The Anderson daily intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson, S.C.) 1914-1915, 1915-03-17
o 90 90 5000 o o 0 o
PAY FOR CAR.LINE PAVING. o
u o
o oOooooOo 100000 o
Editor rhe Intelligencer:

| rejoice greatly In the success OF
the election on yesterday. 1t is "a long
step forward and does honor to the
citizens ii Anderson. II / thought
that the opinion ! am about TO express
would in any way delay or hinder paw
ing / would refrain expressing IT,
There will be many who Will not
agree with me, and il in their dis
agreement they will accord me the
same respect for my view as | grant
TO them. then what / shall have to
say will not cause any dissension In
our ranks. ! am jealous for more
paving, and to make the bond issue
go az far as possible towards cover
ing the principal streets of the city.
II in my view / am right we will be
able to pave few more miles OF
streets than we would be able to pave
under the present impression. The
commissioners are ali good men and
1 am sure will accept whatever view
their Consciences dictate. and IL l am
wrong. those who disagree with me
will please be so charitable as to
give me credit for trying by plain
construction TO stretch the paving ter
Titory few miles longer.
l refer TO paving along the car
line of the city. 1t is part of the
franchise that the car company is to
keep the streets along their right of
way in as good condition as the re-
mainder of the street, and this will
necessitate paving along the right OF
way wherever the street is paved.
Now the question submitted to the
people was this: Shall the city of
Anderson issue bonds in the sum of
not exceeding one hundred thousand
dollars (S100,000). the proceeds there
Of TO be used solely for the perma
nent improvement OF public streets. or
parts of same. in said city, where one
hall the cost OF such improvements
is paid by abutting property owners?
You will observe that one of the
conditions of this permanent improve
ment is that one half OF the, cost OF
such improvements shall be paid by
abutting property owners. A rea-
sonable construction of this would
mean that those who own abutting
property on the street shal pay one
half of the total cost of the paving, and
1t does not say who shall pay the
other half My construction IL that
where there is car line the car COM
pany shall help the city pay the other
half. The franchise under which the
car line is operated is gift of the
city at large. One of the conditions
on which it is granted is that it shall
help the city to keep the right OF way
in as good condition as the rest of
the street, and II. is no more the con-
sent of the abutting property owners
than of any other tax payer or voter
in the city. But some argue that the
Il
Carry II to the logical conclusion and
let each abutting property do his own
paving Of IA and the result will be
that the city paves the rest So you
have II as follows: the car company
paYes its right of way, each abutting
property owner paves IA OF total
of 1-2 to both abutting property own
ers. and the city under its bond issue
paves the rest. Take street that, has
no car line for an illustration. In
that case there is no question but that
the abutting property owners pay one
half the cost of any improvements and
the city the other half, and my argu-
ment is that IL the car line is deducted
before the division is made between
the city and the abutting property.
owner, then the abutting property
owner does not pay one half of the
cost of such Improvement. Remember
that one of the conditions of the bond
issue was that the abutting property
owner should pay one half.
The result of this procedure would
mean that the city hns in its control
not only the 100000 raised by the
bond issue, but the total amount OF
the cost of paving between car tracks.
all of which they could use as their
hall of the cost of permanent improve
ments. Can't you see that this will
give us few more miles OF paving?
DO we need It? Is 1t q hardship on the
property owners along a car line?
We voted that they too should pay one
half the cost OF the Improvement and
IL the car line Is expected they won't
do 1t. The franchise belongs to the
city and 1t is nothing more than right
that the city should use IL In paying
for its one half, and that the abutting
property owner should not have his
one half OF the cost OF the improve
ment reduced by this amount. 1t
comes down TO this one point. Should
the city have the right to add the
benefits of the car line space to the
bond Issue so as to increase its capital
with which to pave, or should II al
low its franchise to inure TO the bene1
fit only OF abutting property owners.
My answer is that it should inure to
the benefit of the people who gave the
franchise and that means the city at
large. Then all abutting property
owners Will truly pay, one half the
cost of improvements, but not until
then.
l have tried to condense this per-
haps at the expense OF. falling to make
myself clear. ] do not want a con-
troversy and will not have amy. /
have been approached by a few men
a-hn :, ,al,e,A N, &. ff, d nd 4 napa a fn