Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1908-05-03
CITY HALL QUESTION

With the exception of two or three
interested parties who derive greater
or less revenue from rents from the
city there has been no one either in
the papers or in private conversation
so far as have heard, who has de-
MED the necessity of city hall. Yet
there are few who object to the is
suing of bonds for such a purpose.
The following are the objections
made:
First: Bismarck should erect a
building costing $4,000 or $4,000,
something we can be proud oil" and
'that our grand children can point
to with pride and say, my gradd-
father helped build that" No one
will deny that $4,000 building will
be a great delight to the present gen.
GRAFTON as we'll as to generations yet
unborn. But it would fully add
$4,000 to $1,000 to our tax levy each
year. And even if we did raise the
assessment of property so we could
issue that amount of bonds our tax
alton would be raised just the same
and / will be willing to wager that
certain interests which have escaped
, just assessment in the past will
continue to escape an equitable as
sessment so that the burden OF tax
alton will still be where it goes now,
on the private parties who have no
political pull.
Second: There is the proposition
to erect city building on the lot
where the bell tower now stands,
h,1i1 mo RI
600. If such course is pursued we
will have temporary makeshift af-
fair which, in the course of a few
years, as the city grows in population
and wealth, will be disgrace, an
eyesore to all of us, which we, of this
| generation, cannot point to with
pride or anything else and which I
hope my. grandchildren will not be
able to blame on me in anyway; a
! building which will be unsuitable to
! our purposes and which will not be
large enough for the many uses to
which city hall should be put.
| even with such a building we would
have to issue bonds and our taxes
| would not be lessened. Space for
| bids giving the exact figures as to
| the expense of running either of the
above buildings but it is incontro-
vertable that such is the case.
Third: The objection is made
| that we cannot issue $4,000 in bonds
| now. A previous article in this pa
| per, published few weeks ago,
proved beyond doubt that we can
and the only public objection to
those figures was that the writer,
from the opponents point of view,
4 used peculiar style of bookkeeping
/ though this opponent admitted the
! correctness of the figures and the re-
suit obtained. The writer of the
! previous article should have said
"tweedledee" instead of "tweedle-
/ dunn.
/ Fourth: The objection if also
1 made that the expense of running a
building would be very large; that
we would have to employ five or six
i janators, etc. 1t takes only one JAM
| tor for the Will school building and
| there are a number of instances in
/ the city where one janitor cares for
\ two or three buildings.
I But to get down. to the present
plan Of issuing $4,000 in bonds The
city can now issue approximately
1 $4,000 in bonds; the lots owned by
1 the city are appraised at about ST.
900 and will sell for more than that
4 thus giving us at least $27,5O0, if nee
| essary, for building.
A suitable site, if necessary to pur-
chase one and not use the lot north
OF the court house, next to Mr.
LASTS, as is also proposed, can be
| secured for $4,000 at the utmost and
l al h ~
need fear the city will be held up on
the price for there are numerous
suitable lots to be had and if moth.
ing else will keep the price down
! the competition will.
/ The Will school building is cur
Z rently reported to have cost $4,000
and that is a larger building than
would be needed for many years. A
building erected this year will cost
4 20 . u E Z & - L st5 ~ a#