Harrisburg telegraph. [volume] (Harrisburg, Pa.) 1879-1948, 1915-09-15
WALTER WROTE THE
PAVING CLAUSE HE
NOW CALLS UNFAIR
Understood When He Bid That
Work Was to Be Done
This Year
CANNOT RENT CITY PLANT
Illegal to Lease 1t to Him; Commis-
sioner Lynch on Asphalt
Controversy
CANNOT RENT CITY PLANT

When Alderman Charles P. Walter
accepted the contract with the city to
pave these sections OF street he under
stood perfectly tnat he was expected
TO complete this work this year.
The change in the speclncations
providing tnat the work snouId be
done this Fail was written into the
contract by MIR. Walter himself.
The specifications originally did
not mention any time. These are
copied alter the standard paving
specifications that are used in cities
throughout the United States. How
ever Walter first suggested that he do
the WORK next year and he was permit
ted to insert that clause in the specl-
tlcations. Later l told him that the
property owners on several OF the
streets wanted the work completed
tins year, and as the sections are conf
parauVely small, and could be easily
paved this year, / would want the
work finished before winter. Walter
agreed to this and he himself changed
the wording OF the specifications ac-
cordingly."
In brief this was the way City Com
missioner William ri. Lynch, superln-
tendent of streets and public improve
ment, discussed Walters alleged state
competition was not permitted under
the specincations.
Illegal to Lease Plant
Gould you, even Ii you wished, have
permitted HIM to lease the city aSphat
repair plant to manufacture his mate
rial, as he askeuE the commissioner
was asked.
City Solicitor Seitz says we could
not. We are not in the contracting
business. The Clark act provides that
contracts OF this sort should be adver-
tised and let to the lowest and best
biduer, answered Mr.. Lynch.
Where could Walter obtain the
material to do the work this year II
he deslred?"
why where has he been getting it
for the last five years? / tod MIN tnaC
the city plant was in operation-thur
we couldn't lease it ii we were per-
mitted to do so legally. For five years
Walter has had a city octnract TO
produce the asphalt Tor the repairing
work. This totaled $4,000 a year.
Did he in all that time make any ef-
did not. He bought his material from
the Central Construction and supply
Company"
The Fallacy of Walters Position
These streets &otai seven or eight
thousand yards. At $1.6S you can
figure for yourself what that amounts
to. At best it doesn't total nearly what
Walter has been paid for doing every
year for five years. And as j said be-
fore he still hasn't a plant of his own.
He never brought a plant here's He
doesn't intend to. If he is counting on
any contracts that may be let next
year-and that this is what he is
figuring on he said in Council-why
that's ridiculous. There will be only
few small sections paved The rea-
son is very simple. We haven't any
money for intersections"
Wanted to Iiorrow Plant
Council yesterday afternoon award
ed Alderman Walter the contract for
paving a dozen sections. He bid S1.6S
a yard; the Central Construction and
Supply company bid $1.90. All told
about 1000 yards of material will be
needed. The alderman has no asphalt
plant here and to bring one to this
city would involve too much time and
expense for the size of the job.
Walters offer to Council yesterday
was that he be permitted to use the
city plant for a week or ten days. This
would be time enough he said to pre-
pare his material. The present force
at the plant would be retained he said
at their present wages. He would re-
turn the plant in proper condition
and would pay the city five cents a
yard for the privilege of using the
plant, or about $500.