The daily morning Astorian. [volume] (Astoria, Oregon) 1883-1899, 1897-01-26
THE ROAD TAXES
IN CITY LIMITS
Are They Reyertiblc 10 the City After
Collection by the County.
OPINION or CITY ATTORNEY
Question 10 BE Considered at the Ad'
j0urned Meeting Of the Coupc1I
Friday Night
OPINION or CITY ATTORNEY

Al the meeting Of the city council 10
be held Friday night the most Import
nnt question 10 be- considered II that
Of the city tax levy for the ensuing
year. The ways ana means committee
have been Of the opinion tia; the city
wns entitled 90 the road taxes collected
within the city limits Their Is lnvolv-
I'd In this question. about 1900 to the
credit of the city. and II the opinion of
the committee is correct, IL viii ais"
make a considerable difference fnyora-
bic to the city In the amount OF the
levy 10 be imposed The matter was
referred To- CHy Attorney Curtis for an
opinion. which follows In detail;
Astoria. Jan. q. 1887
Hon. Jas. W. wech. Chairman Com
mittcc on Ways and Mcans:--
Your request FOR an opinion aS 70
whether the City Of Astoria Is entitled
TO tho road taxes collected within the
city limits. | beg leave 10 submit the
following report.
Section liJ Of the charter Of the City
Of Astoria provides;
An Rad taxes on property and polls
within the city limits Ot the city ot
Astoria chall be turned over to the
city In the same manner as other taxct
collected for it, and shall BE- expended
exclusively upon roads, highways and
str,st crossings within SAID city"
The question II. do the provisions OF
the charter conflict with the constitu'
ton Of the state. Article I, Soe, ?S, sub
divisions :. 10. which inhiblts the leg
lala.urc from passing special local laws
FOR laying opening and working high
ways. etc.
Tho question was iirat raised m the
case OF East Portland vs.. Multnomah
county. reported IA 9th Oregon. Page
g.. wherein the supreme court held
Tho paramount and primary control
Of highways In state. and Of streets
In cities In vested In the legislature.
In other words, that the Legislature
had power to delegate 10 city the con
trOl VI the roa,is and highways within
the city limits and such delegation OF
power does not conflict with the consti
tutiunal inhibition. This was reaflirmed
In the case of Multnomah VS.. Silker
10 Oregon, Page 65. and city OF As
toria vs., Clatsop county, not reported.
A test case was made short time
ago in the case of the city of Oregon
City VI. Moore. In this case the city
OF Oregon City made u demand upor
the county treasurer 10 pay over {,
the city the money collected within
the limits OF the city for road taxes
etc Two propositions were submitted
70 the supreme court One that tn,
provision In the charter of Oregon Cit!
was In conflict with the constitutions
Inhibition. Second, that the tax haC
not been apportioned when the demanC
was made.
On the first proposition the suprem,
court says: III the legislature may by
special law incorporating u city. con
stitutlonaily vest in the municipality
exclusive jurisdiction over the county
roads within Its boundaries, Il Seems
to US that no valid objections can b,
made. on constitutional grounds, to 4
provision In such an act merely conferr
ing upon the municipal authorities tho
right to control the expenditure o.
funds applicable to the improvement o.
roads and streets within the municipal
ity, collected under general laws" Ii
other words, the supreme court holds
that the act incorporating Oregon City
relative To this provision Is constltu
tlonal, and does not conflict with tn,
constitutional inhibition.
But where the supreme court affirm
ed the decision OF the lower court wa
in the demand made by Oregon CIT!
upon the county treasurer for the funds
collected. before the apportionment haC
been made.
II follows, then, that the provision II
the charter of the City OF Astoria 4
constitutional and does not conflict will
the constitutional inhibition cited.
In my opinion the City of Astoria Il
entitled to all the road and poll take
collected within the limits of the cit!
OF Astoria, and as soon as the appor
tionment is made, the city can deman,
of the county that they turn over al
such money collected, such money 3
be expended by the city in the manne
provided by Its charter II the count!
court refuse. mandamus proceeding
should be brought TO compel them L
do so, Respectfully submitted.
c, j. CURTIS.
City Attorney.