Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1905-05-11
TAKES WORK OUT
Of MORAN 5 HANDS
City Attorney Gives Opinion Con-
cernis Awarding Of Contract
For Watermains
the MATTER MAY Be TESTED.
Auof ney Holds that work Should Not
Be Ordered uatll All Money Ia
Paid 10.

IN nm opinion M 10 whether or not
Waterman extensions Nos "a, 81, 50 and
~ should b. dono by Il. J, Moran un.
der his 1904 contract or by u, j.. Ford,
who was awarded the contract for such
work during the year 1905, city Atty,
Dey holds that the work should not be
ordered by the council until all OF the
money for tho Improvement " paid
N, and that II should be done by tho
contractor who has tho contracts for
such work at that time. This deprIyos
Mr. Moran OF the contracts IN question
for the reason that all the money has
not been paid In In any OF them
Tho attorney snys that tho rule OF
the city council, authorizing the board
OF public works 10 order such work
done whenever ono.third OF the cost OF
the improvement IL paid into tho city
treasury, does not apply 10 the cyton.
elons IN question for tho reason that
no assessment has ever been levied
against the property for those I'm.
proycmonta M oil Of them were 10 DO
iuade 1T the petitioners expense" In
all such cases the one'third rule can
not apply, Az Mr. Moran has already
been ordered by the clerk of tho board
OF public works To commence work on
soma OF tho extensions mentioned, II
IN very probable that ho win test tho
loattor IN court NS 10 whether or not
ho IL entitled 10 the work,
WHAT ATTORNEY SAYS,
Tho opinion OF the city attorney Is
Os loNowsi
no the Honorable the President ana
Members VI tho CltY Council, .Gontlo-
meni on May ] your honorable body
referred TO tho city attorney Tor Al,
opinion as 10 whether the work OF oon-
Erueting Waterman extensions Nos, n,
81, W and o1 should be done under the
contract for such WORK. made IN 1904 or
the contract for 1905
IN re No, n II appears from the rec.
ords that on Sept :, 1908, the Hubbard
Investment company petilloned for wa,
termaln extension, and that on sept "a,
1903, the council recommended that tho
petition be granted at cost OF s2,aO0,
provided petitioner pays costs OF
same" etc,
In re No 81 II appears that Mr.. II, W,
Lawrence petitlonod for an extension
on Jan, is, 1904 that ON Jan, 70, 1904,
the council granted the petition. at an
estimated cost Of $50, provided pou-
TONER plys the costs of extension" etc.
In re No, 80 II appears that on May 20,
1904 u, ", Harding and Ave others pc.
titonod for w0termain extension, ana
that on June Q, 1904 the council granted
the petition at a cost OF $1,000, "Nhutting
property owners TO pay cost OF tho
same" etc,
In ic No, % II appears that William
N0ylor ct alo on Sept 7, 1904, fled pc.
utlon requesting extension Of waters
main On Oct 3, 1904 the council grant.
Cd tho petition, work 20 be done at pc,
lltoners expense etc. Estimated cost,
5000.
From data furnished by the cIty
treasurer II appears that only sl,7629j
has been paid I'm on extension No "A
llls report further shows that s3,biSSi
~ required whereas the council nSed
,ha estimated cost az $4,000 Also that
IN No, n Only s63gbl has been paid,
whereas the amount required " sO20o7
Also No, &c. that only t36,22 has been
paid whereas the amount required In
N0i022 Also No, %, that only s6o2,i
has been paid, whereas Sl,0Sb,S5 IL ro-
quircd,
II thus appears that the city council
granted conditional authorization %
the several proposed extensions, TO be,
come effective only when, and not untll
the money required for each respective,
" san paid into the city treasury, No
special assessment appears Ia havo
been made, ana consequently tho one.
mira payment rule before work COM
mence0 has no application here Clear.
ly II was not the Intention 10 bind tho
clly 70 pay for said water extensions
except IN scrip issued 20 those who hni
advanced the money No property has
been assessed ana no personal rosponeL.
blllly rests upon amy person TO pay FOR
tho same,
1t seems very cloor 10 mo that under
lho proceedings IN these matters the to.
ta amount required must all be first
voluntarily paid before the councils
resolution an TO performing the work or
issuing scrip takoB effect, and that when
tho condition OF payment n performed
mon the work VIII 20 10 the contractor
whose contract covers such work az that
Time
~ tho required amount appears 10
nave not been paid IN for any ~ said
extensions the existing authorization
Tor The work ", IN our Judgment, not
greouYo nj the present time. Respect,
CHARLES @, DEFY,
city Attorney