Ark. Code Ann. § 14-92-238 (2026)
Lien for preliminary expenses
- In case, for any reason, the improvement contemplated by any suburban improvement district organized under this subchapter is not made, the preliminary expense shall be a first lien upon all the land in the district and shall be paid by a levy of a tax thereon upon the assessed value for county and state taxation.
- The levy shall be made by the chancery court of the county and shall be collected by a receiver to be appointed by the court.
History. Acts 1941, No. 41, § 22; A.S.A. 1947, § 20-722.
Case Notes
Constitutionality.
This section is not unconstitutional because it does not provide that each landowner be served with personal notice of the proceeding to determine the district's preliminary expenses, since no such notice is necessary; in a dispute between an improvement district and its creditors, the district's board of commissioners represents the district. Harrill v. Board of Comm'rs, 282 Ark. 348, 668 S.W.2d 538 (1984).
Jurisdiction.
This section is not invalid as conferring jurisdiction on the chancery court to levy a tax since the chancellor is not vested with any discretion in the levy of the tax; the chancery court has jurisdiction to determine the preliminary expense because it is a first lien on the land, a matter traditionally within the jurisdiction of a court of equity; but, once the amount of the district's debt for preliminary expenses has been determined, the computation of the tax is merely a matter of distributing the burden over the total assessed value of the property within the district. Harrill v. Board of Comm'rs, 282 Ark. 348, 668 S.W.2d 538 (1984).
Notice.
Where landowners did not show that their position differed in any pertinent respect from that of other landowners who contested assessment of benefit and, moreover, their petition to intervene and their proposed complaint were considered at a hearing at which they were specifically given the opportunity to proffer whatever proof they may have had and they presented no evidence to show that the absence of personal notice prejudiced them in any way, they had notice and an opportunity to be heard, so personal notice to each landowner was not required. Harrill v. Board of Comm'rs, 282 Ark. 348, 668 S.W.2d 538 (1984).
Preliminary Expenses.
Judgment was reversed and the case was remanded in engineer's breach of contract case against defendant improvement district because the trial court had to determine the portion of compensatory damages awarded that qualified as “preliminary expenses” and, hence, were subject to a tax levy against the improvement district's land. Perkins v. Cedar Mt. Sewer Improvement Dist. No. 43, 360 Ark. 50, 199 S.W.3d 667 (2004).
Although all of the work performed by an engineer was preliminary to the construction phase of a sewer improvement project, the engineer had yet to complete all of the work required by the contract; once the construction began and the contract was completed, the preliminary expenses under this section would merge into the general cost of the improvement. Perkins v. Cedar Mt. Sewer Improvement Dist. No. 43, 360 Ark. 50, 199 S.W.3d 667 (2004).
Protests.
Every landowner is given the opportunity to protest when his land is assessed for general taxation; a second opportunity need not be given for them to protest valuations for suburban improvement districts pursuant to this section. Harrill v. Board of Comm'rs, 282 Ark. 348, 668 S.W.2d 538 (1984).