The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1901-06-21
HEARS REPRESENTATIONS.
Council Committee Meets Pro.
perty Owners.
People Wso Want Their Special Assess
mems Lowered or Wiped Out En-.
tirely Have a HeariUg.

Aids. Wilcox, Deebach and Heinze
of the committee on claims and ac-
counts, and City Attorney Daley, met at
the city hall Friday evening to receive
complaints from persons who have
been assessed for improvements and
who have not yet paid their assess
ments.
Alex. R. Mcdonald wanted to be re-
lieved of his assessment of $12 "a on
the Fourth street. improvement, claim
ing that it had damaged instead of
benefited his property.
J. W. Schmitt appeared on behalf of
Frederick Wickstaed, who claims to
have paid $40 sidewalk assessment to
Officer Schiman some years ago, and
with which the city still has him
charged.
d. l.. Clements wanted to be relieved
of a So assessment for the Fifth street
improvement, claiming that it was of
no benefit to his property J. A. Fit
tie said that his lot on Poplar street
had been sold for an assessment that
covered eight feet more than he owned.
He was willing to. pay the share that
belonged to his lot.
Mr.. Flittie also appeared for the
Givens' estate, which owns block 1875
in West Mankato and was assessed for
the Baker avenue Improvement al
though not adjoining the avenue. The
assessment, costs and interest amount
to nearly $500 The estate does not
want to pay anything.
G. L. Benedict appeared for Wheeler
& Bennett, who own several lots on
North Fro Mt street The firm did not
know that the lots had been assessed,
and desires to pay only the original
assessment, without interest.
Mr. Benedict also appeared for W. B.
Craig, who does not want to pay
$50. 80 that was assessed against his
block 143 in Mankato City, in 1896. He
claims that as long as the city gained
the street by adverse possession it
SnOu1u pay lOr Cue walk.
Oscar Bierbauer does not desire to
pay the assessment for street graiing
on his lots in blocks SO and 81, Man
kato City, as he says that they are
damaged rather than benefited
Thos Hughes appeared for Fl. E.
Thurston, who owns several lots in
block 154, in West Mankato. The as
sessment of $116 for street improve
ment was made by mistake against
block 143, but the lots in block 154
were sold.
Mr.. Hughes also appeared for Hall
& Willard, who have some lots in
Mankato City that they claim were
damaged by the improvement assessed
against them. He also appeared for
NJ G. Willard. who is assessed on a
Clark street lot Mr.. Willard was as
sessed on two lots and paid the assess
ment on one and thinks that he must
have paid it on the other at the same
time, although he has not yet found
the receipt.
w. W. P Mcconnell claims that his
property on Jackson street was dam
aged by the Fourth street improve
ment, and does not wish to pay the as
sessment.
Dr. VIM. Frisbie has several lots in
West Mankato, which he claims are
not benefited as much as they have
been assessed. He is willing to pay the
original assessment without the, in
terest.
Frank Henline claims that his lot
one, block 1913, Mankato City, was
damaged by grading North Second
street, and he does not want to pay
the assessment.
The committee decided to take a
look at all of the property where com
plants have been made. If wrong has
been done, it may recommend relief