Alexander v. City of Tacoma

Citations

• 35 Wash. 366
• 77 P. 686
• 1904 Wash. LEXIS 457

Syllabus

<p>Municipal Corporations — Local Improvements — Assessments — Hearing on Objections — Promise of City to Give Notice of Adjournment. Where proceedings are instituted before a city council to reassess property for local improvements and, pending ■a hearing thereon, adjournments are taken, and the city officials promise an objector to give notice of the time to he thereafter set for the hearing, the promise relates only to the pending proceeding, and not to a subsequent proceeding begun after the abandonment of the first.</p> <p>Same — Indefinite Adjournment — Right to Rely on Promise of Notice. A property owner objecting to proceedings to reassess property has no right to rely upon an oral promise made by ■city officials that he would he given notice of the time to he thereafter set for hearing his objections, after the hearing had been adjourned to an indefinite date.</p> <p>Same — Objections to be Made Before City Council. Objections to assessment proceedings not going to tbe jurisdiction must be made before tbe city council on the hearing pending the confirmation of the proceedings.</p> <p>Same — Objections Not Going to Jurisdiction — Waiver. Objections to a local improvement assessment, that it was made without regard to benefits, that it exceeded the actual cost, that it included the cost of future repairs, and exceeded the benefits, do not go to the jurisdiction of the council to make a reassessment under the act of 1893, and are waived if not made before the city council.</p> <p>Same — Constitutional Law — Due Process — Promise of Notice of Hearing Objections. The fact that a property owner was lulled into security by a promise of city officials to give him notice of the time to be fixed for a hearing upon his objections to an assessment for local improvements does not deprive him of his property without due process of law, where he had no right to rely upon the promise.</p>