Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1928-06-24
COUNTY SANITARY
LEWES TO Be CUT.
Maryland Suburban CommIs-
sion to Reduce Tax as Re-
suit of Decision.

a
Appeals at Annapolis. validating the Al
creased front foot benefit charges po
into effect in 1925 by the washington
Suburban Sanitary Commission 10
wafer and sewer furnished Mon'so'ner!
ana Prince Georges County. Md, area
near she District Of Columbia, Officials
Of tbs sanitary commission e&ry t aA
v~-~k will ask the county coIala2@',ssNhASt
Of bots counties 20 reduce {.Rs ivy y
Is cents on each $l0o assessed NaAd&s sst'S
fer the ensuing year - : eS0tS rs
announcement vas made YESTERDAY y ,
Tn,,ald Clagett, n1en2ocT q me >A3a'
i1sfy commission. SD. .>,.,
n was explained by MI, C1ASess t<eS'
ts,e rate has been ) CeatS II S<+sA $<ssSs>
ties end the extra seats u y& V%A'
care Of trunk sewer coStS&<ls< ,asSs
AFR Clazegt said that cf3esses * SaS
commission would toGoSScw e<sss@eS a3-E
r. Ernest Smith. Treasurer g EEsssS~
Georges County. 81 IpHsE Ma ,N~N'
with view 70 determining eS>@ s&N'
f>sverS Of that county Mo aaFe s+ses<SN
paid their bills calling SoE = g&S
G. a sanitary tax On t6s &s-<SEfs S$SsS
car De refunded he tna2Sa& >&t2>-
fsctorv plan could b. c&yl$Se-
WIN Confer Wigh Beard
Some provision was eeTt&za y oe
Hade he said. 50 that Prince SsecsE>S
@omntv taxnaverS woalG have % nsy
eoiv on the 7-cent basis. Ec@}S~iSS tos
conference with Treasurer STs1Aia II Is
IRE rlay1 70 take She matter up WIN the
Prince Georges County commissioners
81 their meeting al Upper Marlboro on
TUESDAY, In Montgomery County. Mr..
Clsrett said. bills have not been issued
a16 in view Of this. little difficulty Is
exnectad in making the readJustrnent.
Ar Claeett declared the matter would
he brought 10 the attention OF the Mont
canerv County commissioners at their
session at Rockville, also 10 be held
TGeS6gy
Despite the intention of the SAM
tnrv Commission to ask the reduction
II the tax rate. the fight between the
commission and taxpayers Is by no
means over. according 10 F. Regis Noel,
attorney. of Kensington. Montgomery
County. who said yesterday that the
e~oup Of MONTGOMERY County taxpay-
e-s whom he. with other counsel rep
resents. will push their petition for 8
rehearing BIZ the Court Of Appeals of
the case Of the Sanitary Commission
vs.. Renee Noel. in which case the
Court Of Appeals handed down its de-
eision Thursday. The petition for the
reFsaring. said Mr. Noel. win be based
On the legal doctrine Of election OF
remedies. 1t will be contended in the
petition. he declared. that the SAM
farv Commission several years ago
Y71a5e q contract that the fronr-foot
benefit charges would be specific
an4ount for so years. and it viii be
maintained that the act of the 1927
LEGISLATURE validating the increased
CHARGES Of approximately 33i3 per cent,
was Illegal in that no State car impair
the obligations OF Q contract.
Wan. Regulations Changed.
Deprivation Of private property with
ezt i5ue process OF law and without
fast compensa ion also win be alleged
n an attempt to prove the act OF the
Legislature invalid, and II will be
maintained that the act is Illegal be-
csHse It would authorize an assess
rent n varying amounts for eeneht
which IL states IS equal.
AfT Noel asserts that the taxpayers
wi4axn he represents will not be salts
fed until provision for the expenses Of
fIae operation of the Sanitary Commits
SION are made alone IN the general tax
Isvv and the Sanitary Commission Is
deprived of authority 10 increase 'front.'
feet benefit charges. It is his opinion
that IL such were the case the SAM
ta-y Commission would never be al
ioH'ed mere than was reasonable, as the
county commissioners are answerable
70 the voters and would go slow in
making the rate too high Mr. Noel
contends that the Sanitary Commits
SION is answerable to no one, and would
have no didlc1llty in increasing its ben
eft charges at any time.
According 10 officials of the sanitary
commission the extra cents levied this
year In both counties viii be used for
construction of trunk sewers 10 elirni-
2ate pollution II streams. The com
mission is now constructing a sewer
xcrth 10 the Colegyiile road along Sligo
Branch in Montgomery County TO serve
Oliver Spring, WooGside, Seven Oaks
and communities in that section. Later
Is lg planned 10 extend the same sewer
Cswn the Northwest Branch. Construc-
s2on Of 8 Rock Greek sewer from the
District Of Columbia line north for a
distance Of approximately one mile also
1s projected This line would serve the
Chevy Chase area and would be ex-
tended later 10 take care of the Ken
esngs0n and Forest Glen sections. An
o1ner project is the construction OF a
sewer n Wiiiett Brook. Montgomery
County. 10 serve the Somerset and
1adley Hills nrighborhood.
II is the intention ultimately TO take
ncIlE.son cut Of Rock Greek an5 OIL
d IRE Anscostia River area in Prince
Georges County.
A nth light Of the decision handed
snty la CfssT
reals was that the court does not see
srv logical reason for holding that IN
thus subsequently, providing the leg sSla-
tive foundation previously found lack
tysz. there is reversal Of the judgment
az the court and an assumption Of a
judicial function Mrs. Noel sought the
u, junction against the increased fr0Dt
fcot benefit charges on the grounds
with other contentious, that the act OF
che Legislature In 1927 merely reversed
fse decision In the Ecriyener case, III
w4nicn 1Isa Court Of Appeals held the
Regpssn6 charges Illegal and in doing 4
assumed 3adacia, function,
Holds Act Makes New Levy.
with regard to the allegations brought
hw MRS, Noel that no benefit fo'
~ssssen ar additional charge could b.
fsvle6 you'd accrue 70 the complain
ertss property from The further con"
rtrisctsor an6 installation which Is paid
fey. and n benefit charge xciild for that
Teesop be invalid because depfiylng the
ergn9nlatnant Of her property without
de process q law end sltf3cut com
ssevssstseD, the decision Of the Court Of
AoDeals saic
aAs We view IL, this present act
Snakes IN substance and effect, new
feefSiasiwe assessment OF the amount;
rreysousiy charged on the complain.
arts properly. and We have 10 deal witt
: case in which there has been de-
4Eymlnalion by tfle Legislature f0t Itself
~ me district on which the cost d
the improvements Is to be assessed. ane
~ the amount % front-foot benef
charges which are reasonable, and al
.ee,ssl legislative imposition Of tlesl