Washington Code 85.18.030 – Hearing on roll — Determining continuous base benefit
Current as of: 2023 | Check for updates
|
Other versions
After the roll is prepared the board shall give notice of a time and place at which the board will hold a public hearing to determine whether the facts and conditions heretofore recited in this chapter as a prerequisite to its application do or do not exist, and if so found to exist by said board at said hearing, then the board shall by resolution so declare. The notice shall also state that at said hearing, or any continuance thereof, the board will sit to consider said roll and to determine the continuous base benefits which each of the properties thereon are receiving and will receive from the continued operation and functioning of such district, which shall in no instance exceed one hundred percent of the true and fair value of such property in money, will consider all objections made thereto or to any part thereof, and will correct, revise, lower, change, or modify such roll as shall appear just and equitable; that when correct benefits are fixed upon said roll by said board, it will adopt said roll by resolution as establishing, until modified as hereinafter provided, the continuous base benefit to said protected lands and buildings against which will be levied and collected dollar rates to provide funds for the continuous functioning of said district.
NOTES:
Severability—Effective dates and termination dates—Construction—1973 1st ex.s. c 195: See notes following RCW 84.52.043.
Terms Used In Washington Code 85.18.030
- Continuance: Putting off of a hearing ot trial until a later time.
- Equitable: Pertaining to civil suits in "equity" rather than in "law." In English legal history, the courts of "law" could order the payment of damages and could afford no other remedy. See damages. A separate court of "equity" could order someone to do something or to cease to do something. See, e.g., injunction. In American jurisprudence, the federal courts have both legal and equitable power, but the distinction is still an important one. For example, a trial by jury is normally available in "law" cases but not in "equity" cases. Source: U.S. Courts