The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-08-31

Total cost of projected widening
and extension of streets. $3.50. 81 1894, 424 10
All the extens ion schemes excepting
Market street have been revived pending
the decision of the Supreme Court, which
is awaited with anxiety by many property
owners and taxpayers in San Francisco.
The proceedings had to open and extend
streets in the Board OF Supervisors were
begun in most instances on petition of
property-owners, many of whom, being
spectators in real estate, desired to make
successful business ventures in the dispo-
sition of their property. The Legislature
ut their b"hest passed an act to enable
city councils throughout the State to open
and extend streets and to condemn and
acquire property for that purpose. The
power was given to appoint commission
ers, who in turn were empowered to incur
such incidental expenses as they might
have deemed necessary, the expense of
each proceeding to be assessed upon the
lots and lands deemed benefited within a
district to be defined by the city council.
The exercise of the powers granted under
the act was such as to impose improper
burdens upon owners of property, and its
operation in San Francisco was not under
stood until the proceedings eliminated in
reports and assessments made by the
Commissioners being completed and filed
with the Board of Supervisors.
The Legislature of 1898 passed an act,
approved March Is, 1893, applicable to
cities and counties containing over 10000
inhabitants, enabling the city council to
inaugurate proceedings to open, extend,
ETC., streets upon the petition of the own
ers of majority of the frontage of the
property to be taken for the opening or
extending of a street. 1t also provided
that when proceedings had been COM
menced and objections made to the So
called improvements by the owners of
majority of the property of the frontage of
all lands to be assessed for benefits, the
city council might. after hearing the OBJ
jections. sustain the objections and stop
all proceedings for the period of II months.
The act gave the supervisors power to con-
tinue any existing commission until it's
work was completed, but in all other cases
declared the assessments, plats and reports
null and void, and provided for refunding
all money collected to the persons from
whom it was taken.
The Commissioners were also removed
from Office and the Mayor, Tax Collector
and City and County Attorney constituted
board of audit to examine all the ac-
counts and the salaries of the Commits
siOners with power to allow such amounts
as might be just and reasonable, and to re-
port these amounts and to whom payable
to the Supervisors. The Supervisors were
given power to provide for the payment of
those sums in the tax levy, made after
hearing of the report.
Mrs. Helen A. Landers, who was inter
ested IN seeing the Potrero-avenue extern
sion become reality, entered suit against
the Board of Supervisors for having an
nulled the Potrero commission. In her
complaint she attacked the constitution
atty of the act of March, 1893. She repre-
sented property along Potrero avenue
from Serpentine to Army street. There
were two similar cases from other inter-
ested parties which abided by the decis-
ion il Mrs. Landers' suit.
After tedious delays Judge Slack handed
down his decision. In brief he held that
the act of 1893 was special legislation, be-
cause it applied only to cities and coun-
ties of 10000 inhabitants and over; and
being special legislation it was unconsti-
tutional, because it applied to case, to
wit: eminent domain, where q general
law could be made applicable, contrary to
the constitution.
The decision was an intense surprise to
real-estate owners and dealers, and has
proved a most disturbing element particu-
larry in cases where nervous people are
buying land in the large districts affected
by the assessment. This is above and be-
yond the prospect of an assessment in the
near future of over $500, 900, for Judge
Slack's ability as constitutional lawyer is
highly respected among his colleagues.
who expect that his opinion will be up
held by the Surname Court