Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1897-10-15
LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS.

Legislative bodies are rarely, IL ever. In
advance OF the people The Congress, tie
General Assembly, and the City Council
each waits to be urged forward by the
public. 1t Is therefore not strange that
The municipal Legislature Of Richmond
mas not bestirred itself, either IN the mat
Ter of street repairing or street cleaning.
As long as the public was content 10
see our principal streets ill-cleaued. and
was not shocked at the sight Of such
sidewalks as that or Ninth street be-
tween. Main and Franklin 1t was not srr-
prising that the Council should have given
little heed to these matters. But now all
that is changed. Our people are interest
ed and are demanding better and cleaner
streets. But the question Is, How shah
we be able 20 get them?
For our city TO undertake the cost OF
repairing or rebuilding all OF the sldo-
walks that are discreditable 10 US would
be to require vast expenditure Yet
this work must be done sooner or later
Richmond cannot afford to present a
"down-at-the- heel" appearance, and either
the mass Of taxpayers must bear the ex-
pense, or it must be assessed upon abut-
ting property owners.
1t is the usual thing in this country
for cities TO pursue the assessment plan,
and that was the plan under which we
conducted active operations until few
Yeas back. when a series of law cues
lions was raised. in which the whole sub
feet was greatly befogged. But now the
coast is tolerably clear.
In the case of Violet's heirs VS.. the City
Council OF Alea andria. decided by the
Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia
or February 8, 1896, it is settled that spe-
clal assessments may be levied on pro-
perty benefited by local Improvements on
streets; such power Of taxation being up
held, however, solely on the ground of
peculiar benefits TO the property taxed.
In this case the property-owner had
not had fair opportunity to contest the
assessment. and the case was therefore
decided against the city. In View OF the
decision in this case. an Act OF Assembly
was passed at It's last session prescribing
how such assessments may be made, how
notice thereof must be given TO the pro-
perty-owner. and how he may appear
contest the assessment, appeal, &C.
So thoroughly, deliberately, and timely
xafeaiarded are the rights OF property
owners under This law. II proceedings
were now instituted. say. against the
owners OF me property ahuttlng upon
Ninth street, we doubt Il actual work In
ths renewal OF the pavement there could
be begun before next spring, Certainly.
II The property owners chose 10 rests.
the proceedings by all OF the means placed
within their reach they could obtain "A
delay OF that length. so Il woGld seem
That the Council ought to tesh proceed
ings at once. where new sidewalks are
noeoriously aeeded
In the present condition OF business we
presume the city Council would DOT crde'
brard-n.w sidewalks TO be laid. except |
a. front OF unusually valuable property. |
AS rule. a iittlo repairing woui; make |
the present payenents last FOR some |
years ia co,oe liut In sonio cases fnr.he'
delay is tiny:scticablc. w The course a. |
in spots on Ninth street is RichIn2in |
60 be pat TO shame in thai way upoG one
OF her great ihoroughfsrcs. or IS the ne
cessary renewal TO be made; II II IS TO /
be made. by whom Is IL 10 br made? by |
the ci'yy II not By the city. Their why /
does not the City Council proceed 10 give
notice OF a special assessment as Is re
CURED by the act ~ 1896.
What eitec, the decision In The Alexan-
dria case VIII have upon .he debts claimed
70 be due Richmond Tor loesl irapr,yo--
nents made In the years gons we kacw
not But We might az well face the |
situation nos as later on. IL would be
''hsAi Tor as 20 attempt 10 srsnd stin.