The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1896-02-02
Members of the South Side I'm.
provement Clubs Are
Indignant.
THEY IMPUGN HIS MOTIVES
They Claim That He Is Actuated by
Self. Interest in Neglecting
Their Districts.

Mayor Sutro is severely criticized. by the
South Side Improvement Clubs for vetoine
the Folsom-street appropriation. After
the resolution appropriating $35, 900 toward
illuminating this much neglected thor
oughfare had passed the Board of Super
visors unanimously, the members of the
improvement clubs, who had been assidu u
ously working for nine months for the re-
paving of this street, considered their fight
won. They were only concerning them
selves with such petty details as having
water and gas companies agree to lay their
pipes before the improvement in order not
to have to reopen the streets, when Mayor
Sutro.s pen cast shadow over their hopes.
sit is grievous injustice" said DR.. a.
T. Rottanzi, president of the South Side
Improvement Clubs. HAD the proposed
improvement been such as to enhance the
value OF property in the vicinity of the
Cliff House the resolution would not have
Eeen vetoed
U. L. Spader expressed his views as fol-
lows, Confidence in South Side property
would return If the property-owners could
only convince our City officials that the
South Side is part of the City of San Fran
cisco. The Street Committee recon-
mended and the board passed resolution
setting aside $50, 600 from the street fund to
repair Folsom street. Our Mayor, to
whom San Francisco is bounded by the
horizon as viewed from the Cliff House,
has seen fit to veto this resolution, on the
grounds that the street fund should be
used on the public streets of the City, and
that Folsom street is county road in San
Mateo County.
1.-THE South Side property-owners ap-
peared before the Street Committee and
convinced them that $500, previously set
apart for illuminating Oak street along
the panhandle of the Park, should be ap-
Piled on Folsom street, where the traffic is
great, instead of expanding it on q street
along the park, when all the travel is in
inside the park. 1t may be of interest to
note that there is no veto on record
against the appropriation for Oak street.
Is it because Oak street at this point lies
within the limits of the City, as viewed
from the Mayors standpoint
The facts In regard to Folsom street
are: First, it is In a horrible condition
and has been SO for numbe of years, the
result of the carelessness and indifference
of our City officials; second, the railroad
has to be reconstructed on Folsom street.
which necessitates the raising of the street
to the official grade.
Third, there is public necessity for q
good thoroughfare leading out of the City,
and Folsom street is the best suited as to
location and grade for such outlet. Over a
thru Oi tnIs street Is already DltumlnlZeQ.
After continuous fight of months on the
part of the property owners, supported by
the entire press of the City, the Board OF
Supervisors has become convinced that
it is better, as matter of economy as well
as necessity for the business and traffic oil
the City, that the street should be repaved
throughout.
ut is to be hoped that the Board of SUI
pervisors will not sustain the Mayors, as
such action would be damper on real
estate values and the spirit of improve
ment in the South Side district"
Late in the afternoon A. B. Mcguire, F.