Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1882-01-07
CITY ASSESSMENTS.

lilo Works Gets . Black Eye-The Front
by the Supreme Court-A Decision of
Interest to Every Property Owner In the
State.
We print bellows decision of the supreme
court which will be read with interest by all
property owners in the city. This is in the
Mackubin street assessment case, which has
been pending before the board of public works,
the district court and twice to the supreme
court.
The board of public works has been in the
habit OF confiniug assessments to the front
foot, regardless of the depth Of the property,
and many times without considering the dis
lance from the improvement.
Judge Simons declared in his opinion,
printed in the GLOBE of the 10th of April,
1881, in this very case, "The board of public
works avowedly and purposely abandoned the
statutory rule" of benefits.
In view Of the adverse decision OF the dis
trlct court, the city made o reassessment on
the same basis as before, and on this the mat
ter was taken to the supreme court.
The great interest felt in our city, in regard
to local assessments, is because of the billy
character of the ground, and the fact that
many owners are injured, or little benefited,
by grade, which they are under this rule OF
the board compelled to pay for, equally, with
lot which may be doubled in value by the
work In this case certain of the property
assessed is over half mile from the work.
Mr.. Beals, the attorney for the property
owners, has contested this matter vigorously,
and won at last The following is the opinion:
The State of Minnesota ex rel. John W.
Cunningham ct al, (named in judgment un
known, but property being that part of Mar
halls subdivision of block 81, Mackubin's
& Marshall's addition to St. Paul, being
within the line of Iglehart street if extended
through said block; (named in judgment as
unknowp) but property being that part of
Marshall's subdivision of block 81, Macku-
bins & Marshall's addition to st. Paul, lying
within the lines of Carroll street, if extended
through said block, REALTORS, VS.. The District
Court of Ramsy County, respondent.
OPINION.
Certiorari to the district court of Ramsy
county.
Proceedings were had for the grading Of
portion of Mackubin street In the city of st.
Paul The proceedings were conducted under
the provisions of special legislative enactments
relating to the making of such Improvements
in said city, and the levying of special assess
ments therefor. Tsp. laws 1874, oh. 1, as amend
ed by sp. laws 1875, CHI.
After preliminary proceedings, the regulari-
ty of which is not called in question, an assess
ment was made by the board ofpublic works,
by which the cost of making the improve
ments was charged upon the real property OF
the REALTORS, and upon other property front
ing upon the street, a part of which was
graded.
Such assessments having been paid only in
part, application was ma to the district
court on the part of the city, as provided in
such statutes for judgment against the lands
so charged for the amount of such unpaid as
sessments. Upon hearing upon such appli-
cation, Judgment was refused for reasons
which affected the validity of the assessment.
Thereupon the common council, as author
zed by such statutes, ordered new assess
ment by the board of public works, upon the
property as to which judgment had been de-
MED. Of its proportionate part
of the cost of such Improvements;
such reassessment having been made
ton was made to the district court for judg
ment, which was allowed and entered.
By this writ there has been brought before
us for review the question as to whether the
city was entitled to such judgment. A part
of the improvement for which these assess
ments were made, consisted in cutters, made
upon that part of the street which was
graded, and culvert at a point in the graded
part of the street.
"
seem to have been treated as a part of the
general work of grading the street; but the
cost of the culvert and of the cutters was as
certained separate from the cost of the grad
ing proper, and different apportionment
made of the cost OF the three items. 1t ap-
pears that so much of the cost of the grading
proper as had not been paid upon the former
assessment Qess the sum of 1913 was by the
assessment in question charged upon the
70 front;pn fha cfrpnf (ovnantin r
such property as had paid the assessment be-
fore made) along the whole of the graded por-
ton, and for considerable distance beyond
the charge being made upon all of this prop
erty equally in proportion to the extent of its
fronting upon the street.
1t appears that In addition to the assess
ment Of the cost OF the grading proper, the
cost of the cutters was assessed equally in
proportion to the frontage upon the street, up
IN the property Immediately AUDITING upon
that part of the street where the cutters
were laid, and that in the same
way the cost Of the culvert was charged upon
the property Immediately adjacent thereto.
1t is claimed on the part of the REALTORS that
the board of public works in these assess
ments, did not pursue the requirements of
the statute in that they did not at all consider
was benefited by the improvement, nor the
extent or proportion of benefit, but charged
the cost of the work upon the property of
the REALTORS by applying an arbitrary rule of
frontage.
The order or determination OF the board of
public works in respect to the assessment, and
In accordance with which the same was made,
as entered in the record Of the proceedings, is
as follows: Pursuant to due notice, the
matter of making and compiling the reassess-
ment for grading Mackubin street, from Day
ton avenue to University avenue, came up
and no one objeciing the said re-assessment
was competent, and the clerk directed to give
confirmation notice, all property reassessed
on said Mackubin street from Charles
street to Summit avenue. being
for th. cost of eradns and that in addtcn
thereto the property fronting on cutters and
culverts shall be charged the cost thereof.
Yeas Co.
We interpret the latter half of this record as
though it read as follows: "All property on
said Mackubin street, from Charles street to
Summit avenue, being deemed benefited pro-
portionately alike, according to frontage, is
addition thereto the property fronting on gut
ters and culverts shall be charged the cost
thereof"
The statute under which alone the, proceed
ings are authorized, prescribes the rule in ac-
cordance with which such assessments must
bs made, except in respect to sidewalks and
sewers, as to which different course may be
pursued, the cost of the improvement is to be
assessed by the Board of Public Works upon
the real property specially benefited thereby,
in proportion as nearly as may be to such bene-
fits, and only to the extent of such
benefits, and in estimating the
benefit to any particular tract of land
consideration should be had of the nature of
the owners interest therein, the form and po-
sition of the land, the qualified right of the
owner in reference to its enjoyment, and any
other circumstances which render the pro-
posed improvement more or less beneficial to
him. (23, SO, II, Oh. Z, title 1, of act of 1874,
above cited)
1t has been decided in this court that the
determination by this board of public works
Of the facts as to what property is benefited,