The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1917-05-31
STATES HIS VIEWS

STATES HIS VIEWS
To the Editor of The Tribune:
There having been some complaint
and criticism because the contract of
the City Of Bismarck with the Ford
Paving Company does not provide for
the paving of the streets around the
Court House, and it having been stat
ed that the city commissioners can
not provide for this pavement with
out again advertising for bids, and
many false reasons and excuses hav-
ing been "given by the city admins
tration why. ,this part of the paving
project Awasa 0dHnt of the contract,
l desire, to throWs some light on the
matter.s ssk;Ms
Ar The County commissioners have no
authority over the streets of Bismarck
and have no power to control or influ-
ence the city commissioners Of Bis
marck relative to paving improve
ments either where property of the
county abuts thereon, or otherwise,
except that the county commission
ers may, under the provisions of sec
ton 37O4, G. l.. 1918, on behalf of
the county, join with other owners to
make up majority of the property
liable to be specially assessed for such
proposed improvement, within fifteen
days after the first publication of the
resolution of the city commission de-
claring such improvement necessary
to- be done. In no other way is it the
duty or within the power. of the coun-
ty commissioners tdJsoIArh' the queE
ton of the necessity Of advisability
OF making the said Improvement. The
city commission is the only body that
has full power over the streets and
can say that there is a necessity for
public improvement and order it
done.
The property of the county of Bur-
leigh las is all property except prop
erty belonging to the government of
the United States, which is exempted
by section 1926, c. l.. 1879 is liable
to be assessed for such improvement
under the provisions of said last nam
ed section. The fact that the board
of county commissioners, or a major
ity thereof, refused to sign a petition
requesting the pavement was no le-
gal reason why the provision to pave
the streets in front of the court house
should be left out of the contract
Under the law such petition would
be immaterial. The refusal of the
commissioners who declared that
they were against the signing of a
petition simply expressed their views,
and certainly those county commits
siOners who represent outside districts
should be congratulated by their con-
stituents for not joining in such an
enterprise as would place so great a
burden upon the taxpayers he rep
resented, who would receive so little
benefit from it. But whatever was
the action of the county commission
ers, 1t had no legal force or effect to
bind the city commissioners in any
manner whatsoever. It simply en-
pressed the views of the county COM
missiOners as to the necessity Of the
improvement. However, for some rea-
son not given in the minutes of the
city commission or expressed by any
commissioner of the city at a public
meeting, the city commissioners de-
liberately left the streets surrounding
the court house out of the contract
made by the city with the Ford Paw
ing Company, although the same city
commissioners passed resolution
declaring it was necessary to have
paving done on those streets, and in
cluded the same in the plans, speci-
fications and estimates, and also in
the advertisements for proposals for
such work. Why these streets were
left out of the contract has never been
disclosed by the city commissioners,
though several reasons have been CIV
en- on the street by their so-called