ÿWPCð Ó›pæeu [Ê" +J xÕ™Óˆ@BP„~GÕŸm`|ki–ñðQŽÌî©/ß;x˜ÿy4Ú¤ ïDw··ÃçË •£~G§yï 25„öCBø?ÔÑÌø„ŒsZ€2àòÛ lë}ñO±Ì pLÕô/B2rŒXÉv„7ÇÄVLõUë:¸’»“tT(y³DÕì$Ö¦øòÎÜ,‹B/w,¢ !úò§eûibýáªváq!™µ7Τ<Qg$¢”X®H.󘔫('À û”zZƦ:‹‰Kâ{Ikþu¿f?E,Z??ÁOäÚÎØ¶eNÆæ€V¶ÝÇ_óàÁÐ[–Â…ÍÀcO‚VÁj¡bbÁLE`Þ>´ÝQÒyüË¡jöæêpÜaFSuÝŒÏ9ÂINÎÙ]êp…q´K-¥C¡èuT‰™€÷©5Àä'yËÒŠêú¯Ûm¦”;¨¦fÎðèhöx¡}¬$cw ¢‚¶éÞ=¹ONw5 ÚŽë(5@ñxÝ7b#Á\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ U N· w 4 z Ò— i x mz 0D‘ ÆÕ Æ› Æa Æ'UNíN;ò=l/E›U @¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥¥båååååååååååååååååååååååååååååååååååå 0ëíííí BØØ 0¤õ D3™ D-Ì 0Kùù ASDÆ— 0¤] 0D A«E˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 5eÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»Ht)L (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regularö~ì(,À œ ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5&Öd9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular èÝ ƒR ñ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€XIX»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡XIXXXIÔÔ‡ôÎJòXXIÔThe€trial€court€dismissed€the€plaintiffs€claim€against€Bradley€Building€L.L.C.€and€the€plaintiffs€did€not€appealÐ ° Ðthe€dismissal€of€that€claim.€€Accordingly,€Bradley€Building€L.L.C.€is€not€a€party€to€this€appeal.Ô#†ôÎJòòôÎJ~#ÔÔ#†XIXòôÎJ#Ô bÝ ƒR ñ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€XIX»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€XIXXXIÔÔ€ôÎJòXXIÔA€ð ðphysician„hospital€organizationðð€(PHO)€is€an€organization€formed€by€a€hospital€and€local€physicians€forÐ ° Ðthe€purpose€of€marketing€and€delivering€health€care€services€to€patients€covered€by€managed€care€organizations.€Ð tÄ ÐContrary€to€statements€made€in€the€opinion€of€the€Court€of€Appeals,€€OHA€was€not€involved€at€all€in€the€medical€officeÐ 8ˆ Ðbuilding€project. (ÖÃ9 Z‹(Times New Roman - ù-(|G2 ñ$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€U»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€XIX»»Ô d(|3x$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€U»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3x$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€U»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€U»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€¼U»»»ÔÔ€¼U»»¼UÔà@7 7 ìàIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@””$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEˆÐ  Ðà@«« ìà(HEARD€AT€NASHVILLE)ˆÐ Ô$ Ðà@††"ìàJune€2000€SessionˆÐ æ6 ÐÔ‡XIX»¼UÔà@ìì*ìàˆÌò òÔ#†¼U»XXI»#ÔÓ  ÓCLEVELAND€SURGERY€CENTER,€L.P.€òòet€al.óó€v.€BRADLEY€COUNTYÐ ä 4 ÐMEMORIAL€HOSPITAL,€òòet€alóó.Ô‡XIX»¼UÔó óÐ ø H ÐÓÓÌà@  ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Bradley€CountyˆÐ ø H Ðà@µ µ ìàNo.€97„196€€€€Earl€Henley,€ChancellorˆÐ ä 4  ÐÌÌà@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<§` A߈Ð ¨ø  ÐÌà@  ìàNo.€E1998„00347„SC„R11„CV€„€Filed€August€25,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_ԈР£ó  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<z` AßÐ {Ë Ðó óÌÔ#†¼U»XXI‘#ÔÔ€XIX»¼UÔThe€plaintiffs/appellees,€private€health€care€providers,€brought€a€declaratory€judgment€action€allegingÐ vÆ Ðthat€the€defendants/appellants€were€violating€Article€II,€ðð€29€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution€whichÐ b² Ðprecludes€any€ð ðCounty,€City€or€Townðð€from€either€giving€or€loaning€its€credit€to€any€private€personÐ Nž Ðor€private€business€or€becoming€a€stockholder€with€others€in€a€private€company€unless€an€electionÐ :Š Ðis€held€and€the€qualified€voters€of€the€county,€city€or€town€approve€by€a€three„fourths€majority€of€theÐ &v Ðvotes€cast€the€giving€or€loaning€of€credit€or€owning€of€stock.€€The€trial€court€found€that€theÐ b Ðdefendants€were€in€violation€of€the€constitutional€provision€and€issued€an€injunction€to€precludeÐ þN Ðfuture€activities€that€would€violate€the€constitutional€provision.