Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1914-03-17
Would Give Property Owners
Riqht to Petition for Street
PavementS.
OFFERED AS BASIS OF
CONFERENCE AGREEMENT
HOPES to Procure Reinsertion Of Pro-
vision Stricken From District
Bill by Senate.

Representative Borland of Missouri To-
day made suggestions to Representative
Page OF North Carolina concerning d
possible compromise on the Boriahd
amendment which the Senate struck OUT
of the District appropriation bill, ana the
effect of which was to put the ehtire
cost of street paving on the owners OF
abutting property. Representative rage
chairman of the subcommittee OF the
House. in charge of the bill, will be one
of the conferees with the Senate, ana
the elimination OF the Borland amend
ment from the bill as the House passed
ii is simply one of the difficult dlHer-
ences which must be smoothed over be-
fore the Ii use conferees will accept the
bill as the Senate approved IT,
The suggestion made by Representa-
tive Borland today grows out of the re
marks made by Senator Hoke Smith OF
Georgia, who hinted that it would De
much fairer to the District if the law
prorated the street paving charges pc
tween property owners and the District
of Columbia, and If property owners
were allowed to choose what streets
should be paved or repaved.
Added Clause Proposed.
Representative Borland proposes the
following addition to the original Bor-
land amendment:
Amy of the foregoing improvements
may be initiated by petition signed by
the owners, resident in the District OF
Columbia, of majority of the lineal
feet OF the private property TO De
assessed for such improvements 'front.'
ing on the street avenue, road, or por-
ton thereof, to be improved. Such
petition shall be filed with the Commits
sioners of the District of Columbia and
shall be canvassed by them to ascer-
tain whether it be signed as herein re-
quired. In case the petition is found to
be sufficient and the improvement is
one no part of the cost of W hich, except
the intersections of streets. Will be
charged against the revenues OF the
District of Columbia, the Commission
ers OF the District shall forthwith pro-
coed to let the necessary contracts for
such work. If the Improvement is one
in which part of the cost Will be
charged against the revenues of the
District of Columbia on account Of the
excess width of the street. the Commits
sioners of the District of Columbia
shall order the work to be done and
let the necessary contracts therefor
unless there shall not be sufficient ap-
preparation remaining for the fiscal
year 10 provide fos the amount to be
assessed against the revenues of the
District of Columbia. and in this case
the petition shall stand over with full
force and effect for the next fiscal
year"
Mr.. Borland's Argument.
proposal:
Senator Hoke Smith in the debate in the
Senate ON the Borland amendment to the
District of Columbia appropriation bill,
IL, f<,$ $tn
amendment giving property owners on a
street the right to initiate improvements.
1T provides that property owners on a
street forty feet or less in width may,
by a petition signed by the resident own
ers Of a majority of the front feet, re-
quire their street to be paved or repaved
whenever they desire. Where the width
Of the street to be paved exceeds forty
feet a part of the cost would fall on the
District of Columbia, and majority of
the resident property owners can compel
the District to have it paved unless the
appropriation for that purpose for the
riscal year is exhausted.
Practice in Other Cities.
Il believe that property owners should
have the right to demand public i'm
proyements as fast as they are willing
TO pay for them, and that no street
or section of the city should be neglect
ed or disseminated against. This is
almost universally the rule in Ameri-
can cities, but it is always combined
with the requirement that the prop
erty owners pay for their own special
improvements. Much of the dissatis-
faction which has grown up in the
District has been the result of a feel
ing by some OF the smaller property
owners that their streets or their sec
tons of the city have been neglected
or discriminated against in public i'm
provements
1T has been said that the old system
of paying for improvements out of the
general fund has been in force so long
that IL would be an injustice now to
change 1t. This argument could be
made against any form of new legisla-
ZION because all reforms are accom-
panied by isolated cases OF hardship.
but the longer system prevails the
greater the hardship in ma king the
change. At present ] believe that only
per cent or 10 per cent of the possible
ultimate mileage in the District of Co
lumbia is improved, and, therefore, the
change can be made at this time with
less hardship than ever again.