The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-02-29
SOUTH topeka DRAINAGE

|SUUIh IUPEkA DRAINAGE
To the Taxpayers of the Shunga-
nunga Drainage District:
The drainage board, or the fraction
that Is left Of 1t, has recently made
report and hurried into print with
1t, adding some very laudatory re-
marks about their own philanthropy,
honesty and public spirit, and two of
them offer themselves for reelection
next Tuesday. One of these patriots
is a two-headed candidate-headed
for a second term on this board, and
a first term on the board of county
commissioners. His valor and itch
for office seems to have blinded him
to the glarfng Inconsistency Of being
on both boards at once and dealing
with himself in a two-faced capacity.
If there should be a clash Of interest
or authority between these two
boards, how can he honestly repre-
sent the opposing or conflicting inter-
ests? Do you as tax payers want a
two-faced official making contracts
with himself from two opposite direc-
lions? Can he honestly represent op-
posing interests between these two
boards and be Of any possible service
to either? Will you tax payers stand
for that outrage on decency2 We are
informed that the present board has
already made contract with the
county board to let the county off for
ever from its just share Of expenses,
for the paltry sum of $500 and the
city for $3.50 all of which the district
tax payers have helped to pay
through county and city taxes. And
all work hereafter done for the bene-
fit of either city or county must come
out of the pockets of the property
owners In the district. even though it
many amount to many thousands OF
dollars. Why did they not let the
other property owners In the district
off on the same ultra-Hberal terms
Do you think it was square deal?
Was it honest? Will you stand for 1t?
You have now been taxed three times
over for this bit of business sagacity
and honest administration, once by
the county, once by the city and once
by the drainage board in a special
levy
And what have you got to show for
this triple pinch of your pockets, that
has already cost us according 10 the
garbled report of the drainage board
treasurer s2,240.3O, with an unreport-
ed amount still to follow?
You have a dinky little ditch, few
rods long, with only about half the
capacity of the creek that was cut out
by it, and a few rods of worthless en-
bankments that will hold more water
out of the creek than in it. while the
real cause Of overflow, the all too mar
row waterways under the bridges that
span the creek are left untouched. A
wonderful piece of sagacity!
In the garbled report just issued,
the board makes no mention of the
$500 from the county, nor does 1t In
form us of the amount Of the special
levy collected, nor why 1t did not levy, |
as the law requires, the amount that
the assessors report called for, nor
why they violated the law by paying
several hundred dollars of incidental
expenses out of the special improve
ment fund instead of the general fund
as the law plainly requires, nor why |
they employed a second contingent OF
engineers at nearly a hundred dollars |
cost to make plans and estimates, ar
ter having employed and paid the |
county engineer $50 for doing the
same thing, nor why one member OF
the board hired himself $33 worth on
er-in-law to advise the board how
most effectively to drain the pockets
of the tax payers instead of draining |
the creek, nor why the treasurer paid |
out $40 Of your money for his official |
bond without authority of law for so |
doing, nor how much of our cash is |
left in the treasury to be turned over |
to the new board when it comes into |
office, nor why the three remaining |
on the board did not COM
ply with the law by filling the vacan-
cies on the board when two of it's |
members moved out of the district |
and carried off part of it's official rec
ords. This marvellous report with its |
grandstand argument for the virtue |
and honor of its members, reminCs |
one of the statement of Lord Give be- |
fore the British parliament when he
was on trial for plundering the peo-
pie of India: when I think of all
the opportunities 1 had. I am amazed |
at myself for not taking great deal
more"
We, q 70 i,,pro1,o thu opportunitias
of the three, that the other two were |
left off?
This three-fingered, remainder of
the board recently called caucus OF
the voters in the district to nominate
candidates for election on March 8,
the day the law fixes for new cleo
ton. And when the caucus assem-
bled in the store Of one of the board,
the president of the board called the
caucus to order and promptly an
nounced himself chairman OF the
caucus and another board member
secretary. refusing the request Of |
those present to be allowed to elect
their own chairman and secretary
according to custom And i'm
one Of the benef1ciaries of
the board nominated all three of the
board with two other benef1ciaries,
as candidates for the ensuing election. /
But the tax payers present proceeded
to vote down that set or nominees by
more than two to one, and then put
UP a ticket of their own and elected
it by nearly three to one OF the voters
present. Whereupon the board
and seven of it's followers instituted q
rump caucus and nominated an "off1-
cdal ticket as they styled it. But
even that was not done until a big
had been raised. over COM
polling one of the three sraces to re-
tire in order that a colored man
might have a place on the board
ito draw votes"