The record-union. [volume] (Sacramento, Calif.) 1891-1903, 1897-08-28
NO FOLSOM MACADAM ROAD.
THE CITY CANNOT CONTRIB
UTE TO ITS COST.
District Attorney Ryan Says That
the Law Expressly Pro-
hibits It.

right away, unless aldeu Dy voluntary
contribution from citizens of this city
This fact was settled yesterday by
an opinion given by District Attorney
Ryan in response to a request by the
Board of Supervisors.
Mr. Ryan had given the subject close
and careful consideration, with the re-
suit that he finds the law to be such
that municipalities cannot be legally
taxed TO aid in constructing roads out
side their respective jurisdictions.
The opinion, though it was anticipat-
ed, fell like a wet blanket on those
members of the board who had hoped
the county might be able to inaugur-
ate a decent road system. Following
is the full text of
THE OPINION.
Honorable Board Of Supervisors OF
Sacramento County-Gentlemen An
swering your communication of Aug
ust 18th I will reply to the questions
propounded in the order in which you
have submitted them.
Question HAS the Board Of Super
visors of Sacramento County the right
to deed to the State of California the
right of way for the Folsom Road?
The provisions of the Act of the Leg
islature of 1897. providing for the con-
struction of the Folsom Road, as I con-
strue them, contemplates more the per-
lection of the title to the lands over
which the road is to pass as against
private interests than the deciding of
the road by the county of Sacramento
to the State of California.
In strictness the public highways be-
,f,.1, al
public use subject to legislative con-
troi. The Board of Supervisors obtains
its power and authority to deal with
the highways from the Legislature.
(See People VS.. Marin County, JOB Cal
ifornia Reports, page 224)
My opinion then is that the Folsom
road is now as much g public highway
of the State as it could be made by any
deed from Sacramento County to the
State of California.
However, if the State authorities
should construe the Act to mean that a
deed must pass from the County Of
Sacramento to the State of California
of the highway known as the Folsom
road in order to carry into effect the
provisions of the Act of the Legislature
of 1897, ! can see no legal objection to
such action, although 1 consider the
same wholly unnecessary.
Question 2 Can Sacramento City le-
gally be made TO pay its pro rata of a
special or other road tax for the Folsom
road?
By a general Act of the Legislature,
approved February Is, 1888, relating to
roads and highways, it is provided:
Sec. ,. All laws concerning roads and
highways in conflict with this Act, and
all laws applicable to particular coun-
ties of this State concerning roads and
highways, are hereby repealed; pro-
vided, that any proceeding commenced
before this Act takes effect, for the
alteration, establishment, or abandon
ment Of any road or highway may be
conducted under the provisions of the
law under which said proceedings were
commenced; provided further that
nothing herein contained shall be
deemed to authorize the levy or colec-
ton Of road poll tax. or property road
tax, within municipalities existing I'M
der the laws of this State, wherein work
and improvements upon the streets is
done by virtue of any law relating 20
street work and improvements within
incorporated city or towns be by the
Supervisors of the county included or
embraced in any road district by them
established under this Act
This provision is similar to the pro-
visions OF Section 1864 of the Political
Code as it stood prior to the Act of
1888; the provisions of which section
We're considered by the Supreme Court
in the case of Marin VS. Aston, 60 Cal
ifornia Reports. page 67 and upheld. tt
was there held that under Section 1864
of the Political Code road taxes and
property taxes provided for in the pre-
ceding sections SECTIONS relating to the
levying of taxes for road purposes
could not be levied or collected from the
inhabitants or property of incorporated
cities or towns which by municipal au-
thority levy such taxes for the streets
and alleys thereof
sacramento City is municipality
acting under its own charter. wherein
work upon its streets is done by yir-
tue of the provisions of such charter
1t is therefore excluded from the pro-
visions of the law relating to roads and
highways and cannot be subject to any
taxes levied by the Board of Supervf-
sors for road purposes.
Question 3-Up to what limit can a
special road tax be levied and what
per cont of same can be used for the
Folsom road?
The board has power-subdivision IS
Section %. County Government Act
to levy a special road fund tax not to
exceed two mills on the one dollar of
assessed valuation on all the property
IN such county outside of any incorpor-
ated city or town. Such tax shall be
in addition to all taxes otherwise pro-
vided for, and the fund so created
shall be expended for the construction
and maintenance of the main public
roads or county highways in the sew
eral road districts in proportion to the
amount collected from such districts. -
This is the only provision I find in law
for = special road fund tax.
For general county road purposes the
board has power under the provisions
Of Sections 1858. 2654 and 2655. Politi-
cal Code, to annually levy a property
tax not to exceed forty cents upon each
one hundrede dollars of the assessable
property in any one year which taxes
must be apportioned and expended as
provided by Sections 2651 and 1862 of
the same code. Property within the
limits of the City of Sacramento is not
liable for this tax.
Question What effect would spe-
cial election upon the question of build
ing the Folsom road have, and what
would it establish?
Tt would have no effect other than to
ascertain the Will of the people of the
county upon the question of the build
ing Of the Folsom road 1t could not