Arizona republican., 1913-09-29
SORRY STATE
DOES Mt LEAD
But Office Engineer of the
State Engineering De
partment Lends His APP
proval of the Proposed
County Road Bond Issue

county hOdQ DOIlO Issue
The following interesting commune
cation on the subject of a road bond
issue is contributed by Mr. T. +.
Nichols, office engineer of the state
| engineers office:
/ To the Editor of the Republican, Sir:
| In the absence of Lamar Copp,
| state engineer, / wish to express the
| friendly interest of the state en-
| gineering department in the proposed
| bond issue for road building in Mari
cOpa county, I must confess, how
| ever, at the start that I really do
not like to have Maricopa county
showing the way to the state of Ari-
IONA. 1t should have been the other
way about.
! When everyone consulted favors a
measure as enthusiastically as in
this case, it seems superfluous to
mention the arguments in its favor.
1t usually happens however, that OPP
position develops unexpectedly to the
best of plans and usually through
some misrepresentation.
/ In this connection it is important
to hold clearly in mind the vast diff
ference between an unbusiness- like
mortgage on the future for the pleas
ure of the present, which is not at
all the thing contemplated in this
| instance and the fair distribution
of a necessary expense among all
that will enjoy it's benefits This
latter it seems needless to say is all
that is contemplated in the proposed
bond issue for road building in Mar
licOpa county.
| The old argument that everybody
is doing it now" applies to the is
suing of bonds for road building as
well as to the tango and the turkey
trot. This would not however, to my
mind lead the citizens of Maricopa
county to too enthusiastic endorse
ment of either or both.
a synopsis of the various bonding
plans was presented at the last an
nual convention of the American
Road builders convention at Cincin-
natl. 1t appears that no great pro-
gress in roadbuilding has been made
in this country without depending on
bond issues for financing the work
The term of the bonds varies large
" all the way from fifteen to fifty
lyears, the provision for sinking funds
to retire the same at maturity being
even more diverse. In some cases
there is no such provision made
| d
tending more and more to issue from
the state instead of the county. and
in general county bonds are only is
sued for road building where there
is no adequate provision for state
bonds for this purpose
Personally 1 should state the case
something like this: The best plan
for raising money for roadbuilding is
by the issue of bonds by the ma
tiOnaI government, the next best
plan is by the issue of state bonds
and so long as neither the United
States nor the state of Arizona has
taken care of Maricopa county in this
respect, the only thing left for Mari
copa county to do is to take care of
herself.
In this connection too much at
| tention cannot be given to the eau
ton included in the letter publish
ed by you from Roy S. Goodrich
refer particularly to the import
ance he attaches to the permanency
of the improvement for which you
issue your bonds. The lack Of such
permanency in the case of cadam
roads under automobile traffic has
led to much criticism of the long
term bond issues by which they were
built. The result of this destruc-
ton of what were planned and fin
anced as permanent improvements.
has been to cause the opponents of
bond issues to claim that possibly
traffic conditions will continue 10
change so as to destroy the newer
forms of pavement that we now
claim to be permanent.
This objection might perhaps he
sustained against some of the forms
of pavement in use and when it can
be sustained 1 must frankly say that
am not in favor of bond issues
for such construction
There can, however, be no doubt
of the permanency of many of the
improvements possible in the way of
roadbuilding in Maricopa county and
I hope to see them made, as [ be-
lieve they properly should be made,
by the aid of a relatively large is
sue of long term bonds. None can
doubt, for instance, the permanency
of all improvements in grade and
alignment. Neither does anyone
, question the long life of concrete
\ bridges and culverts properly con
structed. Further as suggested by
. Mr.. Goodrich. the concrete base that
is being used more and more as a
foundation for thin wearing sur
face in modern pavements might
properly be financed as a permanent
Improvement.
. 1t will be necessary, however. to
i provide for the renewal of the wear
ing surface by yearly appropriations
and such renewals should not prop
erly be financed by bond issues
In an interview published in yon
Il paper Hon. Dwight B. Heard re-
= ferred to the importance of separat-
ir,rr raCl,
Y all possible political influence anC
) referred particularly to Massachu-
d sets as an example of a business.
u like administration of highway af-