€€The€Court€of€Appeals€affirmed€theÐ ê: Ðtrial€courtððs€finding€that€the€defendants€had€violated€Article€II,€ðð€29,€but€slightly€modified€theÐ Ö& Ðinjunction.€€We€granted€permission€to€appeal€to€determine€whether€Article€II,€ðð€29€applies€to€quasi„Ð Â Ðgovernmental€entities€that€do€not€have€the€power€to€levy€taxes.€€For€the€reasons€that€follow,€weÐ ®þ Ðconclude€that€the€constitutional€provision€is€to€be€construed€literally€to€apply€only€to€counties,€citiesÐ šê Ðor€towns€and€that€it€does€not€apply€to€quasi„governmental€entities€that€do€not€have€the€power€to€levyÐ †Ö Ðtaxes.€€Accordingly,€the€judgments€of€the€trial€court€and€Court€of€Appeals€are€reversed€and€summaryÐ r  Ðjudgment€is€granted€in€favor€of€the€defendants.Ð ^!®  ÐÌò òÓ  ÓTenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€Appeal€by€Permission;€Judgment€of€the€Court€of€Appeals€Reversed;Ð 6#†" ÐCase€Remandedó óÐ "$r# ÐÓó ÓÌòòFrank€F.€Ô_ÔDrowotaÔ_Ô,€III,€óó€J.,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòE.€Riley€Anderson,€C.J.,Ð ú%J!% ÐÔ_ÔAdolphoÔ_Ô€A.€Birch,€Jr.,€Janice€M.€€Holderóó€and€òòWilliam€M.€Barkeróó,€JJ.,€joined.Ð æ&6"& ÐÌDan€H.€Elrod,€G.€Brian€Jackson,€and€David€L.€Johnson,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,Ð ¾($( ÐBradley€County€Memorial€Hospital.Ð ª)ú$) ÐÌDavid€J.€Cocke,€Memphis,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Ocoee€Health€Alliance.Ð ‚+Ò&+ ÐÌWilliam€H.€West,€Nashville,€Tennessee€and€Buddy€B.€Presley,€Jr.,€Chattanooga,€Tennessee,€for€theÐ Z-ª(-ý' Ðappellees,€Cleveland€Surgery€Center,€L.P.€and€Ocoee€Physical€Therapy,€Incorporated.Ð ° ÐÌWilliam€B.€Hubbard€and€William€Penny,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€€for€amici€curiae,€Tennessee€HospitalÐ ˆØ ÐAssociation€and€Hospital€Alliance€of€Tennessee,€Incorporated€Ð tÄ ÐÌà@66'ìàò òOPINIONó óˆÐ L œ ÐÌà  àThe€plaintiffs/appellees,€Cleveland€Surgery€Center,€L.P.€(ð ðCleveland€Surgeryðð)€and€OcoeeÐ $ t ÐPhysical€Therapy,€Incorporated€(ð ðOPTðð)€are€private€independent€health€care€providers€operating€inÐ  ` ÐBradley€County.€€The€defendant/appellant€Bradley€County€Memorial€Hospital€(ð ðBradley€Memorialðð)Ð ü L  Ðis€a€quasi„governmental€entity€created€by€the€General€Assembly€in€1947€to€provide€health€careÐ è 8  Ðservices€to€residents€of€Bradley€County€and€the€surrounding€area.€€òòSeeóó€1947€Tenn.€Priv.€Acts€846.€Ð Ô$  ÐPursuant€to€the€private€act€as€originally€enacted€and€as€subsequently€amended,€Bradley€MemorialÐ À  Ðis€governed€by€an€autonomous€Board€of€Directors,€the€members€of€which€are€selected€by€the€BradleyÐ ¬ü  ÐCounty€Commission,€the€City€of€Cleveland€Commission,€and€the€Bradley€County€Medical€Society,Ð ˜è  Ða€private€association€of€physicians.€€òòId.óó€at€ðð€12€(as€amended€by€1976€Tenn.€Priv.€Acts€291,€ðð€1;€1989Ð „Ô  ÐTenn.€Priv.€Acts€46€ðð€1;€1993€Tenn.€Priv.€Acts€22€ðð€1).Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àThis€lawsuit€began€when€Cleveland€Surgery€and€OPT€filed€a€complaint€for€a€declaratoryÐ H˜ Ðjudgment€asserting€that€Bradley€Memorial€was€violating€Article€II,€ðð€29€of€the€TennesseeÐ 4„ ÐConstitution€by€participating€with€defendant€Bradley€Building€Ô_ÔL.L.C.Ô_Ô׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€in€the€development€of€aÐ  p Ðmedical€office€building€adjoining€the€hospital€and€by€participating€with€defendant/appellant€OcoeeÐ  \ ÐHealth€Alliance€(ð ðOHAðð)€in€the€creation€of€a€physician„hospital€organization.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€medical€officeÐ øH Ðbuilding€would€have€been€owned€by€private€developers€with€Bradley€Memorial€leasing€the€buildingÐ ä4 Ðand€then€subleasing€the€office€space€to€physicians€and€others.€The€physician„hospital€organization,Ð Ð  ÐOHA,€would€have€been€structured€as€a€non„profit€mutual€benefit€corporation€with€roughly€fiftyÐ ¼  Ðpercent€(50%)€of€the€membership€interest€held€by€Bradley€Memorial€and€fifty€percent€(50%)€heldÐ ¨ø Ðby€individual€physicians.