The Logan Republican. [volume] (Logan, Utah) 1902-1924, 1913-03-29
GOVERNOR GIVES REASONS FOR
vETOIRC THE PAVING BILL

& atty interest imposed as to all install
r, ments; but this benefit, IL 1t is ;
h benefit, is Offset, in my opinion, b!
Il the authority given by the provision
t in this act, above referred to, where
r. a default Is declared as to any install
o ment, of compelling the lot owner tc
g pay compound interest upon such de
linquent installment at the rate Of 3
=. per cent.
, Law Repealed
BY the provisions Of this act, sec
, ton 272, compiled laws Of Utah,
1907, is repealed. The provisions Of
this section are as follows:
Nothing in this chapter shall be
construed or held to authorize any
city to issue bonds Of the city, either
as district bonds for paving the
streets or for paving said intersec-
tons or spaces opposite alleys In
said city or for any purpose whatever
to any amount beyond that fixed as
the limit of the bonded indebtedness
Of such city by law?
I am not perhaps clearly Informed
why the provisions of this section
should be repealed. Under the provi
sions Of the present law, as we'll as
under the provisions Of the act under
discussion, city has authority to
issue improvement bonds which a.e
issued as the bonds Of particular
Improvement district. The special
taxes assessed for such improvement
against the particular district constit. |
ute a sinking fund for the payment Of |
such bonds and interest, 1t may be
given az q reasonable explanation for |
the repeal OF such section that It is
the desire to have such improvement |
bonds, II issued, considered district /
bonds and not an Indebtedness Of
city. which may be incurred under
the provisions Of sections and
OF article IA of the constitution.
Excessive Bonds
Whether or no the courts would |
give such construction or effect to
this act, should it become law, 1t \
would seem there should not be a
law upon our statute books which on
it's face authorizes improvement
bonds to be issued which in the ag
gregate amount might be far in ex-
cess of the constitutional borrowing |
capacity of the city and which, re-
CARELESS of the provisions or this act |
must under the constitution, ultimate
ly be met by the city.
1t may be and probably is true that |
the provisions of chapter IA OF title |
10 of the Compiled Laws and other |
provisions of our laws relating to spe-
improvements by cities should be re-
vised and amended, but in the at
tempt to amend certain sections of |
the said chapter 1t appears that the
author of the act under discussion
has not taken into consideration 9TH
er sections Of the chapter which are
not amended, and upon reading the
the sections left unamended, II APP
pears that many discrepancies and
conflicts will still remain should this
act become a law.
imperative
/ call attention to the provisions Of
section 255 as amended by this act.
It is SO amended as to give the pow
ers in such section enumerated to |
boards Of trustees Of any town In the |
state; this in addition to the present |
law. And while 1t confers on boards |
Of trustees of towns the powers en-
umerated in such sections. the pro-
visions OF said chapter IA, unamend. |
ed apply only to powers Of city coun-
ellis. Again, by the wording Of the |
act under discussion 1t Is provided |
In many instances that nothing in
this chapter shall be construed, etc"
The act itself, IL this becomes a law,
will be given a chapter under the law |
OF 1913 and when reference in the act |
Is made ito this chapter" 1t can only |
refer to the provisions of the chapter |
appearing In the Session Laws Of
1913 and will, therefore, 1t seems. |
make imperative sections Of he pres
ent law which remain 'namendea |
when taken in connection with the
provisions of tbs act.
While under the provisions Of this
act, as / have already pointed out,
extra and additional burdens may be
imposed upon the lot owners for spe-
cial improvements, yet there has been
no attempt to take away from cities
the power to levy for such improve.
ments the mill tax in each instance
provided for by subdivisions and
of section 1853 Compiled Laws of
Utah. 1907. In other words. city
will still have the power to levy not
to exceed 8 mills on the dollar to
open. improve and repair streets and
sidewalks and to levy not to exceed