State ex rel. Washington Toll Bridge Authority v. Yelle

• Decision Date: 04 August 1938
• Docket Number: 27248.
• Parties: STATE ex rel. WASHINGTON TOLL BRIDGE AUTHORITY et al. v. YELLE, State Auditor (JANNSEN et al., Interveners.
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

82 P.2d 120

195 Wash. 636

STATE ex rel. WASHINGTON TOLL BRIDGE AUTHORITY et al. v. YELLE, State Auditor (JANNSEN et al., Interveners.

No. 27248.

Supreme Court of Washington

August 4, 1938

Original mandamus action by the State, on the relation of the Washington Toll Bridge Authority and L. V. Murrow, Director of Highways of the State of Washington, against Cliff Yelle as Auditor of the State of Washington, to compel the auditor to audit and approve certain vouchers authorized by the Washington Toll Bridge Authority and the State Director of Highways for expenses incurred incident to preliminary plans and survey of a proposed bridge in Pierce County wherein N.C Jannsen, doing business as the N.C. Jannsen Drilling Company and another intervened.

Writ issued.

G. W. Hamilton, Atty. Gen., and L. C. Brodbeck and John E. Belcher, Asst. Attys. Gen., for relators.

E. W. Anderson, of Olympia, for respondent.

Patrick Henry Winston, of Olympia, for interveners.

HOLCOMB Justice.

This is an original mandamus action, instituted in this court, by relators to compel the state auditor to audit and approve certain vouchers, duly authenicated by the Washington Toll Bridge Authority and the state director of highways, for the expenses incurred incident to the preliminary plans and survey of the proposed 'Narrows Bridge' in Pierce county.

By a special leave of court, N.C. Jannsen, doing business as N.C. Jannsen Drilling Company, and one George Stevens were premitted to intervene.

For several years the inhabitants of Pierce county have had under consideration a project which envisages, through the construction of a bridge across a certain portion of the navigable waters of Puget Sound known as 'The Narrows', the connection of the city of Tacoma more directly with the mainland of what is known as the peninsular district of the county, now exclusively served by a ferry system, and the acquisition of the present ferry system at a total cost of $6,000,000.

The United States government has, through the Public Works Administration, made a grant of $2,700,000, and the Toll Bridge Authority proposes to issue revenue bonds pursuant to chapter 173, p. 658, § 7, Laws of 1937, Rem.Rev.Stat. § 6524-7, relating to toll bridges, in the sum of $3,300,000 to be purchased by a federal government agency to complete the financing of the project.

Under the terms of the grant work must be commenced as early as possible, but in no event later than ten weeks subsequent to June 27, 1938.

For some time previous to April 25, 1938, Pierce county had sponsored a project, and had made application to the Public Works Administration of the United States for financial assistance and co-operation in the construction of this proposed toll bridge. April 25, 1938, however, Pierce county, by virtue of a resolution of its board of commissioners, transferred the sponsorship of the projected bridge to the Toll Bridge Authority, with a request that it construct, operate, maintain, and provide for the financing of the toll bridge under the provisions of chapter 173, Laws of 1937, in conjunction with the Public Works Administration of the United States. The Pierce county commissioners also made available to the Toll Bridge Authority the sum of $25,000 from funds which had accrued, or might accrue, to the credit of Pierce county in the motor vehicle fund by virtue of the provisions of chapter 208, p. 1013, Laws of 1937, Rem.Rev.Stat. § 6600-1 et seq.

Acceding to the request of Pierce county, and acting pursuant to chapter 173, Laws of 1937, the Toll Bridge Authority accepted the sponsorship of the bridge, which necessarily involved financing, constructing, and operating a toll bridge, subject to the approval and in conjunction with the Public Works Administration of the United States.

June 27, 1938, the United States, through the federal emergency administrator of public works, made a written offer to the Washington Toll Bridge Authority to aid in financing the construction of the proposed bridge and the approaches thereto, and to assist in acquiring the necessary lands and rights of way therefor.

By resolution, the Washington Toll Bridge Authority declared the construction of the toll bridge was necessary, advantageous, and practicable, and instructed the director of highways to make a further investigation, examination, reconnaissance, and survey, and to draft such preliminary plans and obtain such preliminary data as might be requisite to the financing of the bridge.