€€OHA€was€designed€and€created€to€market€the€services€of€BradleyÐ ”ä ÐMemorial€and€its€physicians€as€a€network€of€providers.€€As€previously€stated,€by€their€complaint€theÐ €Ð Ðplaintiffs€sought€a€declaration€that€Bradley€Memorialððs€participation€in€these€projects€violated€thatÐ l¼ Ðportion€of€Article€II,€ðð€29€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution€which€provides:€Ð X ¨ ÐÌà8  àBut€the€credit€of€no€County,€City€or€Town€shall€be€given€or€loaned€to€or€in€aid€of€anyÐ 0"€  Ðperson,€company,€association€or€corporation,€except€upon€an€election€to€be€first€heldÐ #l! Ðby€the€qualified€voters€of€such€county,€city€or€town,€and€the€assent€of€three„fourth€ofÐ $X" Ðthe€votes€cast€at€said€election.€€Nor€shall€any€county,€city€or€town€become€aÐ ô$D # Ðstockholder€with€others€in€any€company,€association€or€corporation€except€upon€aÐ ° Ðlike€election,€and€the€assent€of€a€like€majority.МìÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€plaintiffs€and€Bradley€Memorial€filed€cross„motions€for€summary€judgment.€The€trialÐ tÄ Ðcourt€granted€the€plaintiffsðð€motion€for€summary€judgment€and€filed€a€memorandum€opinion€inÐ `° Ðwhich€it€held€that€Bradley€Memorial€is€ð ðan€agent€and€arm€of€Bradley€Countyðð€and€found€that€byÐ L œ Ðparticipating€in€the€building€project€and€the€physician„hospital€organization,€Bradley€Memorial€hadÐ 8 ˆ Ðð ðexceeded€its€authority€by€lending€the€credit€of€the€County€and€joining€in€business€ventures€withÐ $ t Ðprivate€industry€in€violation€of€Article€II,€ðð€29,€of€the€Constitution€of€the€State€of€Tennessee,€andÐ  ` Ðthose€acts€are€deemed€ultra€vires.ðð€€Thereafter,€the€trial€court€entered€an€order€permanently€enjoiningÐ ü L  ÐBradley€Memorial€from€participating€in€a€wide€variety€of€activities€with€private€entities€that€mightÐ è 8  Ðdirectly€or€indirectly€implicate€the€credit€of€Bradley€County€or€constitute€an€ownership€in€a€privateÐ Ô$  Ðentity.Ð À  ÐÌà  àBradley€Memorial€and€OHA€appealed€the€trial€courtððs€judgment,€asserting€among€otherÐ ˜è  Ðthings€that€the€trial€courtððs€injunction€was€overly€broad€and€would€prohibit€the€hospital€fromÐ „Ô  Ðengaging€in€virtually€any€business€transaction€with€a€private€entity.€€In€resolving€the€issue€on€appeal,Ð pÀ Ðthe€Eastern€Section€Court€of€Appeals€relied€upon€a€decision€of€the€Western€Section€Court€ofÐ \¬ ÐAppeals,€òòEye€Clinic,€P.C.€v.€Jackson„Madison€County€Gen.€Hosp.óó,€986€S.W.2d€565€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð H˜ Ð1998)€(perm.€app.€denied€(Tenn.€1999)).€€The€Eastern€Section€interpreted€the€decision€in€òòEye€ClinicóóÐ 4„ Ðto€require€an€examination€of€the€private€acts€creating€Bradley€Memorial€to€determine€(1)€whetherÐ  p ÐBradley€Memorial€had€been€vested€with€the€power€to€levy€taxes;€(2)€whether€Bradley€MemorialÐ  \ Ðcould€compel€Bradley€County€to€invoke€its€taxing€power€to€make€payments€on€Bradley€MemorialððsÐ øH Ðindebtedness;€and€(3)€whether€Bradley€Memorial€could€obligate€Bradley€County€to€appropriate€fundsÐ ä4 Ðto€commence€hospital€operations€and€pay€operating€deficits.€€While€recognizing€that€BradleyÐ Ð  ÐMemorial€is€not€itself€vested€with€the€power€to€levy€taxes,€the€Court€of€Appeals€nonetheless€affirmedÐ ¼  Ðthe€trial€courtððs€finding€that€the€challenged€business€activities€of€Bradley€Memorial€were€barred€byÐ ¨ø ÐArticle€II,€ðð€29.€€In€so€holding,€the€Eastern€Section€Court€of€Appeals€stated:€Ð ”ä ÐÌà8  à[Ô_Ôc]onsideringÔ_Ô€the€funding€relationship€between€the€county€and€the€hospital€as€shownÐ l¼ Ðby€the€Bradley€County€Private€Acts,€along€with€the€overwhelming€evidence€that€theÐ X ¨ ÐCounty€has€been€fully€obligated€for€the€hospitalððs€debts,€we€find€that€the€partnershipÐ D!” Ðventures€engaged€in€by€[Bradley€Memorial]€and€[OHA]€in€this€case€amount€to€ultraÐ 0"€  Ðvires€acts€under€the€Bradley€County€Private€Acts€and€an€unconstitutional€applicationÐ #l! Ðof€the€Private€Act€Hospital€Act€of€1996,€under€Art.€II,€ðð€29€of€the€Constitution€ofÐ $X" ÐTennessee.