Los Angeles herald., 1891-05-27
THE STREETS.
A STRONG ARRAIGNMENT OF THE
CITY COUNCIL.
A Correspondent Who Makes a Strong
Argument-Fort Street Given as an
Example-The Remedy.

citizens put up with the worse tnah looi-
ish action of our city council? Had the
governing bodies of cities and towns in
many portions of our country acted as
the city council Of this city has for many
years past, in clouding titles and draw
ing from private parties money illegiti-
mately, there would have been such a
storm raised as would make them think
they had been struck by cyclone.
Since my letter of March 9th have
been looking to see if the council would
appreciate the fact that they are ''con-
fronted by condition and not by the
ory," but they have gone on in the same
happy-go-lucky style, and have accom-
plished what? They have given and
taken deeds calling for monuments over
400 feet from the places intended, and as
monuments control the courses and dis
tances, they have succeeded in sliding
over onto land that belonged to private
parties, and decided away several streets
that were formerly dedicated by ordin-
ances properly passed.
Buc the "head and front OF their
offence" is the manner in which they act
with reference to streets
FORT STREET.
Take Fort street, for instance. This
matter has been before the council for
about six or seven months, and they
have accomplished what? After numer-
Gus postponements, last March, the city
attorney rendered an opinion that the
city had dedicated an eighty-foot street
down to Twelfth street, lit should have
been to the line of old Pico street), and
that though the city had given a deed
which covered it below Ninth street
that they had exceeded their powers, as
the supreme court had decided that
corporation had no power to ALLEVIATE a
street properly dedicated.
After having considered this subject
for several weeks, the corporate wisdom
has found out way to get around this
plain proposition. "We will not talienate
the street; we will reserve two inches
on each side," (why have two strips
useless for street purposes , land we
will vacate the balance of the eighty
foot street."
What have they accomplished by
this? If they have not alienated the
street. then it still belongs to the city.
Speaking as a layman, let US look at
this proposition. When the city dedi-
Gated this, and many other streets, it
was over land belonging to it, and not
over any private lands. When it made
deed, it exceeded it's powers, and no
title passed as against the public.
When it undertakes to vacate it, as no
title had passed, would not the land
then become again part OF the city
lands? and from that date have to be
treated as other city land? And if the
city undertook to dispose of it, be sub
iect to sale under the ordinances. If it
is city land, then how will they treat it
on the tax lists for the coming year, it
being in possession OF individuals? If
city land, what authority did the as
SCISSOR have for taxing it for years past?
am assuming that the provision in
our city charter as to the right of the
council to vacate streets, is not in con-
f1ict with the general law. l have been
assured by several attorneys they do
consider it in conflict with the general
laws of the state.
OTHER STREETS.
Some days ago I looked over list of
streets that the present council has in
contemplation to widen, extend or pave,
and out of the total list there was only
two that they were not undertaking to
do as they did with Fort street, viz:
charge the lot owners for purchasing or
improving lands that belonged to the
public. Through the remissness of our
councils and officials, there are today
thirty miles of streets, regularly dedi-
Gated, that are in possession OF lndivld-
uals.
PARKS.
.o.o oro eaxyaro1 email tracts dpHi-
Gated by ordinances to which, in def
ance of the statutes, the council has
made deeds to individuals.
REMEDY.
Let the council meet The condition
firmly. and at little expense they will
find they can settle this state of affairs
where they are continually cropping in
the dark, and causing useless trouble
and expense to the people. Have
proper map of the whole city prepared,
showing the original corners of all
blocks, as by the original records, and
their present location on the ground
then there will be basis from which to
work, and it will not be necessary to
take any backward steps. AS property
increases in value we will not have peo-
PIC dlO W. lhNSop, bNSouoOOi ASei0 oi'eNo
our council, not having any plan formed
in advance, will commence taking up
street and putting it somewhere else.
For instance, there are two records
in our city hall. both of which
are still of force and effect, that
place the same intersection of two streets
over 800 feet apart, and eight records
still in force that place it in eight differ
ent positions. 1t is time that when our
city engineer q do not now refer to the
present one) is called upon to testify as
to how he surveyed a street to answer
that he "followed the fences aligning
the street." And when asked why he
did not show the original block lines,
confess that she did not know where
they were." And, by the way, this is
one of the streets that our present coun-
Gil is wrastling with, and as nearly all
prior councils have since 1866. If the
work was properly done do not our citi-
zens suppose that there would have
been saving of both public and private
expenditures? And there has also been
a considerable delay, and will probably
be further stoppage of improvements
on that street that would be of great
public benefit and convenience.