Burns v. City of Duluth

• Decision Date: 27 October 1905
• Citation: 104 N.W. 714,96 Minn. 104
• Parties: BURNS v. CITY OF DULUTH.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

96 Minn. 104

104 N.W. 714

BURNS

v.CITY OF DULUTH.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

Oct. 27, 1905.

Appeal from District Court. St. Louis County; Wm. A. Cant, Judge.

In the matter of an assessment of the city of Duluth. From an order overruling objections of Margaret Burns, she appeals. Affirmed.

Syllabus by the Court

Under the express provisions of a city charter authorizing the collection of a percentage to cover expenses of making survey, plans, specifications, and superintendence, the actual expenses of such items were included in local assessment. The assessment was not thereby rendered illegal, as involving double taxation, because the amount thus collected went into a special revolving fund used for convenience in making local improvements and largely supported by local assessments, while the actual expenses of these items was in fact defrayed out of another fund supported exclusively by general taxation. Property owners paid no more than they should have paid and enjoyed the use and benefit of the accumulation in the revolving fund. Roger S. Powell, for appellant.

Bert Fesler, for respondent.

JAGGARD, J.

The city of Duluth levied assessments upon the property of appellant and of other objectors for the contract price of a local improvement, and also 10 per cent. of the contract price to cover ‘the expenses of making survey, plans, specifications, and superintendence’ of the work. The actual expenses of these items were found to be $823.06. The 10 per cent. levied amounted to $3,743.86. The trial court cut out so much of the 10 per cent. levied as was in excess of what was found to be the actual expense. The contention of the appellant in this case was that the entire 10 per cent. levied was made without any warrant of law and that every dollar collected thereunder amounted to double taxation. The basis of this contention was that the special expenses referred to were paid out of a fund known as the ‘Public Works Fund,’ created by taxation on the general lists: that the money collected by the assessment went into a ‘Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund,’ not supported by general taxation, but only by local assessment upon specially benefited property. The appellant further insists that no part of the money which is paid into this revolving fund could be used to pay the items of expense thus collected upon local assessments; that there is no power or authority anywhere lodged by which the money could be transferred from the permanent improvement revolving fund into the public works fund, or to any other general tax fund; that under section 306 of the charter no money belonging to any separate fund could be borrowed or diverted by any means or by any municipal authority for the use of any other fund. The proviso to that section expressly denies the power of the council to transfer any city funds to the payments of a public debt ‘funds collected on account of special assessments.’

It is not necessary for us here to decide whether or not double taxation of such a kind would be illegal, for no case of double taxation is made out in fact. The property owners under the...