Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1900-10-20
cITY ATToRNEYIs oPINIoN.

]
follows:
CITY ATTORNEYS OPINION
Salt Lake City. Utah, Oct 10, 1900.
Hon Committees on Public Grounds
and Municipal Laws, Associated Gen
tlemen-Replying TO your inquiry as to
whether or not the city has the power
10 donate Pioneer square 10 the pro-
posed railway company. would say that
this square having been dedicated as a
public park under an ordinance APP
proved July g. 1898, the first question
to be determined is whether or not the
council has power to yacate this park
and cause the square 20 again become
part of the open public lands OF the
city
In order TO determine no questions
presented to me for consideration, Il Is
necessary to ascertain from whence
municipal corporations derive their
powers. and the extent Of the same.
Municipal corporations In the state
Of Utah derive their powers from the
authority conferred In title 10 OF the
Revised Statutes Of 1898, and the par
tcular powers granted TO the city cOun-
ell are enumerated In section 2g6, and
the subdivisions OF this section bearing
upon the questions presented TO me are
paragraphs /, and s. Paragraph Is
Streets. etc..-To lay out. establish,
open. alter. widen extend. grade. pave
or otherwise improve streets. avenues,
sidewalks parks and public grounds,
and 10 vacate the same
This paragraph gives special power
TO yacate streets and public parks. ]
accordingly conclude that the city coun-
ell has power TO yacate the park en-
braced within the confines OF Pioneer
square. but such vacation must, how
ever be for a good and sufficient
reason and In furtherance Of munich
pal purpose
Assuming that there be a valid vaca-
ton Of the park. the next question Is
Has the city council power 10 make a
donation Of the same for the encour-
agement OF the construction Of rail-
road? The petition presented by MT
Gibbon makes no express proposition
In General terms he requests that the
square be- donated for depot purposes,
under certain conditions 10 be turmu-
lated by the council but the discussion
so far has been upon the theory OF an
absolute grant OF the square so far as
the city Is concerned that u.s. the city
to hereafter have no benefit Of the
square. except that indirect benefit re-
sultng from the construction OF rail-
way and the increased amount OF tax
able property; and the railway to have
the exclusive ownership and ~0ssession
Of the square under certain conditions
POWER OF CITY COUNCIL.
The power Of the city Council over
city property, real and personal, is con-
b .. tf. NH H.f
vlsei Statutes, and Is as follows.
Appropriations Property APP
proprate money for corporate purposes
only, and provide for payment ~ debts
/ and expenses Of the corporation; and
20 purchase. receive hold. sell lease,
convey and dispose " property, real
and personal. for the benefi, NJ the city
| both within and without ITS corporate
bouudarss;to improve and protect such
property. and 10 do all other things in
relation thereto rs natural persons
The promoters OF the proposed rail-
way have expressed the opinion that
the city Council under the legislative
| authority have power 90 make the do
nation requested but ! have made
careful examination Of such authorities
as have been able 20 find bearing upon
the proposition and find myself unable
90 concur IN their opinion. The de-
cIsI0ns IN regard 90 the powers ~
municipal corporations 20 aid railroads
have been very numerous and upon va
ried phases Of the question. Some OF
them Indicate that this Is more Of a
debatahla question than I had though
when 7 first commenced 20 investigate
] have found no case directly In point
that s where the power TO donate open
public lands Of the city was involved!
except as 1t Is to some extent presented
I'm an Indiana case. but / am convinced
that the great weight Of authority Is
that o. municipal corporation can make
no donation, either of money or lana
IN ala ~ "a railroad company, unless
specific legislative authority be given
so 20 DO, and II is my opinion that the
section of our statute quoted above
though broad. Is not broad enough 10
comprehend such authority.
Prominent members OF the bar OF TINS
city have expressed a contrary view
but such Is my best judgment. our
courts nave not passed upon the eues'
ton and II win REQUIRE a judicial con-
structi0n 10 absolutely determine inc
same In the absence of such construo-
ton, ] feel that my duty comDels me
10 resolve whatever doubt there may
be IN favor OF the city and against the
Dr0f.gaa granf RceupCtfullV submit