The claims involved here were incurred for services rendered in connection with the preliminary investigation and survey by one N.C. Jannsen, doing business as N.C. Jannsen Drilling Company, and George Stevens, a designing engineer.

It is admitted that these persons have already rendered their services in accordance with their contract with the director of highways, and that the sum of $2,621.50 and the sum of $41.94 became due and owing to Jannsen and Stevens from the Toll Bridge Authority. Notwithstanding the presentation of duly authenticated vouchers for these amounts, the state auditor has refused to issue warrants therefor upon the motor vehicle fund.

In his return to the application for the writ respondent denied that relators were entitled to the relief prayed for because chapter 173, Laws of 1937, is unconstitutional for several reasons.

The validity of the claims hereinBefore referred to is the question presented for decision. It is conceded that these claims are a proper charge against the funds of the state highway department provided chapter 173, Laws of 1937, Rem.Rev.Stat. § 6524-1 et seq., is a valid enactment.

The Washington Toll Bridge Authority, an administrative body composed of the governor, the state auditor, the director of public service, the director of highways, and the director of finance, business and budget, was created by chapter 173, Laws of 1937, Rem.Rev.Stat. § 6524-1 et seq.

Chapter 173, § 3, Rem.Rev.Stat. § 6524-3, reads:

'The Washington Toll Bridge Authority is empowered, in accordance with the provisions of this act, to provide for the establishing and constructing of toll bridges upon any public highways of this state together with approaches thereto wherever the same is considered necessary or advantageous and practicable for crossing any stream, body of water, gulch, navigable water, swamp or other topographical formation whether the same is within this state or constitutes a boundary between this state and an adjoining state or country. The necessity or advantage and practicability of any such toll bridge shall be determined by the Washington Toll Bridge Authority and the feasibility of financing any toll bridge in the manner provided by this act shall be a primary consideration and determined according to the best judgment of the Washington Toll Bridge Authority. For the purpose of obtaining information for the consideration of the authority upon the construction of any toll bridge or any other matters pertaining thereto it shall be the duty of any cognizant officer or employee of the state upon the request of the authority to make reasonable examination, investigation, survey or reconnaissance for the determination of material facts pertaining thereto and report the same to the authority. The cost of any such examination, investigation, survey or reconnaissance shall be borne by the department or office conducting the same from the funds provided for such department or office for its usual functions.'

Chapter 173, § 12, Laws of 1937, Rem.Rev.Stat. § 6524-12, provides that any city, county, or other political subdivision of the state may upon the request of the director of highways or of the Toll Bridge Authority advance or contribute money, rights of way, labor, materials and other property toward the expense of building the toll bridge, and to defray the costs of preliminary surveys and the preparation of plans and estimates of costs therefor.

We consider now the reasons assigned by respondent in his return which form the basis of his contention that chapter 173, supra, is not a valid enactment.

First, it was urged that this act contemplates the incurring of a debt of the state of Washington in excess of that permitted to be incurred without a vote of the electors under Article 8, §§ 1, 2, and 3 of the state constitution.

It should be observed that chapter 173, § 7, Laws of 1937 Rem.Rev.Stat. § 6524-7, provides: 'The Washington Toll Bridge Authority is hereby empowered to issue bonds for the construction of any toll bridge or toll bridges authorized under the provisions of this act. Any and all bonds issued for the construction of any toll bridge or toll bridges under the authority of the Washington Toll Bridge Authority, shall be issued in the name of the Washington Toll Bridge Authority and shall constitute obligations only of said Washington Toll Bridge Authority and shall be identified as . . . Toll Bridge Bonds and shall contain a recital on the face thereof that the payment or redemption of said bonds and the payment of the interest thereon is secured by a direct and exclusive charge and lien upon the tolls and other revenues of any nature whatever received from the operation of the particular toll bridge or bridges for the construction of which the bonds are issued and that neither the payment of the principal or any part thereof nor of the interest thereon or any part thereof constitutes a debt, liability or obligation of the State of Washington. The Washington Toll Bridge Authority is empowered to receive and accept funds from the State of Washington or the Federal government upon a cooperative or other basis for the construction of any toll bridge authorized under this act and is empowered to enter into such...