The Daily Ardmoreite. [volume] (Ardmore, Okla.) 1893-current, 1910-05-18


presiding. Commissioners Bridgman,
Dawson and owen being present,
Commissioner Burnitt being absent
Il was anticipated that the pro-
posed pure food ordinance would be
brought up at this meeting and scy
eral gentlemen who wished 10 be
heard in relation thereto were pres
ent However. Commissioner Burnitt.
who had introduced the ordinance,
being absent, It was concluded by
the commissioners to defer the mat
ter until the next meeting.
Mayor Cotner presented h'S an
nual report, which covered the pc
riod since he had been inducted into
office and which was rs follows
Ardmore. Okla. My Il, 1910.
Honorable Board Of Commissioners,
Ardmore. Oklahoml.
Gentlemen:
have the honor TO submit hero.
with my first annual report. It being
one year ago the 3rd day of THE
month since the first officers elect
ed under the new charter were
sworn in.
When the present administration
assumed control of the citys affairs
We found $225.0OO municipal bond
issue, consisting Of $4,000 sewer
bonds. $4,000 water bonds, $4,000
street Improvement bonds. $4,000
fire department bonds. and $4,000
park bonds, which had been votet
more than a month prior thereto
completely tied up in a legal tangle
as 10 whether any of the issues
could be sustained, and they alsC
differed as TO the procedure In call
ing a new election and again votini
the bonds. Suits were instituted anC
taken To the supreme court anC
bonds to the amount of s170.00'
were sustained as follows: $S0.00'
for sewer, $4,000 for water anC
$4,000 for park. The same were sole
aud the various public Improvement
are now being constructed with tn,
money derived from the sale of tn,
bonds.
The supreme court in passing NJ
on the street improvement bond
held that these bonds could not b.
issued. inasmuch as street improve
ments We're not public utilities with
in the meaning Of Section 81. Art
Gle 10 of the constitution. as the.
could only become such "publi
utilities" rs could be owned and use,
exclusively by the city and that tn
abutting property holders owne,
the fee In the streets and that tn
public only had an easement, an
therefore the street intersections an
sidewalk crossings and alley cross
ings will have TO be paid for by tn
abutting property holders. Fac
quarter block bearing its PROPORTION
ate share of the street and allie
crossings.
In passing upon the fire iepar
ment bonds the supreme co.r' bel
that bonds issued for the improv,
ment of the fire department wer
too general and that the Mayo
and Council should be more speoifi
in submitting the question 20 tn
voters. That unquestionably a npl
Der of expenditures of the fire 4
partment would be classed as "pu
lie utilities under Section 81, Art
ole 10, of the constitution, viii
others might not fall under tn.
section. by these suits we have bee
able to determine the procedure
calling bond elections and also
determining what class of bone
would be termed public utilities
under the constitution.
In the suits involving the scho
bonds, 100000 for the high scho
and 100000 with which the scho
district expected to pay the city f
school houses erected prior to stat
hood. the supreme court held tn
the school board should assume Il
payment of the 100000 worth
school bonds, $4,000 of which we
issued in 1902, and $4,000 of viii,