The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1906-12-21
Old Question Revived BY
Charter Amendment
ALDERMEN TAKE ACTION
Towards Settling Up an Old Matter
Letter of A. C. Blanchard Received in
Reply to Request for Statement Of
His Purpose in the Case.

An amendment to the Barre city
chatter was secured at the session of the
legislature Just adjourned which provides
that in case at ai1E time within six
years prior to the passage Of this act,
any street, lane or alley has been grad
led, paved, etc. the city
council may order and direct the street
commissioners to assess not to exceed
one-h half Of the total cost and expense
of such improvements upon the lands
and buildings abutting'
IN view OF this act the last meeting
fof the board Of aldermen requested the
city clerk to visit these abutters on
North and South Main streets, who had
been assessed ON the block paving laid
three years ago and who had refused
payment, to see if they were now will
ing to pay the assessment levied against
their property without going through
the formality Of new assessment as
required under the amended city char
ter. The parties addressed we're re-
quested to advise the clerk Of their de-
cision on Or before December "a, as it
is expected the council viii proceed To
|reassess then, II they do not signify
their intention Of paying without.
In reply to one Of these letters Al G.
blanchard has written the city clerk
as follows:
Reply by A. c. Blanchard
Dear Sir; IN reply to your letter
of 10 inst regarding assessment, win
say wish this matter OF paving as
sessment might have been adjusted
years ago, and believe would have been
long before this if the city council had
made q business OF taxing all perma-
nent street Improvement eavaer bv gem
eral taxation or special tax upon the
abutting property DO one or tie other
and stick to IT,
But 70 single ont as you have very
small proportion OF your streets and still
let other abutting property with street
improvements equally as good as far
as permanent streets, sidewalks, curb
ing, sewers, CUTTERS, etc, are concerned,
90 into general tax, am Of the opinion
that unlcs you adopt one or the other
method and make it general YOU are
going TO have dissatisfaction
refer you to Washington street,
Keith avenue, Seminary street and 9TH
ers. Compare 1t with what you propose
to do on Summer street.
While won propose to build Summer
street sufficient to take care of the traf-
fic it will get, did you not build SemiA
nary street and others equally as good
for traffic that particular street was to
get? If so. why do you not levy a
special tax on abutting property for
amount Of its proportion of cost Of in
provementsg
wish you would favor me with re-
ply TO this question. If this amend
ment to your city charter You speak Of
is giving you tho required authority to
90 back six years and assess all the
abutting property where you have masle
permanent improvements TO streets, gut
ters, crbing, sewers, etc, and YOU do
il in general, do not believe there will
be any objection by the abutters on
Main street, that took exceptions to
your proceedings on assessment in ques-
ton.
], however, speak only for myself and
as far as | am Interested. ! do not un-
derstand from the plea of your counsel
before the Senate committee that You
have any assessment against me.
Am | right or noti
II YOU have a bill against me, please
send it by return mail. itemized, that /
may consider same,
A. @. Blahchardl.