St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1885-04-03

And IL 1t is found that prop
erty in the vicinity of the
improvement is so situated and related to it
as to receive special benefits in the enhance
ments Of its value beyond that of property
enerally, the improvement may, for the
urposes of a special assessment, be deemed
ocal, though the property in the city or ward
also generally benefited.
The extent of the assessment district must
depend upon the facts of each case, but
when in any case it is made clearly to APP
pear that through fraud or mistake property
is improperly included or excluded, the court
may interfere to vacate or SCI aside an
| assessment.
The terms ''locar' or vicinity" as used
in connection with such assessment pro-.
ceedings, indicate no definite limits, but are
usually understood to extend to real property
sufficiently near and so related to the i'm
provement as to be found specially benefited
in addition to the general benefits accrung
to other property, as reported by the proper
assessors.
Application of these principles to the facts
of this case.
Whether the court is bound to say upon
this record that the assessment in question
is to be deemed made for a general and pub
lie and not for local improvement. Such
an assessment could not have been made
prior to the constitutional amendment Of
1869, which authorizes, through legislative
Intervention, assessments by municipal cor
porations for local improvements upon prop
erty to be benefited thereby, without regard
to cash valuation, and in such manner as
the Legislature may prescribe.
But taxes for local expenditure were re-
quired to be apportoned upon the property
of a political subdivision or district upon the
basis OF cash valuation.
Stenson vs. Smith, Mimi, 366.
1t is now, however, left to the legislature
to prescribe in what manner assessments
shall be apportioned, so as to distribute the
burdens thereof justly and equally, as nearly
as may be, upon property to be benefited, or
in proper eases upon AUDITING property.
These special assessments proceed upon
the principle that certain property pc
culiarly situated in reference to an
improvement is to be specially benefited
in the enhancement of its value and in levy
ing such assessments the principle of equal
ity in their apportion ment, is deemed vital as
in ordinary cases Of taxation under the con-
stitution.
Noonan VS.. saltwater, % n. w. r.
But in the application of this rule in prac-
be committed to the Judgment of officers
whose determination when acting within
their jurisdiction is ordinarily to be taken as
conclusive in reference to the Justice or pro-
priety of the assessment as finally adjusted
and completed
Under this provision of the constitution it
has been the common practice for the legis-
lature to provide in municipal charters for
local assessments for street and other i'm
provements of the same general character,
and for levying the cost in whole or in part
upon the property in the vicinity thereof,
found Specially benefited thereby. Such i'm
provements being public in their nature, it
is rare that case arises where the general
public does not share to greater or less eX-
tent in the benefits, though in some cases,
as of alleys or lateral streets or sewers the
benefit may seem to be peculiarly
| local. But it has never been
contended that in authorizing local assess
ments in pursuance of this constitutional
provision, municipal authorities were to be
limited to such Improvements as are entirely
local in their character. The city at large is
benefited, and at the same time special bene-
fits in ordinary cases result to the owners Of
property adjoining or in the vicinity of the
improvement. If the special benefits to
property so locally affected are equal to the
| cost of the work, then an amount not ex-
ceedlng the whole cost may be assessed upon
such property, but if the expense thereof eI-
coed such benefits, then the city at large shall
in any event bear a portion of the burden.
Cooley on Taxation, Az; Dillon on MINI.
Corp, g.. Ed P. i57. People vs.. Mayor,
60 n Y, 299.
It would be difficult to state in what cases
! local assessments for benefits may or may
not be made. In practice the rule is usually
adopted in case Of street Improvements sew
ers, water mains, etc, while as respects public
buildings or improvements Of like public
character for the use of the people Of city
or district the burden is properly apportioned
By general tax upon the property of a whole
city, or of the district peculiarly benefited.
But in reference to the class of improve
ments under consideration here, grading,
filing and bridging on street for which
such assessments are usually deemed apple
able, the court has held that the fact that the
street to be improved ''is the most public
thoroughfare in the city, does not prevent
the improvement from being ''local," but
the local character of the improvement de-
ponds upon the special benefits which result
to the real property adjoining or near the To-
Rogers VS.. st. Paul 20 Mimi, SOY.
Now, whether in any particular case the
improvement partakes Of this character and
creates such special benefit TO property in the
vicinity, as well, also, as to the extent
and character .of such benefits must
ordinarily be deemed questions Of fact to
be determined by the proper authorities as
the legislature may prescribe. Under the
charter the city council, upon the report of
the board Of public works, is to determine
whether property could he found benefited
TO the extent of the expense to be incurred
by an improvement, and the board of public
works are to ascertain the property to be
benefited and to make the assessment. In
the case at bar, then, the fact that the i'm
provement may open up thoroughfare of
great value and convenience to the city at
large, or that it is extensive and costly, does
not necessarily warrant the court in adjudg-
ing 1t one for which q local assessment NAV
not be made upon property in the vicinity of
the Improvement If found specially benefited
thereby; though these are elements properly
to be considered by the authorities which are
required to dete. .nine as TO the propriety and
extent of such assessment. The legislature
has in this instance recognized
the existence Of these facts and has specially
provided that the city shall bear large pro-
portion of the expense.
The act of 1881 in providing for an assess
ment was also legislative determination of
the fact that a special assessment was proper
for the improvement thereby authorized
The legislative Judgment in such cases ex-
cept in clear cases of abuse is not receivable
by the courts.
Cooley on taxation, 4G0-f.
And as respects the act az amended in
1888, it was for the council to determine
upon proper consideration Of the question Of
benefits whether the work was one which,
together with the appropriations provided by
the city, could be lawfully proceeded with