The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1906-02-16
Broad Street Controversy Now
Comes to An End at Last.
COUNCIL ENTERS AGREEMENT
City Will Pay for Street intersections
and the Property Owners Bal
ance Of Contract Price.
From Saturdays Daily.

From Saturdays Daily.
The council last night ratified the
agreement of the property owners on
Broad street relative to the amount
which the city will pay toward the cost,
and asked the board of public works to
assess against the property only the ac-
tual amount that the improvement cost
in front of the same. Attorneys for the
property owners endeavored to have the
| action of the council made more formal
and technical, but City Attorney DALEY
feared that the action which they sug-
gested would embarrass the city in case
someone wanted to cause further litiga-
ton. The agreement should rest on the
good faith of the city officials, who
were present The officials stated that
they would stand by the agreement to
the end, and with this assurance the at
torneys no longer insisted on the pas
sage of the motions that they had sug
gested.
Every alderman was present at the
meeting, even Aid. Heinze coming in
Unexpectedly. Mayor Taylor presided.
few of the property owners dropped
IN to observe the proceedings. The ut
most good feeling prevailed, and an in
tention to settle the controversy for
ever was manifested.
The settlement agreed upon leaves the
matter exactly where it stood four years
ago this spring, when the improvement
of the street was proposed and $4,000
was set aside to pay for the street in
tersections. Then the injunction suit of
John Diamond was sprung and the city
was enjoined from increasing its in
debtedness, owing to the limit having
been reached, and the council was fore
ed to look to the property for the entire
cost. The litigation and interest on
the Judgment, due to the litigation, has
cost the city $4,000, and the tax pay
ers on Broad street must stand their
proportionate share of this. The prop
erty owners are out this, and nothing
ahead, unless it be the use of their
money for three years.
Mayor Taylor explained that the
meeting was called for general business,
but more particularly because of the
settlement proposed of the Broad street
| assessment. There are 1000 to 5000
feet of frontage on the paved portion of
the street, and of this 1000 to 5000
| feet are represented on the agreement to
pay $3.50 a lot with ten per cent off
for cash.
Alderman Atchison moved that it
was the sense of the council that when
| the board of public works makes an as
sessment to pay the costs, damages and
expenses of the improvement made in
the wear 1902, on Broad street in said
city between Vine street and Warren
street in said city, that the said board
of public works deduct from the $4O,-
OG5.95 assessment to be made for said
| Improvement, the cost of the street in
tersections of said improvement, esti-
mated at $l2,92595, and also that the
property owned by the said city and
fronting on said improvement be assess
ed the same as other property benefited
by said improvement, estimated to be
the sum of $4,000.
Aid. Atchison said that he was glad
to see the matter settled.
J. A. Flittie arose and said that they
wanted it understood between the prop
erty owners and the city that if the as
sessment is not sufficient to meet the
cost of the improvement the property
will not be reassessed or liable for any
other sum; and also that the contractor
is to be bound to maintain the pavement
in perfect condition for ten years from
the time that it was laid. The property
owners wanted no afterclap. As long
as they were settling, they wanted to do
it once for all. They would like to have
these things specified in the resolution.
City Attorney Daley said that the
council and the city officials expect to
stand by the agreement. The board of
hubble works must make the assess
ment. and after it has been made any
tax payer may 60 into court and start
a fight because the whole amount of the
cost has not been assessed upon the prop
erty benefited. The city wants to be
left in shape so it can fight such pro-
ceeding without being embarrassed. 1t
was a question whether the levying of
general tax would not be a violation OF
the injunction in the Patterson case,
and the city is in ticklish position, in
the midst of the various injunctons and
the action of the United States court.
There is no doubt but what a general
tax levied by order of the latter court
could be collected, but the city would
prefer, if possible, to levy it in the us
ual way. The officials did not want to
do anything that would place them in
contempt of court.