SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ‑- CORRECTION AFTER CONFIRMATION, WATER DISTRICT COMMISSION ‑- AUTHORITY TO CORRECT ASSESSMENTS

SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ‑- CORRECTION AFTER CONFIRMATION, WATER DISTRICT COMMISSION ‑- AUTHORITY TO CORRECT ASSESSMENTS.

Water District Commissioners have no authority to correct mistakes in an assessment roll of Utility Local Improvement Districts after confirmation thereof by remitting or adjusting assessments.

                                                                  - - - - - - - - - - - - -

                                                                   March 2, 1951

Honorable John C. Merkel
Prosecuting Attorney
Kitsap County
307 Dietz Building
Bremerton, Washington                                                                                                  Cite as:  AGO 49-51 No. 461

Dear Sir:

            In your letter of January 26 you asked the following question:

            May Water District Commissioners correct a stenographic error in preparing an assessment roll, where the same was discovered after confirmation of the roll, and where the effect of such correction would be to decrease or remit an assessment?

            You are advised:

            Water District Commissioners have no authority to correct mistakes in an assessment roll of Utility Local Improvement Districts after confirmation thereof, by remitting or adjusting assessments.

                                                                     ANALYSIS

            The Water Commission was authorized to correct the assessment roll prior to its confirmation, section 11590, Rem. Rev. Stat.

            When the assessment roll was confirmed by the Water District Commission it became conclusive in all things upon all parties, section 11592, Rem. Rev. Stat.   [[Orig. Op. Page 2]] The principle of estoppel applies:

            McKenzie vs. Mukilteo Water District, 4 Wn. (2d) 103, 102 P (2d) 251.

            You advise that the stenographic error consisted in computing the assessment on 5.36 acres instead of 2.3 acres, and in giving this opinion we assume that the land assessed was correctly described, and does appear upon the assessment roll, so that the assessment payer would not be within the proviso contained in section 11592, Rem. Rev. Stat.

            Assuming that the land assessed appears on the assessment roll, you are advised that the Water Commission is without power to correct any error in the assessment roll after the same has been duly confirmed, where the effect of such correction would change the amount of any assessment.

Very truly yours,

SMITH TROY
Attorney General

E. P. DONNELLY
Assistant Attorney General