Revised Code of Washington
Chapter 85.05 - Diking Districts.
85.05.130 - Assessment of benefited lands formerly omitted—Procedure—Appeals.

RCW 85.05.130
Assessment of benefited lands formerly omitted—Procedure—Appeals.

If at any time it shall appear to the board of diking commissioners that any lands within or without said district as originally established are being benefited by the diking system of said district and that said lands are not being assessed for the benefits received, or that any lands within said district are being assessed out of or not in proportion to the benefits which said lands are receiving from the maintenance of the diking system of said district, and said board of diking commissioners shall determine that certain lands, either within or without the boundaries of the district as originally established, should be assessed for the purpose of raising funds for the future maintenance of the diking system of the district, or that the assessments on land already assessed should be equalized by diminishing or increasing the same so that said lands shall be assessed in proportion to the benefits received, said commissioners shall file a petition in the superior court in the original cause, setting forth the facts, describing the lands not previously assessed and the lands the assessments on which should be equalized, stating the estimated amount of benefits per acre being received by each tract of land respectively, giving the name of the owner or reputed owner of each such tract of land, and praying that such original cause be opened for further proceedings for the purpose of subjecting new lands to assessment or equalizing the assessments upon lands already assessed, or both.
Upon the filing of such petition, summons shall issue thereon and be served on the owners of all lands affected, in the same manner as summons is issued and served in original proceedings, as near as may be, and if such new lands lie within the boundaries of any other diking district, said summons shall also be served upon the commissioners of such other diking district.
In case any of the new lands sought to be assessed in said proceeding lie within the boundaries of any other diking district, and the diking commissioners of such other district believe that the maintenance of the dike or dikes of such other district is benefiting lands within the district instituting the proceedings, said diking commissioners of such other districts shall intervene in such proceedings by petition, setting forth the facts, describing the lands in the district instituting the proceeding which they believe are being benefited by the maintenance of the diking system of their district, and praying that the benefits to such lands may be determined and such lands subjected to assessment for the further maintenance of the diking system of their district, to the end that all questions of benefits to lands in the respective districts may be settled and determined in one proceeding, and such petitioners in intervention shall cause summons to be issued upon such petition in intervention and served upon the commissioners of the diking district instituting the proceeding and upon the owners of all lands sought to be affected by such petition in intervention.
In case the owner of any such new lands sought to be assessed in said proceedings shall be maintaining a private dike against salt or fresh water for the benefit of said lands, and shall believe that the maintenance of such private dike is benefiting any lands within or without the district instituting the proceedings, or in case any such new lands sought to be assessed are included within the boundaries of some other diking district and are being assessed for the maintenance of the dikes of such other district, and the owner of such lands believes that the maintenance of the dike or dikes of such other district is benefiting lands included within the district instituting said proceedings, such owner or owners may by answer and cross-petition set forth the facts and pray that at the hearing upon said petition and cross-petition the benefits accruing from the maintenance of the respective dikes may be considered, to the end that a fair and equitable adjustment of the benefits being received by any lands from the maintenance of the various dikes benefiting the same, may be determined for the purpose of fixing the assessments for the future maintenance of such dikes, and may interplead in said proceeding such other diking district in which his or her lands sought to be assessed in said proceeding are being assessed for the maintenance of the dike or dikes of such other district.
No answer to any petition or petition in intervention shall be required, unless the party served with summons desires to offset benefits or to ask other affirmative relief, and no default judgment shall be taken for failure to answer any petition or petition in intervention, but the petitioners or petitioners in intervention shall be required to establish the facts alleged by competent evidence.
Upon the issues being made up, or upon the lapse of time within which the parties served are required to appear by any summons, the court shall impanel a jury to hear and determine the matters in issue, and the jury shall determine and assess the benefits, if any, which the respective tracts of land are receiving or will receive from the maintenance of the dike or dikes to be maintained, taking into consideration any and all matters relating to the benefits, if any, received or to be received from any dike, structure, or improvement, and to credit, or charge, as the case may be, to each tract so situated as to affect any other tract or tracts, or having improvements or structures thereon or easements granted in connection therewith affecting any other tract or tracts included in such proceedings and shall specify in their verdict the respective amount of benefits per acre, if any, assessed to each particular tract of land, by legal subdivisions. Upon the return of the verdict of the jury, the court shall enter its judgment in accordance therewith, as supplemental to the original decree, or in case a petition in intervention be filed by the diking commissioners of some other district than that instituting the proceeding, such judgment to be supplemental to all such original decrees, and thereafter, all assessments and levies for the future maintenance of any dike or dikes described in said judgment shall be based upon the respective benefits determined and assessed against the respective tracts of land as specified in said judgment. Every person or corporation feeling himself or herself or itself aggrieved by any such judgment may appeal to the supreme court or the court of appeals within thirty days after the entry thereof, and such appeal shall bring before the supreme court or the court of appeals the propriety and justness of the verdicts of the jury in respect to the parties to the appeal. No bonds shall be allowed on such appeals. Nothing in this section contained shall be construed as affecting the right of diking districts to consolidation in any manner provided by law.

