Town of Yorkville v. Fonk

• Decision Date: 28 February 1958
• Citation: 88 N.W.2d 319,3 Wis.2d 371
• Parties: TOWN OF YORKVILLE, Appellant, v. Richard FONK et al., Respondents.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

Page 319

88 N.W.2d 319

3 Wis.2d 371

TOWN OF YORKVILLE, Appellant, v. Richard FONK et al., Respondents.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

Feb. 28, 1958.

Rehearing Denied May 6, 1958.

H. H. Brown, Union Grove, La France, Thompson, Greenquist, Evans & Dye, Racine, of counsel, for appellant.

David L. Phillips, Kenosha, Burton Lepp, Kenosha, of counsel, for respondents.

BROWN, Justice.

In Des Jardin v. Town of Greenfield, 1952, 262 Wis. 43, 53 N.W.2d 784, we declared that the same principles of constitutionality apply to trailer ordinances that apply to zoning ordinances. The source of the power of the legislature to authorize their enactment is dependent on the same general police power.

The power to pass ordinances must be reasonably exercised but within the field delegated it may go to the boundaries of reason and within that field the municipality's discretionary power is supreme. C. Beck Co. v. City of Milwaukee, 1909, 139 Wis. 340, 348, 120 N.W. 293. When a municipal body enacts regulations pursuant to authority expressly granted all presumptions are in favor of its validity and any person attacking the ordinance must make the fact of its invalidity clearly appear. The function of a reviewing court is solely for the purpose of determining whether legislative action under the power delegated to the municipality passed the boundaries of its limitations or exceeded the boundaries of reason. The delegation to the municipality of this power by the legislature implies a field of legislative discretion within which its acts are not subject to judicial review. It is only when the bonds of that field are clearly exceeded that courts will deny validity to the ordinance. City of La Crosse v. Elbertson, 1931, 205 Wis. 207, 211, 237 N.W. 99.

Trailer camps in recent years have become so common that it is not beyond the bounds of reason that the legislature may believe that such camps, with their collection of small mobile homes, present definite problems of health, safety, morality and general welfare in the area which is affected by the presence of such camps. Granting that problems of this nature are presented, it is not beyond the bounds of reason to believe that the larger the concentration of mobile homes the greater or more intense the problems will become, and, conversely, the problem will be diminished by camps less densely populated. The legislature, then, may authorize the municipalities most directly concerned to apply their local knowledge to the local problem and attempt to deal with it by regulating the number and population of the camps to a point where the municipality may tolerate the problems which such camps present.

We have said:

'* * * Courts will not interfere with the exercise of police power by a municipal corporation in the absence of a clear abuse of discretion and unless it is manifestly unreasonable and oppressive, for it is not within the province of the courts, except in clear cases, to interfere with the exercise of this power reposed by law in municipal corporations. 11 Am.Jur., Constitutional Law, p. 1092, sec. 307. Municipal corporations are prima facie the sole judges respecting the necessity and reasonableness of ordinances under their police power, and every intendment is to be made in favor of the lawfulness and reasonableness of such ordinance. The city is presumed to have full knowledge of local conditions, and its adoption of an ordinance in the light of this knowledge creates a prima facie presumption that it is reasonable. 3 McQuillin, Mun.Corp. (2d ed.) p. 110, sec. 951. The reasonableness of an ordinance depends upon the purpose sought to be accomplished and the effect upon all who must comply with it.' Dyer v. City Council of City of Beloit, 1947, 250 Wis. 613, 616, 27 N.W.2d 733, 734.

We need not pass on the trial court's conclusion that in reference to public health, safety and morality the 25 space limit by the ordinance was arbitrary and invalid. It sustained the ordinance because of its reasonable relationship to the welfare of the school district. In this, we concur.

Testimony of the school authorities establishes that the district school of the area in which this camp is situated is populated beyond its...