The Ocala banner. (Ocala, Marion County, Fla.) 1883-194?, 1914-10-23

QulT0 $00sUUU LOT Tic cuidlSiuS dAAu
equipping of the water works plant
and the figures remain at that sum,
and that equipment is to come first,
and if the engineers estimate be cor
rect it will exhaust the entire amount.
So much for that.
! Mr. Burford's third objection is be-
cause there remains over from the
old bond issue the sum of $4,000,
| which he claims could be used for the
enlargement of the water plant, max
ing it unnecessary for an additional
bond issue for that purpose.
That particular bond issue was
passed by the voters under the sup.
position that it would require the sum
of 100000 to purchase the water
works, but owing to the pertinacity
and good judgment of the mayor and
city council, the water works were
purchased for a much smaller sum,
so grave doubts exist whether or not
the remaining leftover amount could
be legally used for any other purpose,
and it was thought best to cancel
them and an ordinance, we are in
formed, has already been introduced
to that effect. Besides, those bonds
run for period of thirty years, and
no provision was made to invest the
sinking fund in interest-bearing pa
per, and necessarily would result in
loss to the city.
Surely, it seems 10 us, that all will
agree that that was wise thing for
the city council to have done.
Mr.. Burford's next objection is to
street paving. He thinks the time is
not propitious. He thinks the prop
erty owners are not able to bear their
proportion of the burden.
The editor of this paper has waited
for the long period of fifty years for
the ''opportune moment" to arrive.
Must he be penalized with another
long wait of fifty years?
When it was proposed to pave Fort
King avenue, on which avenue our
friend resides, he made the self-same
objection. He said that the opportune
moment had not arrived, and at one
time seriously contemplated enjoin-
ing the city from carrying out the con-
templated improvement, but he after
wards took the sober and better
thought was the very first to pay his
proportion, which was the largest of
any on the avenue, and he would not
have it undone today for, perhaps,
twice the amount it cost him.
1t was big improvement, and is
enjoyed by others than automobile
"joy-riders." When we have our
great floods that wash great gullies in
other streets Fort King avenue re-
mains intact, and it's upkeep scarcely
costs the city penny.
The writer will perhaps have as
many feet of paving to pay for as
anyone else in the city, but it will not
all come at once, and when it does
come ne will be given several years
in which to meet the payments, and
in the meantime he will feel that the
increase in the property values will
more than pay for the Improvement.
Mr.. Burford's next objection is to
the bonds for the "civic center" 1t
does seem that Mr.. Burford is oppos-
ed to every item in the bond issue.
Well, he is opposed Eat this time" to
having INTELLECTUALLY beautiful
buildings for the city, with winding
cement sidewalks, beautifully orna-
mented with shrubs, flowers and play
ing fountains. We are sorry that he
presents the old chestnut-worn argu-
| ment: "Not now; some other time"
We can remember that the same
argument was put forth when we
were trying to build new court
house. If ever a county in Florida
needed new court house it was ours.
| The agitation became so strong that
| the board of county commissioners
tried to build one by the issuing of
| bonds. But good, strong men like Mr..
Burford opposed bond issue. 1t
was urged that we ought not to sad
| die our offspring with a public debt,
so the bond issue was defeated. But
the board of county commissioners, in
the face of this public disapproval,
went ahead and built the court house
by issuing script, drawing eight per
cent. interest. The script was after
wards validated by the state legisla-
ture, and the annual interest cost al
most double what the interest on a
bond issue would have cost.
: Wall tho court hoi1co uae h,1i1f