Daily Kennebec journal., 1912-02-21


1905
! In the first place. it was learned
that there was a total road mileage
of $500 miles: it was further learned
that 80 per cent Of this mileage was
located within the borders and came
under the jurisdiction of the twenty
cities Of the state and that 92.4 per
cent. Of this mileage was located out
side of the twenty cities; it was also
| learned that the total expenditures
for road Purposes amounted to $751;
600 and OF this amount 35.G per cent.
was expended on the &c per cent. Of
J the roads located within the twenty
cities and that 6f.4 per cent of the
total expenditure was made on the
92.4 per cent of the roads located out
side Of the cities In the cities at
large, the expenditures averaged 1854
! per mile, and outside the cities at
large the expenditures averaged $3.50
| per mile. Tho further, and TO my
mind, most salient feature OF the
whole Investigation was the fact that
the rate of taxation for road purposes
| in the twenty cities averaged S.0033
| and outside Of the twenty cities $.0047
or. IN other words, outside of the cities
aged 80 per cent more than ii did
within the cities. These figures show
ed conclusively To my mind. and Ia all
unprecedented minds. where the real
burden for road Improvement was be-
ing borne. and where relief from this
burden was most needed Carrying
| this line of analysis still further. it
was found that in many of the smaller
= /
| purposes greatly exceeded the average
| of $.0041 and in many cases went as
! high as $.0l5 and in a considerable
number of cases over S.02. Think of
| it cents for road taxes alone!
Invariably, this condition OF high
| ROAD tex was found in towns Of law
valuation. and every thorough investt-
| cation along similar lines conducted
IL any state has shown the same gem
| cral conditions to exist. and every
state-aid law has been drafted with
| these conditions clearly in mind ana
with TIE idea OF relieving them as far
as possible.
Another point of difference in the
| tNo Laws is as follows. The New
Hampshire law prohibits the expendi-
| ture Of any part Of any joint fund in
| the thlckly settled portions of any city
| or town. \ similar provision was in
| oladcd in the bin presented To the
Maine Legislature in 1907. but the rep
resentatiKes from the cities protested
so strongly against this provision that
| il VAS stricken out before the bill was
eracted into law.
Right here want to state that ]
| believe that tho majority OF our Citi-
Zens, tap to the present time. have
| failed to grasp the real idea of state
| aid. IN the final analysis 1t is moth
| ing more than altruism. our cities
and wealthy towns must take n broad
| view Of the situation. They must re-
member that the question IS one which
| concerns the whole state and not any
particular municipality. II is merely
matter of cooperation for the gem
eral good and the expense is borne
| equally by all property in the state.
| Wherever any comprehensive scheme
of roaG Improvement has been success
| fal. this point has been fully under
| stood.
| We are all aware of the enviable
| position held by Massachusetts IN the
| matter of state road work. About a.
per cert of the state tax OF Massachu-
| setts is paid by Boston, yet nor n cent
| of state road money has been expend
ed il the city. | am quite sure that
| several other Massachusetts cities are
| treated the same as Boston pnder the
state road law.
WAYNE county, Michigan. has issued
| 50 0a1 000 in bonds for road improve
| ment. About S. per cent of the tax
| falls or Detroit, hut nune of the
money is expended in the city.
In my Judgment no salaries, for any
| OF the positions in the State Highway
| Department. should be fixed by law.
| The Governor and Council should be
! free tC adjust these salaries to the
needs of the case. Neither should the
| law state definitely how much assist
anee may be employed. That question,
| like the question of salaries, should be
| left to the discretion of the State
Highway Commissioner and the Gov
| ernOr and Council.
While discussing this point ! want
| to say that the Office of Public Roads
has recently made an inquiry relative
| to the salaries paid to state highway
| engineers or state highway commits
sione in the various state aid states
4 returns we're Eb-tINed IIAiftl 81 states +
| Il of these states pay their state en-
gineers n salary ranging from S3000 n
| $4,000: n large number of these being
! S5000 $1,000 $5o0a and 5000. The other
states practically all pay $25e0 al
| though one paws $500 one paws $2400
| and one pays $4,000 for its state engi-
necr, so it is seen that in the question
of salaries Maine is in the lowest class.
! The salaries of deputies, or assistants,
/ range all the way from $500 to $4,000.
| and i'm most of these states these sala-
| ries are fixed from time to time by the
| commission or state engineer or the
| Governor and Council TO meet the re-
| quiremonts of the time.
| / would now Hike 10 discuss with you
| briefly the matter 0t trunk-hnus. Reaie
| izin@ that no state-aid law is complete
| without some provision for a trunk
| line system ana that substantially eV-
cry state-aid law has after few
years he"n supplemented by some
| trunk-linc legislation, the Legislature
of Maine. in 1909 provided that any
| H.