[ 2013 c 23 § 385; 1971 c 81 § 157; 1913 c 89 § 1; 1901 c 111 § 1; 1895 c 117 § 13; RRS § 4262.]
NOTES:

Rules of court: Cf. RAP 5.2, 8.1, 18.22.


Reviser's note: This section was declared unconstitutional in Malim v. Benthien, 114 Wash. 533, 196 P. 7 (1921). Prior enactments are set forth below:


1901 c 111 § 1. "If the board of diking commissioners shall, at any time, discover that any lands within said district are being benefited by the diking system and the same were by mistake, inadvertence or other cause omitted from the assessment of benefits as provided for in *the last preceding section, or which were omitted for the reason that they were not at the time of assessing the benefits as provided for in said preceding section, for any cause, subject to a legal assessment, said commissioners shall file a petition in the Superior Court in the original cause setting forth the fact of such benefits, describing the lands omitted, the reason the same were omitted in said original proceedings and giving the name of the owners or reputed owners thereof and praying that said original cause, as to such lands, be opened up for further proceedings for the assessment of the alleged benefits, and upon the filing of said petition summons shall issue thereon and be served on the defendants named in said petition the same as summons is served and issued in original proceedings, as near as may be, except the court may, to avoid costs, and in its discretion, call a jury of not less than three jurors, and the jury, in assessing the benefits, shall take into consideration the length of time said lands are to receive the benefits from said improvement and its future maintenance, estimating said time from the date when said lands first became legally assessable, which date must be found by the jury in their verdict as to each tract or parcel found to be benefited: AND PROVIDED FURTHER, That in case the expense and costs of the improvement have been paid for by assessments levied against the lands assessed in the original proceeding before the lands provided for in this section are assessed, as provided for herein, then, in such case, the assessments levied from time to time on said last mentioned land shall be paid into the maintenance fund of said district. Every person or corporation feeling himself or itself aggrieved by any judgment for damages or any assessment of benefits provided in this act, may appeal to the Supreme Court of the state within thirty days after the entry of the judgment, and such appeal shall bring before the Supreme Court the propriety and justness of the amount of damage or assessment of benefit in respect to the parties to the appeal. Upon such appeal no bond shall be required and no stay shall be allowed."


*Reviser's note: "the last preceding section" refers to 1895 c 117 § 12 codified as RCW 85.05.120.


1895 c 117 § 13. "Every person or corporation feeling himself or itself aggrieved by the judgment for damages, or the assessment of benefits, may appeal to the supreme court of this state, within thirty days after the entry of the judgment, and such appeal shall bring before the supreme court the propriety and justness of the amount of damage or assessment of benefit in respect to the parties to the appeal. Upon such appeal no bond shall be required and no stay shall be allowed."

Structure Revised Code of Washington