Ðô$D #Ð Ð  ÐÌHowever,€in€spite€of€this€finding,€the€Court€of€Appeals€agreed€with€Bradley€Memorial€and€OHA€thatÐ Ì&"% Ðthe€injunction€issued€by€the€trial€court€was€too€broad.€€As€a€result,€the€Court€of€Appeals€modified€theÐ ¸'#& Ðtrial€courtððs€injunction€ð ðto€provide€that€Bradley€County€Memorial€Hospital€is€hereby€enjoined€fromÐ ¤(ô#' Ðentering€into€any€business€transactions€with€private€businesses€or€individuals€which€obligate€CountyÐ )à$( ÐFunds€unless€authority€is€granted€by€vote€of€the€citizens€of€Bradley€County€in€a€referendum,€asÐ |*Ì%) Ðrequired€by€law.ðð€Ð h+¸&* Їà  àThereafter,€Bradley€Memorial€and€OHA€filed€applications€for€permission€to€appeal€arguingÐ ° Ðthat€the€Court€of€Appeals€had€misinterpreted€the€òòEye€Clinicóó€decision€and€thereby€inappropriatelyÐ œì Ðextended€the€scope€of€the€constitutional€provision€at€issue€and€created€a€split€of€authority€betweenÐ ˆØ Ðthe€Eastern€and€Western€Sections€of€the€Court€of€Appeals.€€The€Tennessee€Hospital€AssociationÐ tÄ Ð(ð ðTHAðð),€a€voluntary€membership€organization€representing€approximately€ninety€percent€(90%)Ð `° Ðof€the€stateððs€hospitals,€and€the€Hospital€Alliance€of€Tennessee€(ð ðHATðð),€a€professional€associationÐ L œ Ðof€not„for„profit€community€hospitals,€filed€a€joint€amicus€curiae€brief€in€support€of€the€applicationsÐ 8 ˆ Ðfor€permission€to€appeal.€€We€granted€the€applications€for€permission€to€appeal€to€determine€whetherÐ $ t Ðthe€terms€ð ðCounty,€City€or€Townðð€which€appear€in€Article€II,€ðð€29€of€the€Tennessee€ConstitutionÐ  ` Ðencompass€quasi„governmental€entities€that€do€not€possess€the€power€to€levy€taxes.Ð ü L  Ðò òÌó óà  àIn€this€Court,€Bradley€Memorial,€OHA,€and€amici€curiae,€THA€and€HAT,€argue€that€ArticleÐ Ô$  ÐII,€ðð€29€should€be€narrowly€construed€to€apply€only€to€those€governmental€entities€to€which€theÐ À  ÐGeneral€Assembly€may€constitutionally€delegate€taxing€authority.€€Since€Bradley€Memorial€is€notÐ ¬ü  Ðan€entity€to€which€the€General€Assembly€may€constitutionally€delegate€taxing€authority,€theÐ ˜è  Ðappellants€and€amici€curiae€argue€that€Article€II,€ðð€29€does€not€apply€to€Bradley€Memorial.€€InÐ „Ô  Ðsupport€of€this€argument€the€appellants€and€amici€curiae€rely€upon€the€òòEye€Clinicóó€decision€whichÐ pÀ Ðthey€contend€was€misinterpreted€by€the€Court€of€Appeals€in€this€case.€€In€contrast,€the€appellees,Ð \¬ ÐCleveland€Surgery€and€OPT,€argue€that€the€Court€of€Appeals€correctly€interpreted€and€applied€theÐ H˜ ÐWestern€Sectionððs€decision€in€òòEye€Clinicóó.€€According€to€the€appellees,€the€second€and€third€sentencesÐ 4„ Ðof€Article€II,€ðð€29€apply€to€quasi„governmental€entities,€such€as€Bradley€Memorial,€that€are€arms€orÐ  p Ðagents€of€cities€or€counties,€which€have€access€to,€or€can€cause€the€use€of,€the€tax€funds€of€cities€orÐ  \ Ðcounties,€even€though€such€quasi„governmental€entities€do€not€have€and€cannot€constitutionally€beÐ øH Ðdelegated€the€power€to€tax.Ð ä4 ÐÌÔ‡XIXXXIÔà@ããìàòòò òArticle€II,€ðð€29:€Interpretationó óóóÔ#†XIXXXI9#ԈР¼  Ðà  àWhen€construing€a€constitutional€provision,€this€Court€must€ð ðgive€effect€to€the€intent€of€theÐ ¨ø Ðpeople€who€adopt[ed]€a€constitutional€provision.ðð€€òòGaskin€v.€Collinsóó,€661€S.W.2d€865,€867€(Tenn.Ð ”ä Ð1983)€(internal€quotations€omitted);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Martinóó,€940€S.W.2d€567,€570€(Tenn.€1997)€(ð ðItÐ €Ð Ðhas€long€been€held€in€this€state€that€provisions€of€the€constitution€are€to€be€given€effect€accordingÐ l¼ Ðto€the€draftersðð€intention€in€light€of€the€entire€document.ðð).€€These€intentions€are€reflected€in€theÐ X ¨ Ðterms€of€the€constitutional€provision,€and€unless€the€context€requires€otherwise,€terms€in€aÐ D!” Ðconstitution€must€be€given€their€ð ðððordinary€and€inherent€meaning.ðððð€òòGaskinóó,€661€S.W.2d€at€867Ð 0"€  Ð(quoting€òòState€v.€Phillipsóó,€159€Tenn.€546,€21€S.W.2d€4€(1929)).