The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1907-01-04
THE VETO OF
MAYOR BLISS
Of Ordinance Providing For
Purchase of Lots For
City Stables.
GIVES HIS REASONS WHY HE
SENDS MEASURE BACK WITH
OUT HIS APPROVAl-IT WAS
PASSED, HOWEVER, OVER HIS
VETO.

The following is the veto message
of Mayor Bliss which he sent to the
council last night disappearing the
ordinance providing for the purchase
of certain lots, and which was passed
by the council over the mayors veto:
Honorable Board of Aldermen, City
of Pensacola:
| herewith return to you without my
approval an ordinance 10 provide Tor
the purchase of certain real estate IN
the city of Pensacola for municipal
purposes. passed December II, 1906
NV reasons for not approving this or
dinance are as follows:
The charter of the city in section 2,
provides that in the city there shall
be a legislative, an executive, and
judicial department Neither OF these
departments shall exercise any power
properly belonging to either OF the
other, except as permitted in this act
The charter then goes on and per-
scribes the power and duties of the
legislative department after which 1t
defines the duties and powers or the
executive department, including the
executive boards. The duties ana
powers of the council are clearly ana
Enthusiastically defined as also the du-
ties and power of the mayor and the
executive boards.
In the purchase of real estate the
charter provides how it shall be done.
Section 81 reads thus: Real estate
NAV be purchased by the mayor with
the consent of the council, when re
oiiestedrtoi DO so by either Of the said
boards for --the use thereof This
itself should be definite enough, but
lest there be any question about II;
section 81 of the charter reads as FOL
lows: Whenever property shall De
needed for appropriate municipal pur-
poses. either within the boundaries
of the city or the county, the board
of public works, may with the consent
of. the mayor and the council, order
the condemnation of the said proper
". which shall be condemned accord
ing to law" From this it will be
clearly seen that the purchase of real
estate for municipal purposes belongs
to the executive department OF the
city and especially to the board OF
public works, which of course must
have the sanction of the council.
There is not one word in the organic
law that warrants the council in 60
ing out and buying real estate, es-
peciaIly when the executive boards had
not requested it The facts of the
case in this purchase are as follows:
The finance committee of this council
which has no authority whatever IN
the executive department of the city
took it upon itself to recommend that
they directed by the council to get
urices on a block of land on which
to build stables for the city stock
Neither of the boards had made any
reouest of the finance committee IN
this respect and neither was either
of the boards consulted in the matter
The board OF public works has charge
of all city property, excepting thai
under charge of the comptroller, and
the horses and apparatus in the fire
department If property was needed
for city stables the board of public
works was the proper department tC
determine what that property should
he and where it should be, of course
with the approval of the council II
its purchase. but the finance commit
tee. ignoring the rights and duties o
/ the board of public works, took
uDon itself to recommend TO th'
(continued on Third Pdge.)