Tulsa daily world. [volume] (Tulsa, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1905-1919, 1911-02-04

FlaAlliNN aNNH ' - hNf 200 W hAlNA We
These districts contain railway cross
ings which are to be paved with
brick, and none Of the bids submitted
called for brick paving The ques-
ton Of whether the part of these dis
uWcts calling for asphalt paving
could De let without letting the en-
tire district having previously been
referred to city Attorney Ramsey
HIS written opinion held that such "a
procedure would be Illegal II Is
likely that those districts win be re-
advertised within few days,
The discussion of the maintenance
bond proposition came up yesterday
morning after numerous persons lir-
ing In the districts about TO Dc paved
had been heard ON the question of
whether they desired contracts to bc
let at this time and at the prices
named I'm the bids About a dozen
representative citizens interested de-
sired that the paving contracts be
awarded, Nearly all of them favor
ed the awarding of the contracts
hearing the ten-yoar maintenance
clause. Judge t. b. pillWd' who has
handled all of the legal matters for
the Eureka Construction company In
Tulsa, was listener
The last interested property holder
who favored paving was Attorney
John laNer But Mr. lIaver had "a
different opinion about the ten-year
/ maintenance bond. He thought that
| such a thing is Illegal. lie favored
| putting moIe weight into the IN
spectlon Of the work ana less into
/ the consideration Of the bond guar
/ Iauteeing the work. There were doz-
/ ems Of loop holes, he stated, through
/ which the bonding companies would
escape when called upon to maintain
/ the paving, ana held that such bonds
could not be enforced lie had never
| heard OF one being enforced,
Mayor Martin dlssented and be-
.ievod that irasmuch as the property
owners We're getting the extra five
years maintenance at "A cost Of about
SO a lot more than they could get
the straight fiyc-yoar guarantee, that
Il was worth something. lie paid
little attention to the idea that n
maintenance bond could not be en-
forced.
Attorney Iaver held that after the
specified time Of guarantee bond
had run that il was up TO the city TO
maintain the paving, and not the
property owners; that such Is the
case whatever the duration Of the
maintenance bond; and that this be-
ing the fact, the property owners by
reason Of the contracts which were
let were forced to pay the difference
OF the actua! cost of the paving and
that of the real cost plus the cost
with the guarantee amount added,
Al both morning and afternoon ses-
slons he tried to impress the com
missioners that no maintenance bono
should be for longer period than
ilve years. that two years would
probably be sufficient inasmuch as
the paving companies lay the same
material whatever the duration OF
the maintenance bond.
Judge Dilard at length concluded
he had n word or two to say. He
FAILED to see the connections handed
out by Mr.. Hayer inasmuch as the
attorney represented the Cleveland
Trinidad company which was bidding
on the flve-year maintenance basis
The contracts were then awarded
During the afternoon Mayor Mar
tin called upon one man present tc
give his opinion as to his preference
On the five and ten-year maintenance
bond proposition,
ut doesn't mako much difference
to me- replied the auditor Either
ono suits me-" These words cam'
with some hesiJoncy and evident EN-
aarrassmont
Somebody nudged the mayor.
Il beg your pardon said thu
mayor to the man. Il didn't reallz,
your situation
The spectator was one who woulC
. likely furnish sand to whatever com
pany was awarded the contmct Witi
one company having IN bids witl
maintenance bonds for five years
and the other for either five or ten
the sand man couldn't very well eN
press a preference.
,,.,anor Latara .bo aon,,,,is,,o, O.,
son,n ti,,o yost.rday and wos rosnan