€€To€accomplish€that€end,€courts€mustÐ #l! Ðconstrue€constitutional€provisions€ð ðreasonably€in€light€of€the€practices€and€usages€that€were€well„Ð $X" Ðknown€when€the€provision€was€passed.ðð€€òòMartin€v.€Beer€Bd.óó,€908€S.W.2d€941,€947€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð ô$D # Ð1995);€òòState€ex€rel.€Witcher€v.€Bilbreyóó,€878€S.W.2d€567,€573€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1994)€(citing€òòAshe€v.Ð à%0!$ ÐLeechóó,€653€S.W2.d€398,€401€(Tenn.€1983);€òòPeay€v.€Nolanóó,€157€Tenn.€222,€230,€7€S.W.2d€815,€817Ð Ì&"% Ð(1928)).€€As€the€Court€of€Appeals€has€recognized,€Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà8  àArticulating€constitutional€principles,€like€any€other€interpretative€exercise,€may€beÐ )à$( Ðaided€by€referring€to€external€sources.€€A€state€constitution€does€not€exist€in€isolationÐ |*Ì%) Ðbut€rather€is€a€unique€historical€document.€€While€the€text€must€always€be€the€primaryÐ h+¸&* Ðguide€to€the€purpose€of€a€constitutional€provision,€we€should€approach€the€text€in€aÐ ° Ðprincipled€way€that€takes€into€account€the€history,€structure,€and€underlying€valuesÐ œì Ðof€the€document.€€Accordingly,€Tennesseeððs€courts€have€relied€upon€historicalÐ ˆØ Ðdocuments,€constitutional€convention€proceedings,€the€proposed€constitution€of€theÐ tÄ ÐState€of€Franklin,€other€similar€state€and€federal€constitutional€provisions,€andÐ `° Ðdecisions€from€other€jurisdictions€construing€similar€provisions.ÐL œÐ Ð  ÐÌòòMartinóó,€908€S.W.2d€at€947€(internal€footnotes€omitted).€€With€these€rules€of€construction€in€mind,Ð $ t Ðwe€will€proceed€to€consider€the€constitutional€provision€at€issue€in€this€case.Ð  ` ÐÌà  àArticle€II,€ðð€29€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution€provides€in€pertinent€part€as€follows:Ð è 8  ÐÌà8  àThe€General€Assembly€shall€have€power€to€authorize€the€several€counties€andÐ À  Ðincorporated€towns€in€this€State,€to€impose€taxes€for€County€and€CorporationÐ ¬ü  Ðpurposes€respectively,€in€such€manner€as€shall€be€prescribed€by€law;€and€all€propertyÐ ˜è  Ðshall€be€taxed€according€to€its€value,€upon€the€principles€established€in€regard€to€StateÐ „Ô  Ðtaxation.€€òòBut€the€credit€of€no€County,€City€or€Town€shall€be€given€or€loaned€to€or€inÐ pÀ Ðaid€of€any€person,€company,€association€or€corporation,€except€upon€an€election€toÐ \¬ Ðbe€first€held€by€the€qualified€voters€of€such€county,€city€or€town,€and€the€assent€ofÐ H˜ Ðthree„fourth€of€the€votes€cast€at€said€election.€€Nor€shall€any€county,€city€or€townÐ 4„ Ðbecome€a€stockholder€with€others€in€any€company,€association€or€corporation€exceptÐ  p Ðupon€a€like€election,€and€the€assent€of€a€like€majority.óó€Ð \Ð Ð  ÐÌ(Emphasis€added.)€€In€construing€the€terms€ð ðCounty,€City€or€Townðð€as€they€are€used€in€thisÐ ä4 Ðconstitutional€provision,€we€will€first€consider€the€conditions€and€concerns€which€prompted€adoptionÐ Ð  Ðof€this€constitutional€provision.€€During€the€early€part€of€the€nineteenth€century,€at€the€beginning€ofÐ ¼  Ðthe€industrial€revolution€and€increased€westward€expansion,€railroads€and€canals€were€viewed€asÐ ¨ø Ðcritical€modes€of€transportation.€€òòSeeóó€Stewart€E.€Sterk€&€Elizabeth€S.€Goldman,€òòControllingÐ ”ä ÐLegislative€Shortsightedness:€The€Effectiveness€of€Constitutional€Debt€Limitationsóó,€1991€Wis.€L.Ð €Ð ÐRev.€1301,€1306€(1991).€€Because€private€industry€was€unable€to€raise€the€capital€necessary€toÐ l¼ Ðcomplete€these€projects,€many€states€and€cities€borrowed€heavily€to€finance€these€improvement€andÐ X ¨ Ðtransportation€projects€and€issued€bonds€to€buy€stock€in€private€companies€or€guaranteed€loans€toÐ D!” Ðprivate€companies.€€òòId.óó€at€1306„08.€€Unfortunately,€many€of€these€public„private€ventures€failedÐ 0"€  Ðcausing€the€states€and€cities€to€lose€the€tax€money€they€had€invested€and€leaving€the€states€and€citiesÐ #l! Ðwith€a€burden€of€debt.€€òòId.óó€at€1308.