Little Falls herald. [volume] (Little Falls, Morrison County, Minn.) 1889-1950, 1905-02-03
PROPOSED AMENDMENT

PROPOSED AMENDMENT
Consideration as to the Pro-
posed Charter
Change
There appears to be misapprehenslo
IN some quarters as to the proposed
charter amendment. The object is not
to conf1ne the city to doing all public
directly, and to abolish
the contract system. It is possible that
the city would not exercise at all it,
power to do work directly conditions
might be such as to make the contract
system preferable. Instead of being
restricted to one system of having it's
work done, the city would have two
No business man in the city would
allow himself to be tied down the
way the city is at present. Let as
assume that q certain public I'M
provement is greatly needed, that it
would be very unwise to delay it.
Under the present system bids are
called for. Supposing they are too
high. Then they are rejected. and
again bids are called for. It would
be necessary to keep on readvertis-
ing for bids in the hope that finally
fair price will be reached. In case of
an improvement much Deeded. the
board could not afford to keep on re-
advertising. The high bid would have
to be taken, or the improvement
abandoned.
Under the proposed amendment,
when it appeared hopeless to secure
fair bid, whether the high bid was
caused by combination of contractors,
or other reason. the city could,
through the board Of public works,
drop the attempts to have the work
done by contract, and 90 on with the
work. The very fact that such an op-
tion existed in the charter, would
tend to have sslutary effect on the
bidding.
It has been claimed that the city's
experience in the past with day labor
has not been satisfactory. This is pos
sibly true. and at the same time it is
possible to point out where the con-
tract system has also been unsstisfac-
tory. In the days when there was
much day labor done. there was no
system Of checks In the charter such
a. now exists. We would as soon trust
tho present council o. board Of public
WORKS to supervise and construct Z
public Improvement ~ We would any
contracting firm. That, however. IL
not tho question. There are several
other points in connection with the
amendment which viii be taken up
later. It must be remembered that tho
question In not one between day labor
and tho contract system, but whether
the city shall have no option whatever
in determining how it wants it's work
done.
While most cities Of tho state prob
ably have the contract system provided
for In their charters, not all arc
bound to 1t. The new charter of the
city of Red Wing. adopted year ago,
gives the council the power to have
public improvements done either by
contract or by the city through tho
board Of public works,
In letter to Mayor Vasaly, City
Clerk Gard Of Fnrgus Falls says, after
saying that they are restricted to the
contract system by their present
charter:
4''We are nos sure that tho council
should not have tho power to exercise
ID. discretion in making oil improve
ents BY direct work under supervi.
sion Of tho .street commissioned. We
lind tho contract system complicated
and much moro expensive. The past
year'sexperienoe Of making improve
men:s by contract has given us more
trouble and the assessments have met
with more objections than in all the
work heretofore done by day labor
City Clerk Ward Of Saltwater ssys
that their charter is not restrictive,
and they can have improvements
done a. tho oity desires. Afper the
engineer has made an estimate of the
cost Of an improvement, and neoes-
sary proceedings, such as hearings, are
gone through. the council by resolu-
tion makes the assessment based on
the estimate. Assessments are COL
lected before or after the improve
ment.
In Moorhead and Austin all i'm.
provements over q certain amount
are done by contract.
It had been supposed by some that
the contract system was compulsorv
In all CITIES of the state. The above ia
some evidence that snch Z. mt H..