Kumler v. Board of Supervisors
Synopsis
Classification of Counties—Creation of New County—Reclassification—Delegation of Power to Supervisors—Constitutional Law.—Section 235 of the County Government Act, which provides that when the population of an existing county shall have been reduced, by reason of the creation of any new county from the territory thereof, below the class and rank first assumed under that act, it should be the duty of the board of supervisors of such county to designate by order the class to which such county has been reduced by reason thereof, is not in conflict with section 5 of article XI of the constitution, which requires the legislature to classify the counties by population, and does not delegate to the board of supervisors the power to classify counties; but simply in effect authorizes them to find out and determine, as a fact, Dow many people are left within the boundaries of the old county after the new county is created, and when this fact is found, which is not a legislative act, the classification follows as declared by the statute.
Id.—Local or Special Legislation.—Section 235 of the County Government Act is not a local or special law, in conflict with section 25 of article IV of the constitution; but applies to every existing county of the state whose class is changed by having a portion of its territory detached and put in a new county.
Id.—Power of Supervisors—Determining Population—Federal Census—Construction of County Government Act.—The board of supervisors, in determining what is the population of a county, out of the territory of which a new county has been organized, is not limited to an inquiry as to what was the population within its present boundaries as shown by the last federal census, notwithstanding sections J 0 and 162 of the County Government Act make the census of 1890 controlling as to the classification of the several counties of the state as they then existed; and the language of section 235, in which no reference is made to the census, is to be construed as intentionally requiring the board to determine the population of the county as it existed at the time of the creation of the new county, and not its population as ascertained by the federal census.
The Court. The appellant made application to the court below for a writ of certiorari, to annul an order of the board of supervisors of San Bernardino county, reclassifying that county, and reading as follows :
“ Whereas, by reason of the creation and organization of the county of Riverside, the population of the county of San Bernardino has been reduced below the class and rank of a county of the tenth class; and, whereas, the population of said county of San Bernardino is now over twenty-three thousand and under twenty-four thousand; now, therefore, it is hereby ordered by the board of supervisors of said county of San Bernardino that said county of San Bernardino has been reduced to and is a county of the twelfth class, and that the population of said county is now over twenty-three thousand and under twenty-four thousand.”
The order was made on January 12, 1894, and it is alleged, upon information and belief, that the population of the territory then within the boundaries of the said county was in the year 1890, according to the federal census of that year, not greater than nineteen thousand; that the board in making the order disregarded and ignored the federal census and the population shown thereby, and attempted to classify the county on the basis of the population it- contained when the order was made; and that in doing so the board exceeded its jurisdiction and acted without any authority of law.
A demurrer to the petition was interposed and sustained, and the petitioner declining to amend, judgment was entered dismissing the proceeding, from which he appeals.
The constitution, article XI, section 5, provides: “The legislature by general and uniform laws .... shall regulate the compensation of all such officers in proportion to their duties, and for this purpose may classify the counties by population.”
And the County Government Act (Stats. 1893, p. 346) has the following provisions:
“ Sec. 10. The several counties of this state are [395]hereby classified, and shall hereafter remain classified, according to their population, as ascertained by the federal census taken in the year eighteen hundred and ninety.”
“ Sec. 162. For the purpose of regulating the compensation of all officers hereinbefore provided for, the several counties of this state are hereby classified, and shall hereafter remain classified, according to their population, as ascertained by the federal census taken in the year eighteen hundred and ninety as follows.”
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)