The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-02-22


/ realty and $32,5S6,425 personally. 1t would
require an addition to the annual tax levy
| therefore, to pay for all street repairs and
| resurfacing ranging from cents TO 80
cents per 500, and increasing between these
| limits as the guarantees expired. The obli-
| gation of the paving company to guarantee
the pavement is. of course, covered by the
| increased cost of the pavement in the first
| instance.
RIGHT TO ASSESS QUESTIONED.
Sections Of the charter are quoted show
| ing that two different kinds of work on the
streets are recognized improvements"
which are to be paid for by assessment on
the abutting property, and REPAIRS which
are to be paid for out of the general fund.
The report continues:
THE question which first arises is does
the charter permit the Board of Public
Works to improve streets once permanent
~ improved, in a new and different man
ner, and as often as the board may deem
necessary, and, if so. is the charter in this
respect constitutional? In the State of
Pennsylvania it has been held that
special law of Pennsylvania and an ordi-
nance passed hereunder providing for the
repaving, at the expense of the abutting
owners OF street formerly paved at their
the constitutional prohibition against the
States taking the property of the citizen
for public purposes without his consent
and without compensation = On the
other hand, the United States Supreme
Court, adjudicating for the District of Co
lumbia, and the Supreme Courts Of Mis-
souri,, Illinois, Michigan, Louisiana and
Kentucky have held that the Legislatures
have power under the Constitutions of these
States, containing provisions similar to
those Of the Constitution of Pennsylvania,
to authorize the municipalities to repave
at the expense of the property owners
streets formerly paved at their expense
and such is the recognized law in the State
of New York"
The second question which arises says
&c r1.aft, tot
specifications requiring contractors to guar
antee pavements for five years is valid? The
charter says that said board may by order
impose further conditions upon bidders with
regard to bonds and surety or for
Keeping the work in repair for any length
street repairs are uniformly recognized
elsewhere in the charter and in the every
day administration of cities as part of the
necessary maintenance of city property and
not as public work, comforting special bene-
nts upon abutting owners, continues the re-
port, It may be questioned whether the last
quoted provision of the charter is intended
TO apply to contracts for improvements
made at the expense of the abutting prop
erty, and If so, whether 1t is not uncon-
stitutional as attempt to authorize the
taking of the property of individual citizens
to pay the debt which the whole community
owes owes, ana hence the taking of property
AS to the distinction between repairs
and Improvements" the report says the
Tacts are such as to present a good oppor-
tunity for the courts to distinguish between
and define improvements and 'repairs
lnasmuch as the street is not merely to be
resurfaced, but a new structure is to be.
placed between the old base and the new
surface.
THE STREET-CAR SITUATION.
by the decision of the United States Su-
preme Court" the report goes on, 1.-The pres
ent contract between the city and the Citi-
zens' Company is good until Jan. 49, 1901
Whether it holds good after that date is
al rea 81,
inmates any pretended perpetual right in
the streets. Under that contract there is
no obligation on the part of the company
to pave between the tracks. The franchise
OF the City Company contains a provision
requiring the company to pave and repair
between the tracks, and it may be assumed
mat such provision will be inserted in any
Iranchise hereafter granted, unless the city
aulhorltes, for the purpose OF obtaining an
agreement for lower fares should decide
70 charge the expense of paving between
the tracks upon the abutting property own
The cost of repaving Of streets once i'm
proved at the expense of abutting property
funds
In conclusion, the report says that it is
evident that, If the question of repaving
or reSurfacing permanently improved streets
can be postponed without serious injury to
the comfort and development of the city
until a new franchise is granted to some
pany snail pave and repair between the
tracks, it will be pest for the owners Of
property on Washington street to secure
such postponement If. however, the ques-
ton of repaving or resurfacing must be set
tied Immediately it is evident that it would
be better, from financial standpoint, for
the owners of property Washington
street to allow the proposed work to be
done at their expense, and to be relieved
from paying their share of the general tax
alton for repairing and resurfacing perrna-
nently improved streets.
1t is evident that the questions raised by
the proposed action of the city are ques-
tlons which concern the whole city, and
that the persons who are most vitality in
terested are those who own property OF
small value on permanently improved
streets. If it be the proper construction Of
the charter that before or upon the expira-
ton of one Barrett law period a new as
SeSsment, amounting to one-half the cost
Of the original improvement, may be as
sessed for resurfacing upon the owners of
property abutting upon improved streets,
which is of small value, the cost of repairs
having meantime, by the system of guar
antees, been paid by the abutting property
owners the burden will in many cases be
very severe. The owners Of property on
Washington street, where values are high
est, have the least interest in having the
work of resurfacing paid out of the general