Webster City freeman. [volume] (Webster City, Hamilton County, Iowa) 1884-1946, 1911-12-05
LET THE PEOPLE DO IT.

LET THE PEOPLE DO 1T.
The Webster City tFreeman-TriD-
une wants Iowa cities given the OPP
portunity to do their own work. Re-
ferring to what was accomplished at
Ann Arbor where public work was
done by the city when the contract
ors' figures were too high. A law
giving the cities the right to DO
work would not, necessarily, mean
that work would be done at the low
est possible price. It would depend
on the integrity Of city officials. II
contractors sometimes ask prices
that are too high, city officials might
also, in some instances, give the peo-
nile an unfair deal-Cedar Rapids
Gazette.
The burden Of high prices is not
the only thing to complain OF In
contract work. It is next to impos-
sible to get an honest job. When
the contract calls for a piece Of paw
ing of certain dimensions and quail
ity It often happens that both d.
mansions and quality are "scrlmp-
ed" Some concrete paving has been
laid In Iowa cities that has proved
q failure simply because the con-
tractor did not put in the amount OF
cement called for or failed to mix IT
as It should be. Property owners,
II given permission to pave. as tney
have permission to build their own
sidewalk, would do good jobs and
they would see to It that the mater
ial and work necessary to insure
good results were put into 1t. the
council could direct the work done,
prepare the plans and specifications.
and II property owners failed TO 40
It the council could go ahead and
nut It in and charge the cost to the
property benefited. But under pres
ant statutes such work must be
done by contract and the profits OF
patented and monopolized materials
is 50 great that liberal sums are US
ed to debauch councils, buy invest1-
eating committees, bring lawsuits
against honest contractors who will
not bow to monopoly and to make
all the trouble possible for individ-
uals and communities who try to get
ont from under the combinations.
The Freeman-Tribune doesn't
mean that each property owner
should be permitted to pave In front
Of his property, but that all property
owners on street to be paved could
20 together and employ some COM
petent man to take charge of the en-
tire work. In this way the property
owners could buy the material and
there would be no incentive for any
one to slight the work or fail to put
In the material as specified.
or, II property owners preferred,
the council could go ahead and let
the Job by bid, just as at present.
The thing the Freeman-Tribune
wants to emphasize is that the
property owners, If clear majority
can agree, should be permitted to
dictate the kind OF material to be
used and the mode of putting 1t In.
II they were satisfied to leave the
entire matter to the council, we'll
and good. but the council should not
have such arbitrary powers as now
granted.
An Indiana contractor, retireds
once told the writer that some con-
tractors in his state (of course he
didn't do it) bid exactly what they
thought certain job would cost,
then they made their profit by using
inferior material and less of 1t. For
instance, if the contract called for
concrete base one TO Eve, six inches
thick nobody would know the differ
ance If it were made one to six and
five inches thick. The public would
be satisfied and think they were get
ting the job at right prices.
SHALL WE LET THEM?
mes-Republican: Men always
have and they always will. These
things always have existed and al