered to cause taxes to be levied" . -4- Mr. Paxton P. Price In State ex rel Ben(lon v. Union Electric Co . , Mo. Sup . , 220 SW2d 1, Zi, the Supreme Court en bane referred to'\he tact of the district • s lawfully voting the tax. 11 In our opinion, therefore, a county library district established under the provisions of Chapter 182, RSMo 1959, is a "political subdivision" within the meaning of' that term as used in Chapter 67 RSMo, 1961 Cum. o'upp. , and therefore is required to comply with said chapter respect ing the preparation and submission or budgets. e next consider whether city libraries under Section 182. 140 to 182. 301 are political subdivisions an that term is defined 1n Section 70. 120 and by reason thereof required to prepare budgets by Chapter 67, RSMo 1961 Cum. Supp. Section 182.140, RSMo 1961 Cum. Supp. appl1oable to cities containing more than five thousand and less than six hundred thousand 1nhabi tants provides in paragraph 1 that a free public library established under said section "shall be a body corporate, and known as such 11 • The proceeds of the tax levied for library purposes by the voters as well as other moneys of the library are required by the statute to be kept in the city treasury separate and apart from other moneys of the city, and disbursed by the proper city officer only upon properly authenticated warrants of the city lil'rary board of trustees. Paragraph 2. To the same effect is paragraph 4, Section 182. 200 RSMo 1959. That section also provides that the library board of trustees'ahall have the exclusive control or the expenditure of all moneys collected to the credit of the library fund, and of the construction of any library building, and of the supervision, care and custody of the grounds, rooms or buildings constructed, leased, or set apart for that purpose". Paragraph 5 of said section grants add! tional powers to the board "as a body corporate 11 • The legislative intent is clearly manifested to treat city free publie libraries as public corporations separate and independent of the cities in \•lhich they have been established. The cities are \·tithout any power \t~hatever to exercise control over the funds of the library# all such control being co~tted to the library boards. While it is true that Section 182.140, prior to its amendment in 1955, did not in terms refer to t he -5- Mr. Paxton P. Price library as a 11body corporate" as does the more recent statute, it is our view that when all of the statutes are read as a whole the legislative intent is manifested to create a body corporate with respect to the library. That the legislature deemed city libraries to be units comparable to county library districts is evidenced by t he references in Section 182.030 to an existing municipal library district' . I nasmuch as no statute of which we are aware ever previously referred t o the city library as a municipal li rary "d.1str1ct' 1 , it is evident that the legislature undoubtedly believed that such city li raries were in fact li brary districts. The mere fact that the establishment or such city libraries and the approval of a tax therefor is to oe sub~tted to the voters of the city does ~ot militate against our view. County library dist ricts do not necessarily comprehend an entire county, so that the statute could not very well require a vote of all the voters of the county. Hence, the matter would be submitted t~.. the vote or those who resided 1th1n the territorial limlts of the dlstrict as such. On the other hand, with respect to city 11bt·ar1ea they are for the use and benefit of the entire city, ~o part thereof being excluded from the territorial l~t of the aren oervcd JY the llbrary. Hence, the voters of the citJ are, in truth anc.. in fact, the voter·s of the c.1ty library corporation or "district' • There is no mag~ c in the use of the word 'district'' aa applied to libraries. A "district'' 1a simply a defined portion of a state, county, or municipality for administrative, electoral or other purposes. The term is descriptive of the territory within t'lhich specific authority is exercised for certain statutory purposes. ~then the voter s of the city authorize the library and approve the tax they do so in their capacit J as voters or the city library ''diatrl.ct ·• I n ..Jtate ex rel carpenter v, City of st. Louie, Mo . Sup. , 2 Sh2d 713, it was held that a public 11urary is an educational 1nst1t~t1on over ~h1ch the state may exercise local contz~l, and that it is not a matter of purely municipal concern. By the Liorary Act, the legislature ~zas held to assume authority to promote education in localities throughout the state oy means other than through the instrumentality of schools. In our view, therefore, a city library established pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 182 io at the very least an agency of the state for educational purposes. It 1·ms said in the Carpenter -6- Mr. Paxton P. Price case, "Education is not limited to schools and 1t is within the control of the General Assembly~ in the exercise of the State's pol1ce ~owers to provide for other educational agencies • • • . As a state policy., the General Assembly has assumed control or public free libraries as educational institutions. That is a legislative determination that they are a matter of state e<moern. As we have pointed out, the library functions through an independent board as a body corporate, which has exclus1ve control over the expenditure or all moneys constituting the library fund . The Board is not accountable to the city authorities, who must make all pa~ents out of the fund upon proper warrants of the board. ln our view, therefore, ~ch city libraries are agencies or the state and are "empowered to cause taxes to be levied" . 