Honolulu star-bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1912-2010, 1914-03-31

build new roads under the new stat
ute. OF 1913. and urges in the strong
est terms that this policy be extended
to the end that the big blocks of the.
city be cut up, so that the garbage
and waste therefrom can be removed
expeditiously and at a minimum cost
TO the city.
Supervisors Pachecc and Wolter. Il
should have been mentioned. were
present and declared themselves in
favor of free system all over. but
could not promise any action in that
regard in the near future. Nothing
was In fact done by the board toward
the object in making up its succeed
ing budget. that for the current half
year term.
Road Frontage Tax
Not long after the passage Of the
road frontage tax laws. the board OF
supervisors held public meeting TO
hear the views of citizens on the qnes-
ton of promptly bringing the enact
ments into play. Your president and
vice-president along with representa-
tiyes of several improvement clubs
attended the meeting and, besides adj
vocating the utilization of these laws
without delay, replied to pretexts Of
feTed by some of the supervisors for
defefring action. The chairman of
the road committee gave tacit an
nouncement Of policy favorable to
the expressed sentiment of the citi-
zens present. indicating a purpose to
apply the laws to two improvements
of the respective classes-that for
street opening to the extension Of
Bishop street and that for paving to
the extension of School street-in or
der to obtain an early test OF the va
ldity OF each statute.
More unfortunate selections Of
works could hardly have been made,
Ias events proved. Bishop street ex-
tension was found to be hampered
with certain agreement whereby the
Territorial Hotel Company, one of the
largest beneficfaries to have been as
sessed, was assured against any spe-
cial levy Of the kind School street
extension fronteds upon properties
whose owners loudly protested that
assessment of the cost of the work
thereon would mean confiscation.
There is reason to believe. indeed.
that our activity in favor Of the front
age tax was one of the principal
causes for Kalihi Improvement Clubs
persistence in declining to rejoin this
central organization. However. the
encouragement youchsafed by the
chairman Of the municipal road com
mittee of belief that the laws we're go-
ing to be put in operation caused your
executive committee to rest on its
oars until municipal iilaetion lasted
so long as to dispel such fond belief.
Ultimately the matter was again taxi
en- up, being made special order Of
business for a general meeting on
November IS. How the subject was
dealt with on that occasion is record
ed in the minutes read this evening.
As the representation made by the
committee then appointed appear to
have had little effect upon supervise
rial action. this matter Of the frontage
tax has, at the instance of the Ma1loa
club, been made a special order OF
business for this meeting.
1t is respectfully submitted that a
grave omissions of duty is chargeable
to the board of supervisors on account
of their failure to carry out the will
Of the legislature respecting the open
ing and the permanent Improvement
Iof reads and streets. Had the road
policy of the board been shaped in
consonaIice with the enactments in
Question, Immediately after their ap-
proval by the governor, the present
|deplorable condition OF the municipal
treasury would not exist, while the
mileage of new and improved streets
respectively would have been increas-
led to an extent far beyond any pre-
yious record for equal time. This is
as plain as the sum of. two and two.
|If the supervisors had made the paw
ing of streets in the business section
conditioned upon the property front
age thereon bearing, say, one-half the
cost, either the proprietors would
Jump at the chance of the betterment
Tor deservedly go without ii until the
opportunity again knocked at their
doors. And if residence sections had
been offered, say. two-thirds OF the
cost of paving certain streets, the
owners of frontage thereon being as
|sessed the remaining third, would
there not have been great amount
of Improvement where today residents
are loudly complaining of neglect? In
the first case the city would have saw
led one-half and in the second case
one-third of its available funds for
roads, and outlying sections would
have permanent work instead of eph-
|emeral patchwork while the money
saved would have obyiated the pres
ent treasury crisis with some over
for still more road work. / have
presumed here one-half basis of as
sessment for business section streets
and a one-third basis for suburban
streets alphabetically = any division
would serve the argument and COM
port with the statutes - for the rea-
son that the supervisors have, to my
mind, unduly magnified difficulty BY
promising exclusive assessment OF
the whole cost of improvements on
frontage or district" AS matter OF
fact they obtained some contribution