Clearwater Republican. [volume] (Orofino, Idaho) 1912-1922, 1917-09-21
A LETTER FROM 7. J. LaFOREST

'
To the Citizens and Taxpayers OF
Orofino Highway District
On September 6 l filed an appeal
from the order of the Board of Coun-
ty Commissioners attempting to Gre
ate Orofino Highway District. My
reasons for so doing have been
frankly and fully explained to those
who have made inquiry but in order
that no Misunderstanding may exist
as to my attitude l wish to record
here few observations. l have not
voted for the creation of any High
way District in Clearwater County.
Neither have 1 any desire to oppose
any public enterprise which has
the support of majority of
the people affected. And l will
give this assurance at the out
set-that if at anytime during the
pendency of this appeal, a major
ity of the people in the district ap-
pear to desire "a continuance of the
Orofino district, will consent to the
dismissal of the appeal.
Statements made before the Leg
islature by representative citizens of
southern counties disclose that these
organizations, though originated in
good faith as was our Clearwater
Highway District, and with the in
tention to improve roads and secure
more efficient and economical
management of road matters. have
resulted in a greedy scramble for
taxable territory in which the main
object has been lost sight of. And
apparently this is what has hap
pened here in Clearwater County.
The Clearwater Highway District
was evidently launched in good faith
by some of our citizens who were in
fluenced by the general agitation for
better roads which prevailed
throughout the Northwest few
months ago. A large bond issue was
talked of in connection with the
project. resulting in a tug of war
with our neighbors on the north and
the Orofino and Elk districts were
advocated as defensive (or often
sive) maneuvers in this struggle in
which boundaries were drawn with
out much regard to any definite
System of highways" The Orofino
district was designed to levy tribute
on certain territory which the Elk
district sought to exempt from taxa
tion for road purposes. Neither OBJ
ject can be reconciled with the spirit
of the Highway District Law. II
doubt if the advocates Of either prop
osition had in view of the mainten-
ance and construction of permanent
good roads of hard surface and prop
erly graded and available for con-
venient travel thereon throughout
the year." and the employment of
salaried road expert and modern en-
gineering and office facilities for a
business administration of road mat
ters in accordance with the purpose
ofthe highway law.
The race was so much to the swift
that the petition for the, creation of
the Orofino district Que of the Clear
water district was signed and filed |
before the latter was organized.
In the meantime the country be-
came involved in foreign war and
people became more interested In
liberty bonds than they were in
road bonds. We have three highway |
boards and board OF county com
with all the increased |
overhead expense that goes with the
of such organizations.
and which would otherwise be spent
In actual construction and mainten-
ance. There are benefits to be de-
rived from the operation of the high
way district law. II properly applied
to suitable locality, but II Is diff
cult to understand where any bene-
fit will come to US from the present
The prospect now Is that
we will have more taxes and less
roads than we had under the old sys-
tenn. We have been acting hastily
and 1t is now about time that we be-
gan to give some thot to the situa-
tion. 1t Is easier to create a high
way district than 1t is to dissolve
one. A district can be dissolved on
petition only when 1t has money
enough to. take UP all of its out
warrants, and as road
money is usually spent long before
1t is collected, the possibility of be-
ing able to dissolve q district In that
way is almost too remote to con-l