€€As€a€result€of€these€failed€ventures,€between€the€years€1840€andÐ $X" Ð1855,€nineteen€states€enacted€constitutional€provisions€which€limited€the€ability€of€state€and€localÐ ô$D # Ðgovernments€to€incur€debt€and€extend€credit€to€private€businesses.€€òòId.óó€at€1309.€€The€reasonsÐ à%0!$ Ðprompting€adoption€of€such€provisions€has€been€described€as€follows:Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà8  àEarly€in€the€nineteenth€century€it€seems€to€have€been€the€general€practice€of€states€toÐ ¤(ô#' Ðencourage€the€building€of€railroads€by€permitting€the€state€or€a€subdivision€thereofÐ )à$( Ðto€purchase€stock€in€railroad€corporations,€to€issue€bonds€or€lend€credit€in€aid€ofÐ |*Ì%) Ðrailroads,€or€to€make€outright€donations€to€them.€€However,€due€to€the€large€numberÐ h+¸&* Ðof€insolvencies€of€railroads,€caused€by€frauds€or€economic€conditions,€states€andÐ ° Ðsubdivisions€thereof€found€themselves€largely€indebted,€and€were€themselvesÐ œì Ðoccasionally€insolvent€because€of€large€investments€in€such€enterprises.€€ThereforeÐ ˆØ Ða€reversal€of€policy€set€in.€€As€early€as€1851€Ohio€adopted€a€constitution€containingÐ tÄ Ða€provision€prohibiting€stock€subscriptions€or€other€forms€of€aid€to€corporations.€€InÐ `° Ðthe€ensuing€twenty„five€years€most€of€the€other€states€adopted€similar€provisions,Ð L œ Ðeither€prohibiting€aid€altogether€or€requiring€a€vote€of€the€people€before€aÐ 8 ˆ Ðsubscription€to€stock€or€other€sort€of€aid€could€be€made€or€extended.Ð$ tÐ Ð  ÐÌòòEye€Clinicóó,€986€S.W.2d€at€570€(quoting€Annotation,€òòConstitutional€or€Statutory€ProvisionsÐ ü L  ÐProhibiting€Municipalities€or€Other€Subdivisions€of€the€State€from€Subscribing€to,€or€AcquiringÐ è 8  ÐStock€of,€Private€Corporationsóó,€152€A.€L.€R.€495,€495„96€(1944)).€€Indeed,€in€considering€the€scopeÐ Ô$  Ðof€a€similar€provision€in€its€state€constitution,€the€Montana€Supreme€Court€observed:Ð À  ÐÌà8  àA€like€provision€is€found€in€the€Constitution€of€nearly€every€state€in€the€Union,€andÐ ˜è  Ðthe€reason€for€its€presence€is€not€difficult€to€discover.€€It€represents€the€reaction€ofÐ „Ô  Ðpublic€opinion€to€the€orgies€of€extravagant€dissipation€of€public€funds€by€counties,Ð pÀ Ðtownships,€cities,€and€towns€in€aid€of€construction€of€railways,€canals,€and€other€likeÐ \¬ Ðundertakings€during€the€half€century€preceding€1880,€and€it€was€designed€primarilyÐ H˜ Ðto€prevent€the€use€of€public€funds€raised€by€general€taxation€in€aid€of€enterprisesÐ 4„ Ðapparently€devoted€to€quasi€public€purposes,€but€actually€engaged€in€private€business.Ð pÐ Ð  ÐÌòòThaanum€v.€Bynum€Irr.€Dist.óó,€232€P.€528,€530€(Mont.€1925).Ð øH ÐÌà  àAdoption€of€constitutional€provisions€restricting€the€extension€of€public€credit€did€notÐ Ð  Ðbecome€prevalent€in€the€South€until€after€the€Civil€War.€€Stewart,€òòsupraóó,€at€1311.€€As€a€result€of€theÐ ¼  ÐCivil€War,€most€infrastructure€in€the€South€had€been€destroyed€including€railroads,€roadways,€canals,Ð ¨ø Ðand€bridges.€€òòId.óó€at€1310.€€To€rebuild€the€infrastructure,€southern€states€borrowed€money€andÐ ”ä Ðauthorized€large€bond€issues.€€òòId.óó€at€1311.€€In€addition,€Reconstruction€governments€in€the€SouthÐ €Ð Ðwere€said€to€have€incurred€debt€and€authorized€bond€issues€for€personal€gain.€€òòId.óó€€When€the€periodÐ l¼ Ðof€Reconstruction€ended,€many€southern€states€adopted€constitutional€provisions€limiting€theÐ X ¨ Ðextension€of€public€credit.€€òòId.óó€€Tennessee€is€a€clear€example€of€this€trend.€€Prior€to€1870,€Article€II,Ð D!” Ððð€29€consisted€of€only€one€sentence,€which€is€currently€the€first€sentence€of€the€section.€òòSeeóó€€òòEyeÐ 0"€  ÐClinicóó,€986€S.W.2d€at€570.€€The€second€and€third€sentences€of€the€provision,€which€are€at€issue€inÐ #l! Ðthis€appeal,€were€adopted€as€part€of€the€Constitution€of€1870€at€the€end€of€the€ReconstructionÐ $X" Ðgovernment€in€Tennessee€and€were€aimed€at€ending€the€abuses€that€occurred€during€Reconstruction.