Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1914-03-27

s.. K. l W. has been reported by the
county engineer as being in danger
Ous cond on, and the said county
engineer having recommended that
the present bridge be replaced with a
steel structure, now therefore, be it
resolved. That an emergency exists
and that il is the decision of the
board that public necessity demands
that a new bridge be constructed as
soon as lossible on the site of the
Ruth bridge, in Section %, T, I ~,
II. l w, and the county engineer is
hereby directed to request as many
contractors as possible to submit
bids on the same up to 9 o'clock p.
M, November II, Zone week later, ,
at which time the bids shall be open
ed and considered and contract
awarded, should. in the opinion Of
the board, a suitable bid be received"
The minutes of November II say:
Three companies submitted bids:
four from the Coast Bridge company,
bid No. / being for $2,610: bid No.
$4,000; bid No. 8, $500; bid No. 4,
$4,725. One bid from Dibble-Haw
thorne company, of $3,S5O. One bid
from Charles G. Huber for $4,s97."
The minutes then say:
"The board after consideration of
the bids for the Ruth bridge on mo-
ton awarded the contract to the
Coast Bridge company of Portland, at
$500, as per their bid No. 3, this
being considered by the board as the
best bid received"
Appointing Road Supervisors.
The manner in which the county
commissioners have handled the APP
pontment of road supervisors in the
various districts, i'm practically every
instance diregarding the recOmmen-
dations of the good roads associations
of those districts by one scheme or
another, is one of the most peculiar
things your committee has found in
the management of the County's af-
fairs. You committee desires to call
particular attention to the fact that
while the commissioners minutes
show that NJ. j. Neylon's name was
recommended as supervisor of road
district No. :, by his good loads assoc
citation i'm 1911, 1912, 1913 and 1914.
members OF that association state
that Mr.. Neslon has not been recon-
mended for the position of supervisor
since 1911, and your committee is at
loss to explain the discrepancy.
Taking up what the commissioners
minutes show regarding this matter
of the appointment of road supervis-
ors, the minutes for January 90, 1911
state:
Communication was received
from the good roads association of
road district No. 1, recommending
David Fleetwood, John Rodgers, and
Thomas Sleater as candidates for
road supervisor. Also from road dis
trict No. s recommending M. Neylon,
C. christensen, and c. X. Wellman.
The board took up the matter of the
appointment of road supervisors of
ing appointments were made:
District No. David Fleetwood.
District No. 2-William Hartman.
District No. 3-John A. Mckenzie.
District No. ALBERT Smith.
District No. George Sumption.
District No. &C. A. Erickson.
District No. ANDREW Nelson.
District No. 8-M. j. Neylon."
Trouble in No. 3.
The next time the subject appears
is in the minutes of February IA,
1911, where it is stated:
Resolution was received from
Good Road association of Road Dis
trict No. demanding the removal of
il. A. Mckenzie as road supervisor,
and the appointment Of H. l.. Conine,
Gabriel Gallear or ALI Morris to sue
coed him. On motion the clerk was
directed to notify the association that
the appointment was made before the
receipt of the communication, and
that the board refused to take any
further action"
This apparently did not satisfy the
association, for the minutes of March
6 state:
"a resolution was received from
the Good Roads association of Road
District No. 3 demanding the recall
of Supervisor j. A. Mckenzie, and the
appointment of one of the candidates
recommended by the association, viz:
II. l.. Conine, Gabriel Ga'lear or ALI
Morris. On motion the board refused
to take any further action in the mat
ter"
Everything seems to have been
peaceable then until December 80.
1911 when this appears:
Communication was received from
the good roads association of Road
District No. advising the selection