Semi-weekly herald., 1909-05-20

people ignored the order. II was
brought out that promises had been
made weeks ago to attend to tbia
Mr.. Morelock moved that the street
commissioner be instructed to clean
up and charge the expense to the
building. as present conditions were .
nuisance and disgrace. The motion
was seconded by Mr.. Dudley. Before
the motion was put the advice of tho
city attorney was asked. Mr.. Moilette
said he could not give an off-hand
opinion as to the law, all depending
on the reading OF the ordinances. but
that the proper procedure would be
to notify the owners or agents and
then II no action was taken to have
them arrested and fined for violation
OF the ordinances. II was finally
4 moved that the matter be referred to
the street and alley committee with
I power TO proceed according to law to
compel the immediate cleaning up OF
the streets.
Mr.. Smith presented resolution
! condemning a large number OF side
walks to be replaced by new walks
and charge to the property. Mr.. Smith
said from the condition of many of
the walks that It was apparent no
attention had been paid to them for
years. Mayor Goodman added that
some walks had been dragging along
for six or seven years In dilapidated
condition and It was only n miracle
that the city had escaped many suits
I for damages and that II was time
something was done. He did not want
to work any hnrdships but the major.
I lty had to be considered and the inter
ests of the city prutecteu ana unere
should be no shifting of the responsi-
bllity by the council. This sentiment
was voiced by each one and the vote
to carry out the recommendations pre-
vailed unanimously.
Mr.. Smith then called attention to
the grade for concrete walks. that NO
system was being followed and that
the city engineer was not In the city
to furnish grades. Matter was dis
eussed as to whether city could con-
tract with outside engineers to do
the work. City attorney held that
as the city had been regularly elected
city engineer such action would not
/ be legal, but the council had author
ity to remove an officer II he failed to
/ do his work and then secure another
/ engineer Ex-Alderman Mcclellan said
the city engineer WAS paid q salary Of
1 $40 month for attending tho meet.
with Information. He also said the
ordinances provided a fee OF $40 per
lot for furnishing sidewalk grades and
setting stakes. this to be paid by the
property owner. but that the last coun-
ell, In order to encourage the laying
OF cement walks. paid the fec where
cement was laid. the owner paying
where lumber was used. The council
made arrangements with the engineer.
Mr.. Henderson, to make a survey OF
number OF lots at a time and be
charged lump price. often only $40
for four or Ave lots instead Of $40
lot. The matter was referred to the
street and alley committee and the
city attorney to consult with the city
engineer with power to act
Then came the question Of changing
the curb line In the residence districts.
Mr.. Smith said Mr.. John Warner had
put In two days canvassing and obtain
Ing the desires OF property owners, and
that a large majority favored fifteen
, foot curb.
W. II. LaCount then had quite =
He said the petition had been clrcu
z lated and the people misled. Mr.. War
D ner denied the charge. but admitted
1 telling some that he said It did mol
@ make any difference which they sign
ed us the twenty foot proposition wa
c beaten. Mr.. LaCount presented pc
e tion from property owners residing or
d Fourth street protesting agatnn'
d changing the curb from twenty 4
u fifteen feet The petition set forth
d that they had signed the petition cir
J. culated by Mr.. Warner under misap
i prehcnsion OF facts. The Warner pa
per contained 1923 names fAvoring tn
u lifteen-foot curb and eight for tn
y twenty-foot curb. The remonstranc'
d presented by Mr.. LaCount 20 TAR =
Is Fourth street was concerned. ~
't largely In favor Of the tventy-foc
r. curb. The discussion at timss b
le came slightly acrimonious anA ~
IL LaCount was called to order ~ u
10 .s.... ~ or,tfh thasx sa~uxunA -,