Durango semi-weekly herald., 1907-05-23

A petition was presented signed by
twenty-eight property owners on First
street, twenty-five Of whom were In
favor Of n 10-foot sewer and six for
lessor one.
Alderman Naegelin favored the g.
foot sewer. He stated in reply to a
question that he didn't think five feet
was deep enough for First street, but
didn't want to impose an unjust bur
den on the property owners on the
back streets.
John MorIock couldn't understand
what benefit a 10-foot sewer on First
street would he to property owners on
Second avenue. He wanted the sewer
and was perfectly willing to pay his
Just proportion of the cost. but he
wouldn't stand for having to pay for
a sewer for some one else.
| John w. Wingate presented an elab-
| crate array of facts and figures In
support OF his contention that 1t was
unjust to ask the property owners on
Railroad street and Second avenue to
pay for the construction OF a 10-foot
sewer on Main street, when they
would not be benefited In the least.
In reply to remark made by Alder
man Mci elan Mr.. Wingate said he
didn't want any sewer but II he had
to pay his share he did not want to
he compelled 10 pay for that of some
one else.
Mayor Mcconnell interposed the re
mark that the sewer would be a pub
l 4,
benefit to all the property in the
district. He stated that 1t was on the
same principle as the street sprinkler
all the tax payers paid for its main
tenance. yet only those In the business
center got the benefit from 1t.
Mr. Wingate thought the property
owners along First street should pay
the additional cost OF deep sewer.
The mayor replied that some OF them
were. but those who were not could
not be compelled to do so. II Mr.. Win
gate could suggest some way out of
the difficult the council would be
pleased to adopt II, but under the law
there was no way on the plan pro
posed.
Ht CITY aioihCy 1uio VIC otiShiht, {,
point was the outfall, which would
cost $3.131. II arrangements could
be made for the construction of the
outfall Independent OF the sewers the
way would be clear. That each sewer
could be constructed and paid for by
the abutting property and connect
with the outfalls. He had never said
| bat ha dnna hi tho
outfall II constructed In connection
with the sewers must be paid for pro
rata by the property owners. 1t would
cost more for each sewer to build its
own outfall than for all to pay for
the one.
Mr. Wingate thought that a sub
scrlption could be taken up and the
necessary money raised to build the
outfall separate from the cost OF the
sewer and advocated that the move
ment be started. Mayor Mcconnell
said he was willing for Mr.. Wingate
TO 60 ahead and raise the money, he
would pay his share. but he was OF
the opinion that 1t could not be done
Mr.. Wingate said he would pay his
share but didn't want to tackle the
job of soliciting.
A. P. Camp said he was greatly dis
appointed that the attorney could not
find authority giving the property
owners the right to build their own
sewers. He realized the impossibility
Of equalizing the cost. He favored a
deep sewer on First street and would
contribute toward the expense Of an
Independent outfall.
Alderman Mcclellan offered as an
amendment to Alderman Thomsen's
motion that 1t be the sense OF the
council that 10-foot sewer be con
structed on First street, 5-foot sewer
on Second avenue and Railroad street
Alderman Casey said he WAS sick
and dIsgusted at the way the question
had been handled. The council was
the laughing stock Of the city and that
they were farther away from having a
sewer than they ever had been since
the question came up. He believed
tn councilmen had convictions OF their
own and should stay with them re-
gardless OF what the citizens said.
II they were going TO do anything 1t
was time they were doing 1t or quit
altogether. and acknowledge that thev
were not OF sufficient intelligence to
conduct matters properly.
Matt Harrington stated that the
principle OF the deep sewer on First
street was the same as that applied
to keeping up the park on the Boue-
ward; that he paid toward that and
II was of no benefit to his property
on the north side. He believed all
public improvements were for the ben
eft OF the city In general.
Mr.. Wlngate replied that his prop
erty paid taxes to maintain a park
on the north side and thought there
was kind of reciprocity on that ques.
ton.
Harry Jackson stated that in order
to eliminate Mr.. Wingates objection
to paying for the 10-foot sewer he
would agree to pay whatever extra
there was charged up against Mr..
Wingate on the 10-foot sewer.
| Mr.. Morlock stated that his objec-