Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1915-11-18
CITY CANNOT REPUD|ATE
CONTRACT TO BUY TRACT
.ASrccIucm To Purchase $4,000
Rogers Street Site. Says City
Attorney, u binding.
WOULD Buy LARGER PROPERTY
East Finders Seek Repeal of Earlier
appropriation in Order to Get
on-.\cTc Racc-C curse Tract-(,om-
mittce III Make Inspection.

IN an opinion rendered TO the pr,.
=" BUILDINGS, properties and Utilities
'"nmit'c". made puh!'c YESTERDAY by
Chairman Mitchell. city Attorney p,i
.;,'d holds that the ci:N can lie car,
PEELED by recourse 10 the courts to COM
PIT with its contract 10 purchase tl,,.
property bounded hy ROGERS Tw.n.
ti&ih and L streets "a old &urpar..
ten line. at the agreed prices o.on".
pom the recommendation Of the
council delegation from Jefferson
. Ward, who followed out tn. wishes
i at tho residents ot that section uf tn.
c';y. the Council. on August ~. passed
resolution instruCtiug the Finance
n committee to include III the new budget
the sum OF $io,o0o FOR the purpose of
TINS property which Was IL be used
ias Il site fo: - new Playground
Fast END SENTIMENT
tNDERGoES TRANSPORTATION
I subsequently. however. sentiment in
4 tho East End yccrcd in favor of the
acquisition of the so-callcd Fairfield
( race-course property--;t tract OF about
I fifty acres. for which the owners want
i, $4,000. Advocates OF the newer pur-
chase make the claim that sufficient
money can ~ rca lied from the sale
Of surplus area In the form of build
= ing lots. to make the tract actually
to be used for city purposes cost prac-
| ticallE nothing.
! Tho trend of East End oninion in
4 favor OF the newer plan. led Council
man Rogers. on september = to in
i troducc resolution repeating the
/ $4,000 appropriation for the Rogers
street property. The Finance Commit
/ tee was urged Ia ratjfy this repeal
and 10 recommend tho application al.
! the $4,000 SO released to the pur-
chase of the $4,000 Fairfield tract.
! Green ~ Reid. sales agents for the
! rogers Street property, promptly filed
protest. They looked upon the
| original resolution. they said, as :,
binding contract to take over the
! property by provision in the new bud
get With this understanding. they
said. they Withdrew the property from
/ the market.
/ The Finance Committee entertained
serious doubts as "a the city's legal
az ethical rish, To r.pudia,e the rcs"-
/ luton looking Ia the purchase of tho
4 Rogers street site. aud asked the CITY
: Attorney for his opinion. The latter
replied on October -. holding that tho
| resolution is binding.
SAYS RESOLUTION Is
| VALID AND BINDING
| Referring To his communication To
! inc Finance Committee on the same
subject, Mr.. Pollard informs the Pub
| lie Utilities Committees:
II have no hesitation in saving that
/ tnhor" ia the opinion then given
! and That valid contract. by means of
IN" proposition to sell made by tho
owner OF this property and responded
I" on behalf Of tho city Of Richmond
I ~ the said resolution, has been made.
I anu mat IN" city can he compelled 10
comply with the said contract bv legal
proceedings"
The Public Utilities Committee will
! 'hls afternoon make an inspection Of
| mo fHirhelu racc-coursc property. and
| Wlil also inspect the proposed site for
In rark near the Fulton school Auto
MONIES WIZ carry the members from
| tn" city Han ~ $50 o'clock