The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1908-05-19

fund" in these words, "and Of the tan
so levied (refers to the tax of seven
tenths of a MILL the commissioners
shall set apart such portion, as they
may deem proper, TO be applied TO the
building and repair of bridges, which
portion so set apart shall be called a
bridge fund, and shall be entered on
the duplicate, etc, ETC., and expend-
ed, except as may be otherwise pro
vided by law, under the directions OF
the commissioners in building bridges
and culverts, or in repairing the same.
The bridge fund having been SO de-
fined, what does the statute mean
when it subsequently provides, "in
all cities of the second grade of the
first class and all cities of the second
class, one-half of the proportion of the
said bridge fund collected upon the
property within said city, in all cases
where the city council shall demand
it, shall be paid into the city treas
ury, and shall be expended by such
city for the purpose of building and
repairing bridges" Said bridge fund
mentioned refers to the bridge fund
as set apart by the county commits
sioners from the seVen.tenths of a
mill levied for the purpose of building
bridges and culverts or in repairing
the same.
To more clearly, II possible, show
the intention of the legislature that a
special levy made for the purpose of
restoring an important bridge should
not be considered part of the bridge
fund, the statutes specifically provide
that the proceeds of such special levy
shall be applied solely to the restora-
tion of the important bridge for the
purpose of which the levy is made.
This portion of this section of the stat
ute reads as follows: THAT in case
an important bridge belonging to or
maintained by any county has been
or shall be destroyed or become dan,
gerous to public travel by decay or
otherwise, and the restoration thereof
is deemed necessary for public ac.
commodation, the commissioners may
levy a special tax for that purpose
not exceeding one mill and five-tenths
the proceeds Of which shall be applied
solely to such restoration.
The hardship resulting from the lax
| to cities desiring to have charge oi
the construction and repair OF theil
bridges has been foreseen by other
cities as is evidenced by special leg
islatiOn for their benefit.
/ Cincinnati on demand is entitled t
one-third Of all the money raised il
Hamilton county for general bridge
purposes.
Marietta secures the whole of the
proportion of the bridge fund collect
ed upon property within said city.
Dayton may levy it's own bridge ia,
and the commissioners of Montgomer.
county cannot levy tax for road ant
bridge purposes on property within
said city.
Warren also has a special law TO
its benefit.
From the law as it exists, the fol
lowing conclusions are reached:
THAT the city on demand is en-
titled to one-half of the proportion o
| Lne Drldge 1und corrected upon TN
property within said city.
| 2.-That the proceeds of specia
tax levy by the county commissioner
for the restoration of an impOrtan
bridge can be used by the county com
missioners solely for the purpose o
the levy, and the proceeds of sait
special tax are not part of the bridge
fund to which the city would be ell
| titled to a proportion.
This law as it applies to the city o
Canton when the city demands its pro
portion of the bridge fund, operates
unfairly, since the city bears much
greater burden in the matter Of taxes
for bridge purposes than it receives
| benefit.
To overcome this disadvantage ant
give the city some adequate return
for the money paid into the count!
bridge fund.- it will be necessary tina
the present law be amended so as t.
give our city just proportion of mon
eys paid in to the bridge fund of thu
county, as well as moneys paid in OF
account Of special levies made 70
special bridges.
/ Respectfully submitted,
John II. Blake, Solicitor