€Ð ô$D # ÐAs€one€author€explained:Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà8  àOn€the€subject€of€using€the€Stateððs€credit€to€aid€railroads,€turnpikes€and€otherÐ ¸'#& Ðððinternal€improvements,ðð€the€[1870]€Constitution€made€important€changes.€€Here€wasÐ ¤(ô#' Ðto€be€seen€a€strong€reaction€against€the€abuses€of€the€Brownlow€AdministrationÐ )à$( Ðwhich€was€in€power€from€1865€to€1869.€€There€was€also€evidence€of€a€generalÐ |*Ì%) Ðòòlaissez„faireóó€spirit,€which€was€more€prevalent€at€this€time€than€during€the€framing€ofÐ h+¸&* Ðthe€First€and€Second€Constitutions.€Ð°Ð Ð  Ðà@  &ìà€.€.€.€.€ˆÐ œì ÐÌà8  àà ` àThe€effects€of€the€provisions€were:€(1)€The€State€might€not€thereafter€ownÐ tÄ Ðbanks€in€whole€or€in€part,€nor€invest€in€the€capital€stock€of€private€banks€or€otherÐ `° Ðprivate€companies,€as€had€been€frequently€done€before;€(2)€the€political€subdivisionsÐ L œ Ðwere€not€absolutely€forbidden€to€use€their€credit€in€aid€of€private€enterprises,€but€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðthree„fourths€vote€required€for€this€action€was€a€powerful€limitation;€(3)€railroadsÐ $ t Ðwhich€previously€had€been€loaned€State€bonds€and€were€in€default€on€the€paymentsÐ  ` Ðwhich€were€supposed€to€provide€the€State€with€funds€to€pay€the€interest€and€retire€theÐ ü L  Ðprincipal€of€such€bonds,€could€no€longer€expect€the€State€to€continue€to€refund€suchÐ è 8  Ðbonds€at€maturity,€but€might€instead€expect€seizure€and€sale€by€the€State.ÐÔ$ Ð Ð  ÐÌJames€E.€Thorogood,€òòA€Financial€History€of€Tennessee€Since€1870óó€19„20€(1940);€òòsee€alsoóó€Lewis€L.Ð ¬ü  ÐLaska,€òòA€Legal€and€Constitutional€History€of€Tennessee,€1772„1972óó,€6€Mem.€St.€L.€Rev.€563,€640„41Ð ˜è  Ð(1976)€(ð ðLegislative€power€was€limited€in€several€respects,€however€as€a€result€of€the€experiencesÐ „Ô  Ðof€Reconstruction.€€The€state€was€forbidden€to€make€loans€to€or€to€own€stock€in€any€bank€orÐ pÀ Ðcorporation.€€This€provision€ended€one€of€the€nobler€experiments€of€Tennessee€legal„financialÐ \¬ Ðdevelopment,€namely,€public€financial€support€of€privately€sponsored€ððinternal€improvements,Ð H˜ Ðparticularly€banking€ventures.€.€.€.€€Next,€no€more€state€bonds€could€be€issued€to€defaulting€railroads.€Ð 4„ ÐThis€provision€was€aimed€at€Brownlowððs€fiscal€policies€which€had€saddled€Tennesseans€with€a€debtÐ  p Ðthat€was€not€compromised€until€1883.ðððð).Ð  \ ÐÌà  àHaving€considered€the€historical€background€and€origin€of€the€constitutional€provision€andÐ ä4 Ðthe€concerns€which€prompted€its€adoption,€we€agree€with€the€appellants€that€the€terms€ð ðCounty,€CityÐ Ð  Ðor€Townðð€in€the€second€and€third€sentences€of€Article€II,€ðð€29€should€be€given€their€ordinary€andÐ ¼  Ðinherent€meaning€and€should€not€be€interpreted€to€apply€broadly€as€the€Court€of€Appeals€in€this€caseÐ ¨ø Ðfound€and€as€the€appellees€assert€in€this€Court.€€In€our€view,€the€Western€Section€Court€of€Appeals€Ð ”ä Ðcorrectly€interpreted€these€terms€in€òòEye€Clinicóó€as€follows:Ð €Ð ÐÌà8  àThe€language€of€Section€29€suggests€that€the€drafters€intended€that€the€phrase,Ð X ¨ Ðð ðcounty,€city€or€town,ðð€be€confined€to€its€literal€meaning.€€The€first€sentence€ofÐ D!” ÐSection€29€empowers€the€General€Assembly€to€authorize€counties€and€towns€toÐ 0"€  Ðimpose€taxes.€€The€second€sentence€limits€the€ability€of€cities,€counties,€and€townsÐ #l! Ðto€lend€credit.€€The€second€sentence€begins€with€the€word,€ð ðbut.ðð€€The€third€sentence,Ð $X" Ðprohibiting€such€cities,€counties,€and€towns€from€co„owning€stock,€begins€with€theÐ ô$D # Ðword,€ð ðnor.ðð€€òòConsidering€these€three€sentences€together,€the€limitations€in€theÐ à%0!$ Ðsecond€and€third€sentences€plainly€modify€the€entities€described€in€the€first€sentence.€óóÐÌ&"%Ð Ð  ÐÌ986€S.W.2d€at€571€(emphasis€added).€We€agree€with€this€analysis€and€hold€that€the€drafters€of€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðconstitutional€provision€intended€that€the€terms€ð ðcounty,€city€or€townðð€in€Article€II,€ðð€29€be€givenÐ )à$( Ðtheir€literal€meaning€and€encompass€only€those€entities€to€which€the€General€Assembly€may€delegateÐ |*Ì%) Ðtaxing€authority€pursuant€to€the€first€sentence€of€the€constitutional€provision.