The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1911-12-19
WELL, new BOARD
WILL FIX ALL. THIS
Street Committee Not Satisfied
With Method of Assess
ing Damages.
AND WHEN is A HOLIDAY
Some City Employees Needed
Whole Day OFF in Order
to Vote.
AND WHEN is A HOLIDAY

several times during Il meeting CT
the Council Committee on Streets last
night members took occasion to ex-
press disse tisfaction with the work OF
Assessor OF Damages y. c. Harman
ana WIN the law under which the as
easements Tor grading damages are
made. Ar. Nelson. OF Marshall ward,
stated that appraisements Of damages
Tor grading certain sections Of Nichol-
son and Louisiana Streets had been or
derec last January. and that no re-
port had been Forthcoming in eleven
months. Another case was cited on
Grace street. west of the boulevard.
where S275 damages has been allowed
In the case of one vacant lot for
very slight change OF the grade OF
the sidewalk. in order to put in curb
ana gutter. all other property owners
on the block having released the city
from all damages in order TO secure
the Improvement.
The opinion was several times ex-
pressed that Assessor Hartman was not
only dilatory and slow in making his
returns but that he had been en-
tirely too liberal In his allowances.
giving damages In many instances
matter OF fact. is greatly enhanced
by the Improvement.
Inv Is Defective.
Much OF the blame. however. Is stated
to lie IN the state law on the SUD
tect. which greatly hampers the as
SCISSOR in his work. Under the old
Constitution public improvements could
be made by the city without recourse
on the part of abutting property own
ers. The new Constitution not only
provides for payment in the case OF &C
tual use OF private property for public
purposes. but also for any damage By
reason of abutiinS improvements, anu
many citizens have shown disposi-
ton to hold the city up to the last
notch. instances being reported where
actual damages have been paid for
q -. ,l.,s nf lfaY ftpn
street in front. and then the sidewalk
in front all three OF the Improve
inents being for the actual benefit of
the property and in no sense to lie
detriment
For years the city went ahead with
improvements and allowed such prop
erty owners as considered themselves
nggrieved TO sue and recover such
Judgments as the courts allowed. While
comparatively few did sue, objection
was raised that the City Council and
street Committee were not put on no.
tice what the Improvement would cost
and were. therefore. working In the
dark.
The last General Assembly enacted
statute providing for the employment
OF an Assessor of Damages. but so
reporting TO the Council for authority
to make the assessment-so much ref
erence of the report TO committees. and
so many delays to allow property own
1
statute. that members of the commit
tee last night expressed the view that
the last estate was worse than the
first. and Messrs Pollock. Lynch and
liaddon were appointed subcommit-
tee to confer with the City Attorney
to see II simpler and more direct
method of procedure could not be de-
vised
10 Notice OF Cost.
The present system is no gain over
the former as the reports of the AS
SCISSOR made 10 the Council-not to the
Committee on Streets-arc a binding
Judgment against the city, and the
committee therefore. In ordering a pub
lie Improvement is as much In the
dark as ii ever was as to the probable
cost. and it's consequent desirability in
view of the limited funds for street
work. Several instances have arisen
where the report of the Assessor was
approved and the damages allowed by
him paid. only to find that there were
no funds then available for the grad
ing. and tn. city has therefore paid
for right which 1t will not exercise.
II the property changes hands without
notice TO the purchaser. II will have to