'l'he municipal authorities as such have no power to levy the taxes until they are authorized to do so by the proper vote of those upon whom the burden of the tax levy would fall - the voters within the territorial l~ts served by the library. These libraries, thererore, come within the clear intent or the definition contained in Section 70.120 RSMo 1959, as agencies of the state "empowered to cause taxes to be leviedtt , and therefore are political subdivisions subJec t to the previsions of Chapter 67. As we have stated above, the legislative intent manifested in Chapter 67 is to broaden as far as possible the requirements that all agencies or units of the state prepare budgets. If the statute be construed to apply to county library districts but not to city libraries, the result in our view would be absurd and contrary to the legislative purpose. There is no essential difference in the powers, duties and functions or county library districts and city libraries. The board ot each such library has exclusive control over the expenditure of library funds. We can conceive of no possible legislative purpose which would be served by re~u~r1ng that only county library districts prepare budgets and that oi ty libraries be under no obligation to do so. Inasmuch as the city authorities have no power over the library fund, the result would be thatreither the city nor the city library board would be required to prepare a budget for the library, whe.reas under identical circumstances the county -7- Kr. Paxton P. Price library board would be compelled to do so, In our opin~on, Chapter 67 ie equally applicable to both county and city libraries which are governed by Sectione 182,010 to 182, 301 , I t follows that such city libraries are political subdivisions w1 thin the meatU.ng of Section 70. 120 and required to prepare budgets as required by Chapter 67, RSIIo, 1901 Cum. Supp, In arriving at our conclusion, we have not overlooked the statement of our Supraae Court en bane in State ex ~1 Board of Directors or St, Louie Public Libpry v,: D!Yer,4 Si2d So4, 606t "Of course, the Library is not a polit- ical subdivision of the State under the definition or Sec, 15, art, X ot the Constitution (or any other definition); but we do not think that determines the matter as the City contenda,n What was sa1d in that case must necesaar11J' be read 1n the light of the question for decision, As was said in State ex rel BixbY v, City ot St, Louis, 241 Jlo, 231, 145 8W 861, 803* "The language used bJ' a Judge in his opinion is to be interpreted 1n the light ot the taota and issues held in Judgment 1n the concrete case pre- cisel,- as 1n ever.y human document • • • It would be a wide and very mischievous departure from correct canons ot interpretation to disconnect gene~l language from the issues and taets ot a given case and to apply that general language mechanicallJ' or autamaticallJ' to the different facta and different issues of another easeJ tor the sense BlUSt be l1m1 ted aocorc:i1ng as the subJect requires, the words take color from their context," The Dwyer ease involved the right of the library to a share in the intangible taxes retumed by the Director of Revenue to the City of St, Louis. The question f or determina- tion in that case was stated by the Court as tollowa• -8- Mr. Paxton P. Price "'l'be question involved is whether Sections 4 and 15, art . X, 1945 Constitution, Mo. R.S.A., prevents these amounts from going to the Library Fund. " Hence, \then the Court was considering thether the library was a political subdivision, its parenthetical rererence to "any other definition" meant only any derinition which might be applicable to the question for determination in that case. Obviously, the Court did not search through the statute books to ascertain whether any of the many defini tions of political sub~1vis1on might apply to city libraries, because no such question was before the Court. It 1s equally obvious that the Court did not have before it any question comparable to that here involved, namely whether the 1961 legislative intent manifest 1n Chapter 67 was to include city libraries as amol'l8 those agencies or units of the state which should be required to prepare budgets . CONCLUSION It 1s the opinion of this office that both county library districts and city libraries established under Chapter 182, RSMo 1959, are required to prepare annual budgets under the provisions of Chapter 67 1 Cum. Supp. 1961 (Senate CoBBdttee Subst~tute f or Senate Bill 1713 7lst General Assembly) . This op~nion, which I hereby approve, was p1~pared by my aesistQ.nts 1 Mr. Gordon Siddens and Mr. J oseph Nessenfeld. JO : Jlh Yours very truly~ THOMAS J . EKawroN Attorney General