The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1897-07-16
REDUCED ASSESSMENT.
Writ Of Certiorari Against the Board
of Equalization.

Writ Of Certiorari Against the Board
of Equalization.
City Attorney Mckay yesterday, on
Il behalf Of Salt Lake City. fled in the
Third district court an application for
a writ CT certiorari against County
Commissioners Armstrong, Hall and
Rawlins, 70 compel them to certify to
the court their proceedings as a board
OF equalization in reducing assessments
on property in Salt Lake City.
The petition came up before Judge
Norren for argument at o'clock in the
afternoon, with City Attorney Mckay
appearing for the city, and Judge How
al for the county commissioners.
In the petition It is set out that Salt
Lake City is required by law, on or
before the first Monday of each year,
10 fix and levy its tax for general NUM-
cipai purposes, and on June %, 1897, it
fixed ana levied said rate at mills on
the dollar on the assessed valuation Of
all property subject to taxation within
its corporate limits. Said valuation as
assessed by the county assessor of Salt
Lake county for the year 1897 amounted
TO $37, 600, which, at Z mills, would
yield to the city a sum not exceeding
1892. 600, barely sufficient for the pay
ment OF the current expenses of the
city government, and interest on its
SIbl!c DEBT
That on July u, 1897, the county com
misSioners, sitting as a board of equal
lzation. irregularly, without any au-
thoriGy OF law and without any written
application therefor and without any
jurisdiction in the premises and solely
upon their own motion, passed a reso-
luton whereby the board uniawfully
reduced the assessed valuation of the
taxable property in Salt Lake City
from S37 900, 900 TO S27, 500, 600 and there
by reduced The anticipated revenue of
the city from 1892, 500 TO S192, 500, or
$4,000 less than is actually required to
meet the necessary expenses OF the city
if economically administered during the
year 1888.
That there is no appeal provided by
law from the action of the board of
equalization in reducing the assessment
and said reduced assessment if permit
ted 10 stand viii work irreparable in
jury upon the city by depriving it of
the revenue necessary 10 meet lis cur
rent financial obligations. Wherefore
the plaintiff pTays that the board be
required 70 answer and co certify to
this court its proceedings in respect TO
the passage Of fhe resolution, that the
same may be reviewed and such pro-
ceedings taken thereon as to the court
may seem proper.
The board OF equalization, answering,
admits that all the allegations con-
tanned in the petition are true eXceDt
that the defendants deny that the as
sessed valuation was reduced in any
sum exceeding $4,000. 900. The defend
ants allege that testimony was taken
before them showing that property was
excessively assessed. The defendants
admit than the parties and property af-
fected by the resolution did not make
or file With the board a written appli-
cation Tor the reduction or demand the
same in person. Some persons did ap-
pear but all did not. The defendants
then deny that the resolution passed
providing for the reduction is irregular
or unlawful and pray 10 be hence dis
missed.
Inc point involved is whether or not
the board Of equalization on its own
motion had power 10 make the reduc-
ton in the assessment.
After hearing brief arguments and
authorities being submitted Judge Nor
reli took the matter under advisement,
promising TO render mis- decision OF Sat
arday morning.