Twice-a-week plain dealer. (Cresco, Howard County, Iowa) 1895-1913, 1909-03-16

stretching things some?'' "Why! no, !"
said the secretary. "You are large and
l am respectable.
In like manner, Mr.. Kellow looks at
the number of signers on the protest,
adds his own estimate of his import
ance, and imagines it multitude.
Third Don't you know that only
14OO out of the 3OO5 feet of frontage is
actually owned by what is commonly
called property owners.
Right here is the main contention.
Mr.. Kellow chooses to take the ground
that the railroad company and Howard
county are not property owners. The
railroad company pays every tax levied
on its property in Cresco and will pay
more for paving than any other firm or
man on the street. Howard county,
when it comes to paying for city I'M
provements is assessible just as any
property owner is, and when such mat
tiers are under consideration is to all in
tents and purposes just as much a
property owner as is VIM. Kellow.
While we have the utmost respect
for the opini. ms and wishes of the local
property owners, we feel that the pro-
tests OF non-residents to an improve
ment tax should be ignored if the i'm
provement is needed and the tax is not
excessive. Remove the names of
actual non-residents from the protest
and nineteen remain. AS we reckon it.
there are forty-five property owners ia
the paving district not including the
railroad company and Howard county.
Local property owners considered the
opposition to paving is in numerical
minority, and frontage minority as
as well.
Fourth-Do you know that all of the
parties who own the 535 feet of front
age and not signers of the protest
wanted this paving done now.
The answer to this is disposed of in
the questions answered above with Just
this addition. We know that one OF
the signers of the protest told one OF
the council to pay no attention to his
signature. Another expressed himself
to the council that he was pleased that
it was ordered in, several (more thar
two) of the signers of the protest, in.
Guiding some of the signers of the
Times article have expressed them
selves as not seriously opposed to paw
ing; and since it has been ordered, fifty
feet frontage has been sold by an OBJ
jector to man who is anxious fol
paving. Even the man who asked u.
to publish your article, tells us thai
when paving is once in, no one would
think of doing without it again, ant
that paving once commenced would
spread; that paving was bound to com,
sooner or later, and that his main de
sire was to postpone it few years.
/ Fifth-Is the fact that only 125 fee
OF the 865 OF frontage signing this pro
test and owned by men doing bushes,
(most, If not all of whom would be glat
to quit any reason why they should b.
driven out by an unreasonable tax.
4 The tax is not unreasonable. w,
should regret to think that any bust
ness man on Main street owning thei
place of business could not pay an an
nual installment of $40 or thereabout.
on permanent improvement to hi
property.
Mr.. Secretary of our Booster Club
your parenthetical statement in thi.
question, elects you to the presidency
and general management of the Crescl
Knockers Club.
Sixth-Are you in favor of imposing
any more special or additional tax OF
the people on top of the present 65l
mill levy.
In the past Cresco has cheerful,
voted upon its self taxes for various
improvements, taxes for new cour
house, water works. electric lights
new school houses, sewers-all improve
ments to the town which are of value