City Commission of City of Springfield v. Bethel Township
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
I
In case No. 81-881, Springfield sets forth six propositions of law for our consideration. Each questions a separate calculation of the BTA and, except as otherwise noted, each will be discussed separately herein.
A
In reviewing Springfield’s estimated total expenditures for 1976, the BTA noted that the sum of $540,448 was included in Springfield’s 1976 budget as a “Contingencies” account. The BTA held that this account was an “account for non-existent needs” and eliminated the same from Springfield’s 1976 disbursements. The BTA then treated this account as part of the unencumbered balance of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Grabler Manufacturing Co. v. KosydarOhio Supreme Court · 1973
- Board of County Commissioners v. Village of Willoughby HillsOhio Supreme Court · 1968
- Village of Waterville v. Spencer TownshipOhio Supreme Court · 1974
- City of Cleveland v. Budget CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1976
- City Commission of Springfield v. Bethel TownshipOhio Supreme Court · 1980
3Cited by4 opinions
- City of Canton v. Stark County Budget CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1988
- City of Cincinnati v. Budget CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1986
- City of Lima v. Allen County Budget CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1993
- Lima v. Allen Cty. Budget Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1993