€€In€our€view,€the€CourtÐ h+¸&* Ðof€Appeals€in€this€case€misinterpreted€the€decision€in€òòEye€Clinicóó.€€The€òòEye€Clinicóó€decision€does€notÐ ° Ðrequire€an€in„depth€analysis€of€the€private€acts€creating€and€governing€Bradley€Memorial.€€ApplyingÐ œì Ðthe€analysis€adopted€in€the€òòEye€Clinicóó€case,€which€in€our€view€is€the€correct€analysis,€theÐ ˆØ Ðconstitutional€provision€is€implicated€only€if€the€entity€lending€its€credit€or€owning€stock€in€a€privateÐ tÄ Ðcompany€is€a€county,€city,€or€town€to€which€the€General€Assembly€may€delegate€taxing€authority.€Ð `° ÐòòSeeóó€òòMetropolitan€Dev.€&€Housing€Agency€v.€Leechóó,€591€S.W.2d€427,€429€(Tenn.€1979)€(finding€thatÐ L œ Ðbonds€issued€by€the€housing€agency€did€not€violate€Article€II,€ðð€29);€òòFort€Sanders€Presbyterian€Hosp.Ð 8 ˆ Ðv.€Health€&€Educ.€Facilities€Bd.óó,€22€Tenn.€240,€250,€453€S.W.2d€771,€775€(1970)€(finding€that€bondsÐ $ t Ðissued€by€health€and€educational€facilities€board€did€not€violate€Article€II,€ðð€29);€òòWest€v.€IndustrialÐ  ` ÐDev.€Bd.óó,€206€Tenn.€154,€159,€332€S.W.2d€201,€203€(1960€(finding€that€bonds€issued€by€an€industrialÐ ü L  Ðdevelopment€board€did€not€violate€the€Article€II,€ðð€29).Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àApplying€this€analysis€to€the€facts€in€this€case,€it€is€clear€that€Bradley€Memorial€is€not€aÐ À  Ðcounty,€city,€or€town€subject€to€the€constitutional€prohibitions€regarding€lending€of€credit€and€stockÐ ¬ü  Ðownership€contained€in€the€second€and€third€sentences€of€Article€II,€ðð€29.€€Bradley€Memorial€simplyÐ ˜è  Ðis€not€an€entity€to€which€the€General€Assembly€may,€under€the€first€sentence€of€Section€29,€delegateÐ „Ô  Ðthe€authority€to€levy€taxes.€€In€òòLipscomb€v.€Deanóó,€69€(1€Lea)€Tenn.€546€(1878),€this€Court€held€thatÐ pÀ Ðthe€General€Assembly€may€not€delegate€the€power€to€levy€taxes€to€school€districts€or€civil€districtsÐ \¬ Ðbecause€these€entities€are€not€counties,€cities,€or€towns€within€the€meaning€of€Article€II,€ðð€29.€òòóó€€In€soÐ H˜ Ðholding,€the€òòLipscombóó€Court€noted€that€the€constitutional€convention€of€1870€rejected€an€amendmentÐ 4„ Ðthat€would€have€inserted€the€words€ð ðcivil€districtsðð€after€the€word€ð ðcountiesðð€in€Article€II,€ðð€29,€toÐ  p Ðgive€the€General€Assembly€power€to€authorize€civil€districts€to€levy€and€collect€taxes.€€òòSee€alsoóóÐ  \ ÐòòGibson€County€Special€Sch.€Dist.€v.€Palmeróó,€691€S.W.2d€544€(Tenn.€1985)(holding€that€the€GeneralÐ øH ÐAssembly€may€not€delegate€the€power€to€levy€taxes€to€a€special€school€district€because€the€specialÐ ä4 Ðschool€district€is€not€a€county,€city,€or€town€within€the€meaning€of€Article€II,€section€29).€€Since€theÐ Ð  ÐGeneral€Assembly€may€not€delegate€to€Bradley€Memorial€the€power€to€levy€taxes,€Bradley€MemorialÐ ¼  Ðis€not€a€county,€city,€or€town€within€the€meaning€of€the€constitutional€provision€and€the€lower€courtsÐ ¨ø Ðerred€in€holding€that€Bradley€Memorial€had€violated€Article€II,€ðð€29€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution.Ð ”ä ÐÌà@  %ìàò òòòConclusionóóó óˆÐ l¼ Ðà  àFor€the€reasons€herein€stated,€the€trial€court€and€the€Court€of€Appeals€erred€in€grantingÐ X ¨ Ðsummary€judgment€to€the€plaintiffs.€€Accordingly,€the€judgments€of€the€lower€courts€are€vacated€andÐ D!” Ðthe€injunctions€thereby€lifted.€€Summary€judgment€is€granted€in€favor€of€the€defendants,€BradleyÐ 0"€  ÐMemorial€and€OHA.€€Costs€of€this€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€appellees,€Cleveland€Surgery€and€OPT,Ð #l! Ðfor€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.Ð $X" ÐÌÌÌÔ‡XIXXXIÔÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à_______________________________________€Ð )à$( Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àFRANK€F.€Ô_ÔDROWOTAÔ_Ô,€III,€JUSTICEÔ#†XIXXXIˆ#Ôà Ð à