1918 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

In Re Rescinding Bristol St. In Re Paving of Ed ~tion for paving inger St. be conspicuously posted within the dletrict designated in the Resolution notices. I have very carefully reaAand examined Reaclutio: of Intention No.591 and there is not even an attempt to designate or establish a district for any purpose. 'Sec. ~- 2nd. If no objection to said proposed change coo or modifications of grade shall be filed with the Clerk of the Council within thirty days from the first publication of the Resolution of Intention hereinbefore mentioned' oo~ 'the City Council shall have power to order and deol~ such grades to be changed and established in conformity to said Resolution., Resolution of Intention No.591 was panned by the Board of Trustees on the 19th day of November 1917, it was first published on the 22nd day of November, l~l?,(see affidavit of publication) it provides no opportunity for the filing of objections with the Clerk within thirty days after the first publication, but sought to fix a hearing and to give an opportunity to he heard before the Board of Trustees tc show cause why the improvement should not be carried out at a designated hour and day, to-wit: ?:30 o'clock p.m. on the l?th day of December,l~lT,the giving of thirty days' opportunity after the first publication of the Resolution for the filing of objections was Juris- dictional and a failure to pursue the statutes at least substantially in a fatal defect. You will observe that the time fixed for the hearl~ before the Board of Trustees was but 2~ days after the dat~ of the adoption of Resolution of Intention No.5~l and but ~5 days after the date of the first publication thereof, therefore, if the holding of this hearing was competent to take the place of an opportunZty to file objections it was wholly fatal for the reason that it,d not give the statu- tory time, to-wit: 30 days. I have carefully checked the grade with 7ou~ engineer from the prSflee in hie office used in this pro- oeedlng and find that they ars the grades as sought to be established by Resolution of Intention No.~91, which, being invalid, never established the grade. Therefore, you are not under Re~ution of Inten- tion Vo.60~ ~nd its succeeding proceedings grading or paving Bristol St. to the official grade and your acts are not authorized by Sections a and ~ of the Improvement Act of 1911. There are two other defects in these proceedings which in my Judgment are fatal to their validity,but in view of the absolute failure of Jurisdiction as above ex- plained, ! deem it that you do not desire a detailed state- ment of these. One of the provisions of Resolution of Intention ~60~ is that one-half of the expenses pertaining tc the public work to be done under the proceedings shall be paid out of the public treasury of the city of Basts Ann, and unless these proceedi~ authorize that expenditure then no legal authority to do so exists. ! therefore advise ~ha you that in view of the defects pointed out above a~ that all proceedings under · asolution of Intention No.60~ are invalid and that to expend the public money pursuant thereto would be an illegal act. I further advise you that a bidder could not be compelled ~o execute a contract to do the work nor would he be responsible for failure to dc so, or could hie certified check accompanying his bid be declared forfeite~ to the City of Santa Asa. R~epectfully submitted CLYDE BISHOP ~ The motion of Trustee MoPhes that it is the sense of the Board to a~cept the report and rescind all actions taken 'in the paving of Bristol St. from Fifth St. to the City Limits on the South, was duly seconded by Greenleaf and carried. On motion of Trustee McPhe~ that the Chair appoint committee in reference to investigating the paving of Edinger St. and to secure the necessary legal advice,was duly seconded by Tubbs and carried, the Chair appointing Trustees McPhee, Tubbs,and ~reenleaf as such committee.