Willmar tribune. [volume] (Willmar, Minn.) 1895-1931, 1906-05-30

city At heart, irrrespeeti e 81 political
affili ions and the ID fferent opinions
held respecting cert1ip other lQcal|
questions. II there IS any opposit iont
TO the measure it comes from one Of
two sources: There are, first, those
who are opposed to it on general prin
ciples, that is, upon the presumption
that any measure originating from the
present administration must of neces-
sity be wrong, and therefore ought to
be opposed, or in other words, the
welfare of the city should. be sacrificed
for spite. Those who take this narrow
and arbitrary view of the matter are,
few, and I do not consider
that any argument in support Of the
measure could avail to change their
minds on the subject. Then there are,
secondly, those who are opposed to
the proposed measure, not from: any
reason that they fail to sufficiently
grasp the nature and purpose of the!
proposed bond issue. It is, as T. under-
stand, for the benefit of these that this
article should be written, and I trust
that shall be able in some measure
to enlighten them thereon with a brief
statement. - -
Our charter provides for fund to
be known as q 'Permanent Improve
ment Revolving Fund.-" and it was for.
the purpose of establishing this fund
that the city council passed an ordi-
nance providing that bonds be issued
in the sum of five thousand dollars,
and it is the question whether or not
this fund shall be provided that the
voters will have to determine by their
ballots on June IL! Now, in the first
place, it may be asked, what is the
necessity for such a fund.-. The answer
is, in brief, to enable the city to lay
sidewalks and make other necessary
improvements where the property
owners refuse so to do when ordered
Some one objects to this, saying, II
laid my own sidewalks, and am not
in favor of making the city lay and
pay for the sidewalks of my neighbor.
Let him do as I did," Here is Just
the point where the misunderstanding
comes in. The charter of our city pro-
vides that the cost of laying side walks,
etc., must be paid by. the abutting
property owner. It also provides
that whenever sidewalk, for instance,
has been condemned, and the AUDITING
owner ordered to lay new one, and
he neglects or refuses to do so, the
city shall lay such walk at the ex-
pense of the abutting owner, and the
cost thereof be assessed against such
abutting property. Now let us take q
concrete case: The sidewalk in front
of John Does lot is utterly impossible
without danger to the life and limb of
the pedestrians. 1t is condemned by
the city and John Doe is ordered to
lay new walk. John Doe refuses to
do so. It now becomes the duty of the
city to lay such walk, or else. take the
risk Of having to pay damages for
broken: limbs or other injuries liable
to be sustained by reason of such: de-
fective walk. But John says, IT will
not lay new walk, and 1 don't think
the city will because it has no funds. -
And the fact OF the matter is that, un-
der the present conditions. John: Doe
is right. The city has no money that
it can use for such a purpose If it
did have the money and could lay the
walk, as the charter provides, the
costs would be assessed against the
lot of John Doe, and said John Doe
would have to pay the money back
into the revolving fund within q year.
Hence, tho the city temporarily pays
for the walk, John Doe would be
obliged to repay the city every dollar
spent in laying it. Here is one in
stance where the necessity and utility
of the proposed fund is easily seen.
The city now has the remedy, but it
has not the means ,wherewith to apply
the remedy. It is not that the city has
no money, but it has no money that it
can use for just this purpose. I can
not speak as of my own knowledge,
but am informed from reasonably
reliable sources that there is enough
money in the city treasury to take up
the proposed bonds and that the issue
would practically amount to q mere
transfer of money from one fund to
the other. I am sure that nearly every
one who reads this article can mention
particular instances, even in the most
travelled sections of our city where the
sidewalks have for years been in such
condition as to be a disgrace to the
city and a source of danger to people
who must necessarily travel over them,
and yet the city has been handicapped
in that it has not had the means where
with to enforce the provisions of the
charter in having sidewalks laid at
such places. To remedy this evil the
proposed fund should be provided. I
trust that have made it sufficiently
clear that it is not the intention or
purpose to lay any sidewalk or make
any Improvement out of this fund 'ex-
cept such for which, under the charter,
assessments may be levied against
AUDITING property, and that the only
purpose is to have money that can be
used temporarily in such cases as ]
have mentioned. -. -
The question, therefore, resolves it.
self into this: Shall the city continue
to be handicapped in the making Of
necessary improvements, merely be.
cause the property owners neglect o,
refuse to make such improvements, OF
shall we provide means which the city
may temporarily use to carry out thu
provisions Of the charter? It seems
to me that every public spirited either
OF Willmar who takes any pride in thu
city, can arrive at but one conclusion
and one answer to this question. Lei
us by all means remove any obstacle
in the way OF making our city as at
tractive, as safe and as convenient as
it's size and stage of development re
Iquire. Nothing can be more condu
Give to the furtherance OF. the business
interests of our city and its genera
welfare than to make it as attractive
Las possible, and \ I feel assured tina,
manifested evidences Of prosperity viii
bring further prosperity to our city
It is to be sincerely hoped that thu
voters of Willmar will all unite II
support of measure so necessary anI