The herald., 1893-06-20

Was read and referred.
The street superintendent was ordered
to remove the obstruction from the
road.
Recommend that Mr.. J. F. Greenough
he appointed as an additional inspector.
Referred to the sewer committee.
At request OF Mr.. Campbell | present
I'm ordinance for the grading, graveling
and curbing with redwood of Brooklyn
avenue, FROM the southeasterly line of
Bridge street to the westerly line of Ey-
ergeeen avenue, repeating the former
ordinance. 1t was passed.
Mr.. Munson moved that the city en-
gineer be instructed to prepare 9 con-
tract between Mackay & Young and the
city, which would offer all the timhars
in the out fall several figure which the
city could purchase at rs cents apiece.
The motion was passed.
THOSE WATER BONDS.
Mayor Rowan then entered the coun-
Gil chamber and submitted the follow
ing letter from N. W. Harris & Co.,
which was to the effect that as Judge
Dillon had delivered an opinion respect
ing the necessity of new election to
authorize 40 year serial bonda for water
works in place OF the 20-yesr serial ones
already voted, and that should it be
concluded to hold the new election sug
Qested by Judge Dillon, and the city
should desire us to take the new 40.year
serial bonds go voted, under the terms
of our purchase, they asked that they
be advised by wire or letter and they
would then say whether such course
would be acceptable to them.
JUDGE DILLoN's OPINION.
The mayor then submitted the opinion
OF Judge Dillon. as follows:
Messrs. N W. Harris & Co., New York:
Referring to my letter OF June End,
in regard to Los Angeles, Cal, water
works bonds. have to say that since
that letter was written ! have seen
copy Of the statutes cf California for the
year 1891, which contains the proposed
amendment TO the constitution. At the
time Of writing that letter the volume
was out OF tho law library here, so that
did not have the proposed amendment
before me. / have no means of know
ing whether the amendment was
adopted, but presume that it was, and
| write the following opinion on the
assumption that the amendment was
odopted as it was proposed and sci forth
in the session laws OF 1891, ct page 523.
This amendment required, Inter alia,"
that when any debt or liability is in
Cured "before or at the time OF incur
ring such indebtedness provision shall
be made for the collection of an annual
tax sufficient to pay the interest on such
indebtedness "a it falls due, and also
provision to constitute a sinking fund
for the payment OF the principal thereof
on or before maturity, which shall not
exceed 40 years from the time of con-
tracing the same"
Assuming that the amendment was
adopted as proposed before March J.,
1898, then my opinion is that under the
act of the legislature approved March l,
1898, it is necessary to issue bonds pay
able one-twentieth part each year. 1t
is true the vote was taken in this case
on November 2, 1892, but the bonds
were not issued before the act of March
l, 1898, went into effect. When that
act went into effect the authority to
issue bonds payable one-twentieth each
year ceased, ard there was no saving
clause permitting the issue OF bonds OF
that kind which had been previously
voted Hence the act Of March l, 1898,
stands as the only authority for the
issue of public improvement bonds OF
this kind, and the bonds SO issued must
be Of the character prescribed by this
new act.
| am further of the opinion that the
bonds payable one fortieth each year
cannot be issued without a new vote by
the electors OF the city. Tho act OF
March 10, 1889, section 3, which section
is left unchanged by the act of March L,
1895. provides that the notice Of the
election eball state "the, number and
character OF the bonds to be iesuod. the
rate of interest to be paid, and the
amount of tax levy to be made for the
payment thereof" You state that the
election notice read in part, ''said bonds
shall be serial in character, aud one
twentieth of the principal shall be paid
each year after their issue" The no.
tice also probably stated the amount of
the tax levy to be made for
the payment of the bonds, that is
in substance sufficient to pay the
interest one-twelfth part of the prinei-
pie each year. The vote of the people
was to issue bonds OF this character.
Non constat, if the bonds payable one
iortieth each year had been submitted
to the voters, that they would have
voted to issue such bonds. The consti-
tuition provides that the bonds shall not
be issued without vote; and as the
voters nave never VqJeQ 10 l6kuo INC
bonds payable one-fortieth each year,
in my opinion new vote is required.
1 believe this fully anewers the ques.
tions submitted for my opinion. If the
proposed amendment to the constitution
above referred to, was not adopted. a
different question would be presented,
and might reach different opinion.
SO, also, a different question might be
presented, If there was any express pro-
visions in the laws of California by
which the repeal of an act still left it in
the power OF the municipality to con-
tinue the proceedings ahead, begun, and
such provisions were made In such man
ner as to control the statute now in
question. Bat have not been able to
find any such provision in the laws Of
California. Unless, therefore, the city
attorney can refer me to some such pro-
vision. my opinion is as above stated.
On motion of Mr.. Gaffey the city clerk
WAS instructed to return the $4,000 to
Harris & Co., which they had deposited
in good faith on the bonds.
FIRST STREET WIDENING.
In referring to that portion of the re-
port of the board of public works which
was deferred to the afternoon session,
ralati to the widening of First street
between Wellington and Main streets,
on the motion of Mr.. Rhodes, the diff
ferent property holders being absent,
was adopted.