Lewis v. City of Seattle

Citations

• 28 Wash. 639
• 69 P. 393
• 1902 Wash. LEXIS 530

Syllabus

<p>MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS-STREET IMPROVEMENTS-REASSESSMENTS -PROCEDURE.</p> <p>The faGt that the act relating to reassessments for the purpose of paying the costs of local improvements (Laws of 1893, p. 226), declares in §§ 1 and 2 thereof that the city council shall by ordinance order and make the reassessments does not require the amount of the assessments charged against each lot to be fixed in the first instance by the city council, since the same act directs the board of public works or other proper authority of such city or town to make a new assessment roll in an equitable manner with reference to benefits received -and certify the same to the city council, and by § 5 of the act it is provided that the council shall appoint a time for hearing objections to such assessment and shall have power to correct', confirm or set it aside.</p> <p>SAME-INVALIDITY OF CHARTER PROVISIONS-METHOD PROVIDED BY STATUTE.</p> <p>The fact that the system for assessing property for local improvements provided by the charter and ordinances of a city was unconstitutional and void would not render nugatory a reassessment made under Laws 1893, p. 226, which requires the public authorities to proceed “as near as may be in accordance with the law in force at the time such reassessment is made,” since the reassessment act of 1893 furnishes a complete scheme for a reassessment and § 10 of the act provides a city may proceed either under the act or Under its charter, thus providing an ample scheme, in spite of the invalidity of the city “law in force.”</p> <p>SAME-IMPROVEMENTS COMPLETED IN TWO DIVISIONS.</p> <p>The fact that after a street improvement was begun a portion of it was stopped by injunction, and the improvement of two of the intermediate blocks of the street was discontinued, would not invalidate a reassessment for the completed portions which apportioned the charges as if the improvement were continuous, if the charge made against each lot' was according to the benefits receive