The Robesonian., 1917-05-03
GOOD ROADS BONDS

LII his communication puDllSu0u Ill
this issue Mr.. A. H. Stone discusses
the proposed bond issue intelligently
and brings out one point not hereto
fore discussed in The Robesonian, a
point which we intended to discuss
In this issue; that is, the tax for main
tenance of roads required by the
Clark bill. This act requires that for
maintenance of roads built from mon
eys procured under the provisions of
this act the tax shall equal A per
cent of the amount so borrowed each
year for the first four years, per
cent each year for the next four
years, and 10 per cent each year for
each year thereafter, so long as any
of the loan remains due and unpaid
to the State. In his figures Mr..
Stone includes both the amounts due
for interest and the amounts that
would be levied under this act for
maintenance. 1t is we'll understood
that the amount for interest would be
$4,000 the first year and would in
crease each year by $4,000 till the in
terest would amount to $4,000, and
at that figure it would remain until
the end of the term of Al years.
Now let us separate from Mr..
Stones figures the maintenance tax
The first year it would be $4,000; Sec
ond 6,4O0; third, $4,000; fourth, $12,-
300; 5th, $4,000, and SO on, until
the tax for maintenance would
amount to $48,000.
AS the act stands now that is what
would be requir I'd, but does any one
honestly believe that Robson county
would be required to levy that much
tax for maintenance alone? 1t is easy
to see, and opponents of the bond is
sue will admit, that there is no dan
ger of having to increase the road
tax for the first 6 years. Will not
opponents of the bondissue admit
further that it will be very simple
and easy matter to have the Legisla-
"ture two years from now, or at any
time before the ta=A under this act
would exceed the present tax
except Robson from this mainten-
ance tax and allow the county to fix
the tax at whatever figure is neces
sary to maintain it's roads? That Of
course fcan be done and beyond al
question that it what will be done.
Of course provision had to be made
in this act for maintenance fund
1t would be worse than folly to built
roads and then fail to levy tax t,
maintain them. But this levy fo
maintenance was fixed, evidently, t.
meet the requirements of maintainin,
roads that are much more expensive
to build than will be the roads il
Robson. We venture the assertion
that a four per cent maintenance ia.
will be sufficient to maintain roads i
Robson county after good roads ar
built, or at most a 5 per cent taz
Just half of what is required unde
the Clark act; and it will be easy fo
the county's representatives in an
Legislature to fix this matter so tha
the tax will not be a burden upon tn
people.
We. are thoroughly satisfied ths
it will not be necessary for the roa
tax to exceed 25 or 27 cents afte
six years, and it may be as much 9
25 cents for the next years anywa,
But even if the tax is 25 cents {
even 80 cents, that should not gi1
any man who wants good roads
Robson concern. 1t is impossible |
have good roads without paving f,
them; and, when all is said and don
taking. the question by and large, VI
improved roads cost more than it wi
cost to build and maintain good road