Staunton vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1860-1896, 1874-11-20

OWNERS TO BEAR HALF-No BACK
GRABBING HEREAFTER.
&C, NC, &C.
The City Council held it's regular meet
ing on Tuesday evening last, at which were
present President Bickle and Iessrs. Al ty,
Burke, Echols. Evans, Funkhouser, Cor
man, Hoge, Kayser, Ker and WITT The
meeting, as will pe seen, WAS an unusually
full one the whole body, save Ole member,
being present In addition, there was
among the spectators large gathering OF
civil engineers, brought there through Gu
rios:ty to hear the report Of the City En-
gineer.
THE STREETS. - PAYMENT OF CON-
TRACTORS.
The Council approved the payment of
$1,000 to Alois Rick, the Min street con
tractor, on his contract, ard of $1,700 t.
A. Simms on his contract for the Augusta
st. bridge, the City Engineer stating thai
the stone work of the Augusta st. arch
had already reached the springing llme and
the whole would be completed by Christ
mas.
REGULATING THE COST OF STREET IN
PRovEMENT.
MIR. Echols offered an ordinance proyid-
ing that hereafter the cost of improving
the streets should be assessed one-half OF
the property owners along the line Of i'm
provement, and one-haf by the ci y. HI
said that in Baltimore the property owners
bore two-thirds Of the cost, in Washington
city al the cost, and in Louisville the prop
ertv owners bad to bear the cost of taking
up one kind Of street and putting dow
another.
Mr.. Evans-That was where property
owners had petitoned for the change in the
kind of paving.
Mr.. Echols-No 1t was in many cases
where the property owners were violently
opposed to it. He thought that one of the
benefits Of this ordinance would be to sto
the clamor for streets to improve private
property. He knew OF one or two case
where parties who purchased land by thu
acre were clamoring for streets made 10y
the city, that the property might be mad
more saleable by the fooG.
opening of new streets to be paid for il
the same way were adopted unanimously
Resembling THE MAIN ST. BACK GRAB
Mr.. Echols offered a resolution rescind
ing the resolution passed by the council
November Sd, relieving the property owners
of the half payment for the improvement
on Main st., and assuming it by the city.
The resolution set forth that there Wa
doubt of the legality Of the vote, as only
six members had voted for the assumpt
ion. when seven were required, and that
on mature deliberation the council though
it best to divide the expense half and hali
between the city and the property owners.
He said the council had Just unanlmousi
adopted the principle of dividing the ex
pense half and half. The Main street i'm
provem4nt had been commenced on tla
principle by unanimous vote Of the couh-
ell, and that after the work had pr04resse'
nearly to completion six members OF tn
BODY rescinded the action and assumed th'
acl,oIe debt to he paid out Of tile CITY treas
ury.
Mr.. Evans took exception to that por
ton of the resolution which gave the i'm
preston that tire council had acted Witl'-
out knowing what it did. AS for himself
he knew that the original resolution pro
viding for tie improvement and assessing
one-half on the people was not valid, BE-
cause it required three -fourths ~ Of Thu
council to impose such tax on the peopli,
and, in that view, lie bt lieved six members
of the council could rescind What had
never been legally adopted. lie read from,
the law to show that the three-fourths
vote was required.
MI. WITT said he should not object to
any resolution, so the principe WAS made
general in its operati II.
MIR. German thought the Council ought
to start from this point, and not go back.
Mr.. Bickle thought the acton ought to
go back, SO as to include the Improvement
of New street and the bridge on Augusta
street.
Nh. Ecllols said that speaking personally
- for himself he would not like the appear
ance Of voting for a general ordinance to
assess half the cost on citizens, and then
interested, las he was i'll this. being inter
ested as President Of, and a large stock
holder in the Valley Bank, which will have
a large proportion to hears) embodylng tie
same principle, voting against it. 1t 1t
was lust in one case, it was just i'll all.
For one. he never would have dreamed OF
expanding $4,000 Oh Main street without
it had been the understanding that half OF it
was to be borne by the property holders.
M. Burke-Tney wouldn't have been
able to pass it at all but for that under
standing.
Mr.. Echols--The Finance Committee
estimated $40 900 for the expenditures on
the streets of tue whole city this year. No
man dreamed that it was intended TO eX-
pend the whole of the $4,000 on a few
blocks on one street i'll the CITY for the
benefit Of the property owners there.
Mr.. Evans wanted to know il the pro-
perty owners ON Main street should have
credit for the material they had put down
before the improvement commenced.
The resolution was 50 amended DIS to in
clude all the work commenced OF being
executed since the 4th of August.
Mr.. Bckle-Does that include the bridge
on Augusta street?
Mr.. Echols-Oh, that would be ridicu-
lousl That is public bridge, that IS not
a street.
Nh. BiekIe--i dent know about that: 1t
will make two OF three lots there very
valuable.
MI Funkhouser SAID he weu!d vote for
Mr.. Echols' resolution. Neither he nor
the members who had voted Tor the reso-
tuition of November Sd had done it with a