Brissel v. City of Los Angeles

THOMPSON, J. The plaintiffs have appealed from a judgment which was rendered against them in a suit to quiet title and to vacate a lien to secure the payment of special taxes levied against their properties situated in a municipal improvement district of Los Angeles created for the purpose of widening Highland Avenue in that city. It is asserted the tax levy is invalid for the reason that it is the result of arbitrary, discriminatory and grossly abused discretion on the part of the City Council in relieving two-thirds of the lots in the district of practically all the taxes which were formerly imposed upon them, and by thus materially increasing the burden of taxes on plaintiffs’ property.

The City of Los Angeles proposed to widen Highland Avenue from 70 to 100 feet, being an increase in width of 15 feet on either side of the street. For this purpose a municipal improvement district was created as provided by law, including therein a tract of land 600 feet on either side of that avenue and approximately a mile and a half in length, from Santa Monica Boulevard to Cahuenga Avenue, containing about 200 acres of land. Highland Avenue is one of the chief thoroughfares of Los Angeles. That portion of the city, including the street improvement district which was established, is thickly populated. The terrain was created, platted and divided into 1117 separate lots or parcels of land, with streets, sidewalks and modern city improvements. There are two tiers of blocks ivithin the district on either side of Highland Avenue. The lots within the district are practically all improved with substantial dwelling houses. The tract also contains a high school plant, numerous apartment houses and business establishments. [702]Most of these commercial properties front on Highland Avenue. The lots bordering on this avenue, among which are the plaintiffs’ properties, have a market value far in excess of the value of the more remote parcels.

The widening of Highland Avenue was estimated to cost $2,203,101.28. The sum of $200,000 was first appropriated from the city funds to help defray the cost of the proposed street improvement. This left a balance of $2,039,101.28 to be raised by assessment on the properties within the district. Ordinance number 63,382 of the City of Los Angeles was adopted and approved April 3, 1929, creating the assessment district and declaring it to be- the intention of the city to widen Highland Avenue, according to the plans and specifications on file as above related. July 2, 1929, Ordinance number 64,238 of the City of Los Angeles was adopted approving the proposed street improvement, directing the work to be performed and authorizing the assessment of taxes to be levied on the properties in the district in the manner provided by law to defray the expenses of widening Highland Avenue. After due notice the Board of Public Works of the City of Los Angeles prepared and filed with the City Council as required by law its detailed report of the proposed levy of taxes on the properties of the district. This report and plan of assessment provided for the raising of taxes to pay the cost of widening Highland Avenue in the aggregate sum of $2,239,101.28, except that a credit in the sum of $200,000 was allowed on that account, which amount was appropriated from the funds of the city, leaving a balance of $2,039,101.28 to be raised by the levy of taxes. Of this last-mentioned sum, $124,222.14 was spread over and levied upon 836 lots consisting of two tiers of blocks bordering on the outskirts of the district and not fronting on Highland Avenue. The taxes originally imposed on these 836 lots varied in amounts, but averaged approximately $148 to each lot. The remaining 281 lots or parcels of land in the district were separately assessed for the balance of the remaining necessary sum to be raised, to wit, $1,914,879.14, in proportion to the benefits to be derived by each lot by virtue of the proposed improvement. This resulted in an assessment on plaintiffs’ properties which border on Highland Avenue, as follows: