Harney v. Benson

Citations

• 113 Cal. 314
• 45 P. 687
• 1896 Cal. LEXIS 785

Syllabus

<p>Street Improvements—Construction of Sewer—Lack of Outlet — Jurisdiction of Municipal Board — Enforcement of Assessment —Failure to Protest.—It is the duty of a municipal board to provide means of disposing of the sewage of the city, and it is their province to determine whether sewers are needed, and what districts will be benefited thereby; and, if there can be no outlet provided into the ocean or some other permissible place, the board must dispose of it in some other mode, and may gather it for that purpose; and their determination as to the necessity of the construction of a sewer, and what district will be benefited by it, cannot be assailed in an action to enforce an assessment therefor, on the ground that no outlet was provided for the sewage, where no protest was made against the work on that ground before the board.</p> <p>Id.—Assessment in Proportion to Benefits — Presumption—Method of Calculation.—An assessment for a sewer will be presumed to have been made in proportion to benefits, and the superintendent of streets will be presumed to have done bis duty in distributing the burden as the statute requires, unless the assessment shows the contrary; and it is not necessary that the assessment should disclose his method of calculation; but, if the estimate of benefits appears to be rational, it is not for the court to determine whether it is the best.</p> <p>Id.—Conclusiveness of Assessment—Appeal to Board.—If the method of assessment adopted by the superintendent of streets in distributing the burden is wrong, the property owner must appeal to the hoard; and, in the absence of such appeal, the assessments made by him are conclusive, unless the board is wholly without jurisdiction, or the procedure has been departed from in some other manner.</p>