The pioneer express. [volume] (Pembina, Dakota [N.D.]) 1883-1928, 1912-10-11

TO most people would seem to represent
the bulk of the cost of the dram.
But it would appear by the actual
facts that the digging of the drainis but
small part of the cost under our system
in this county.
Here are the facts:-
! The County Drainage Commissioners,
from whose decision there is no appeal
in this state according to our learned
supreme court), proceeded to levy and
assessment of Sl5. .l24. to construct this
drain which the survey and the contract
showed cost Of about 5000 to dig.
This assessment was made in four
annual payments on the county tax lists
of 1881 annually, and running from s54.
to go. total for each 40 acres benefited.
So far three of these assessments have
been paid in amounting to about 81 1000
with perhaps about $3.50. delinquent but
which will be paid as the land is good
for it.
OF the three assessments already paid
there is now balance of e524.25 in the
county treasury and about 800. out.
standing in warrants.
There has been paid in drain warrants
on this drain fund up to this time, the
sum of $9,400. of which the contractors
have received for the actual work done
by them 1850.
That is to say, the expenditures up to
the present time show that the money
paid in to the county treasurer as taxes
has been paid out in nearly the same
proportion as the first estimate of the
Drainage Board.
To recapitulate. using round numbers:
Amount assessed by County
Drain Board ..... SIS. 600
Amount to be paid contractors
lOr olgglng. ng................... 5!OOO
Amount to be paid for other pur-
poses ..........-........ 10000
Or to make the statement up to dates.
Assessment for three years about 1924
Amount paid contractors. ....... 1850
Amount paid for other purposes
Observation-Disclosures. $3.50
Cash on hand ................... 524
That is to say, the above figures show
that the Macarthur ditch has cost 9,4OO.
to date, of which only $4,000. has been
for the actual digging, leaving about
5000. expended for other purposes.
And further, by the original estimate Of
the drain board the drain was to cost for
digging about q, 900. and the other ex-
penses we're to aggregate $4,000. or that
the expenses account would be q. for
each 81. spent for the real work Of dig.
ging the ditch.
Further, We have the present status Of
the drain to be this: The drain is practi-
cally completed, the contractors are paid
all but about 81 600. while the board has
has s525. in treasury and $3.50. due on
taxes Of 1911, most of which will be paid
within 80 days, or 81 $50 with which to
pay the 81 600. due the contractors.
And yet the county auditor is at this
r.
moment extending on the tax-list the
sum Of 1852. in addition, to complete
the original assessment Of sl5, 900.
Now we beg leave to ask of the auth
critics that be, which include the Board
OF County Commissioners Of Pembina
County and their appointtees the Board
Of Drain Commissioners, the following
questions:-
Does II actually require twice q much
money to survey, and supervise the Dig
ging Of drains under the Law il this
county . II does fof the actual .excav.
ationi And.if %. why and what fori
With ! balance IL The treasury and
available. sufficient % psy tho contractor
in full, With ~ othsr bills sxcept about
|el0os paid II full, Why shall lthea ddition-
u sum sof ss5e3 n 4 III d 5plssd nppon