HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay 21, 1923 A spec{al meeting of the city council
of the City of Columbia Heights was
held at the Columbia school on
day evening, May.21~ to hear the re-
ports of the city attorney and the city
manager on the matter of the adjust-
sent of the 41st avenue water main.
5Ieetin~ was called to order by
5~ayor.~V, C. Gauvitte at 8:30 o'clock
and roll call was responded to by
Bentzen, Burgoyne, Gauvitte and
I£enna. Ledwein was absent.
A letter was read from the city at-
%torney regarding the assessment
.levied on 41st avenne water· main as
follows:
To the City Council,
City of Columbia Heights.
In pursuance of instructions given
at the r~egular meeting of the council
BIay. 8, '1923, we investigated the
sessments for water mains on 41st
Street.
Part of the records and proceedings
in this matter have been lost or mis-
laid and are ~not available. This of
itself does not invalidate the assess-
sent as the presumption is that the
assessment is valid. The petitions for
'the' laYing of 'tile water mains cannot
he found and it is tike contention of
some who protest the assessments
and who signed the original petitions
that these, petitions contained a limit-
: ation of $3.00~per foot. If the court
should find that such limitations were
Jn fact inserted in the petitions, the
I~ assessments could 'not exceed $3.00
and any assessment in excess of $3.00
will be invalid, but there is very per-
'' suasive evidence that the. petitions
contained no limitation at all In fact
evidence shows that they contained an
express waiver oil .all lim;itation in as-
sessment or cost. If the.court should
· find this to be true, the assessment
%;ili stand. '.
It further appears that those who
are now protesting the assessment
petitioned to have the' ~ waterworks
mains la. Sd that they knew the work
was constructed, that they have paid
~at least two assessments without pro-
test. It also appears that they claim
,,' "to have been misled into believing
that only three annual assessments
"were made, when in fact five were
· made. 'The law specifically provides
· thai'the assessments may be divided
,'up into five installments and the petJa
tioners would be presumed to knov
what the law is. Ignorance of the law~,
does not excuse them, so that they'
/cannot claim to be misled on this;
· ground. , The assessment is presumed:
to be valid and the burden of proof l
· is upon those who allege its inv&lidity
to show such fact to the satisfaction
"of the court. - .
.. The, council has power to reduce any
assessment if it believes that it is un-'
just or ~hat the assessment exceeds
the benefits to tile tract of land, but
· it would take a,very extraordinary
' case to induce the court, to set aside
t assessments on g~ound that the ss-
i' sessment fixed by the council is in ex-
' tess of the benefits as 'the council is
~ given a great deal of discretion in
!ing the amount of the assessment. ·
, Under the circumstances we Would
i. advise that the assessment stand as
' it is .... P '
i James Corr, former city-~-m'auag~:j'
and acting under order of the council,
t read. his report which covered tile
whole situation. He included in this
I report the figures for the total cost of
. the improvement and the total number
of assessible frontage. O~ving to an
error on the part Of the c{erk at the
tinge, the assessments were made, a
number of front feet were not included
in the assessment. There were three
lots of 189-19 feet fronta;,~e and one lot
of 131 feet frontage whidh had not
· .been assessed and the reason given
was tlmt these lots were assessed on
another side. However, it was found by
~r. Core that they should have been
included in the 41st avenue improve-
ment list and by including them the
cost of the installation .of the main
was reduced to $2.99 per foot on each
'side. A motion was' ma. de by 5~cI[enna
and seconded.by Bentzen that the as-
sessn~ent on the main be readjusted to
a basis of $2.99 per foot, each side.
1{oll call, .]Bentzen yes, 1Burgoyne yes,
~IcKenna yes, GaUvitte yes..
: . L. Gibbs,: a resident or.the Roslyn
Park section, presented a plan to the
~. city counciI to open 43rd. agenue frsm
4tk street to University. It was mov-
I. ed by Bentzen and seconded 'by
Kenna.that-a committee be appointed
· to investigate the ~cost and advisability
of opening said. street and- make 'it.
:passable. Carried ungntmously land
A~cKenna and. Beflt~en v~'ere instructed
'to serve and report at the next regular
meeting' o£ the council; ' · ' ' '' -
' Upon m0tion'·of.Burgoyne, seconded'
by Bentzen/it was passed to charge'
· L. H. Kahm; proprietor cf,Forest Pai'k,
$10.00.a:montk for a license to operate
~ moving picture and vaudeville show
· at that' plade. ' ......... .
Ut~on' m6tion Of MeKenna and :sec-
o. 'ond',by :Bentzdn 'it: was 'passed. tO apr'
.point Joe Stinson :tempora~'y.city man-
ager. .,.., ,., --. :
Moved .by !~icKenna, a~/~/sec0iaded
by Burgokne that mecting:'adjourn:
Carried unanimously.
· HAZEL A. TRIJ~KER,
City Clerk.