The Hood River glacier. (Hood River, Or.) 1889-1933, 1917-01-04

deputy assessor. .ens@ :, --:----sWH~
1t was at this point that Roy D.
Smith and G. H. Stanton took the floor
successfully, and asked If the oranges
of the county were going to monopolize
the suggestions Of the meeting.
Through representatives Of that body.
Harry c. Grouse and j. r. Forden, il
was explained that the members of the
grange merely desired to express rec
concentrations that had already been
adopted. I'VE do not wish to attempt
to monopofise anything said MI.
Forden. "Any citizen has right to
agree or disagree With our recommend.
ations."
At this point the grange resolution
In regard to the matter of roadmaster
was read. ,.,
NJ. Dragseth urged that the grange
suggestion was.out of order. and asked
that such action be made to await pos.
sible changes in the law BY the Iesisla.
ture. Paul r. Hughes, while be states
that the was in general accord with the
grange measure, thought the resuluton
was out Of place and moved that the
matter be tabled. When Mr.. Hughes
motion lost. the grange recommendatio
was adopted without dissenting voice.
When the experimental station was
under discussion. Prof. L. F. HendeY-
son suggested that the entire item for
horticultural inspection be sacrificed
for the proposed permanent station.
This suggestion brought protests from
G. II. Robbins and August Guignard.
Leroy Childs declared that it would
work as much of hardship on valley
orchardists 10 cut out fruit inspection
as to cut out the experiment station.
Prof. Henderson suggested that q
plot of l23 acres could be purchased as
a permanent site for the experiment
station for the sum of So, 900. "The
piece Of land / have in mind, said
Prof. Henderson, lis in every way ap-
propriate. Il has water and an orch.
ard. In the latter think the expert.
ment station representatives will find
every kind Of disease imaginable.
Mr.. Birge explained that be was on
a committee that had been investigat.
ing the purchase Of possible site for
the permanent station home, and that
he Thought an option could be eecusAd
on 10 acre, appropriate tract that
could be purchased for 5000.
Explaining the item Of $4,000 for
bridges and culverts, Commissioner
Hawkes. said that new bridges would be
needed the coming year over Hood Riv-
er at Trout Creek and north of Dee and
another at the Zeek brick kiln over 10.
dian creek.
The discussion over the proposed cut
in the road budget was sidetraeked
number of times. The county court
came in for keen criticism because of
the poor roads on the East Side. II was
declared by John Koberg. who made
the motion that the road fund be cut
Sc. 600, that the material Of the West
Side gravel pit was Of no value for
road construction on the East Side.
Mr.. Koberg suggested that crushed
rock from plants on the East Side
should be used in East Side road con.
struction. E. W. Dunbar also urged
that a new system in the building of
East Side roads be provided. He de-
clared that q great waste in road money
hatd resulted from the system in use.
Roscoe E. Miller stated that the good
roads Of the West Side were made pos
sible by the constant work and atten-
tion Of Supervisor Smith. He declared
that the roads of bis community did not
receive this attention, since the court
would not allow their supervisor to
continue his work Of maintenance after
winter began. .. s,.i..
F. E. Knowles suggested that, since
the road fund had never on former
year been sacrificed and that since
other items we're sacrificed for il last
year. that the road fund be made to
reciprocate this year.
When DR.. Dumble took the door be
explained that the city's road deficit
the past year was 5000, much Of
which expense was incurred in the i'm
provement of the East Side grade. etc.
He declared that the city would be per.
fectly willing to share in the road as
would any county road district.
Mr.. Mason suggested that the city
school district be organized into road
district. The grange, however, COM
mended the court in its action OF the
road money through the general fund.
One 0f the farewell shots Of the
meeting came from q grange resolu.
tion that provided for the future con.
servation Of roadside trees. II was
recommended that no trees be removed
from The roadside unless property own.
ers Of both sides OF the highway agree,
and when alterations arose. the deci.
sion was to rest ultimately with the
court. Il was further provided in the
resolution that the tree, when cut,
should become the property Of the
abutting land owner.
Answering the charges Of Or. bum.
BILE, J. L. Hefshner. who had been q
member Of the city council at the time
the bridge and East Side section were
accepted ss q part Of the corporation.
declared that at the time the move had
appeard to be good business move for
the city. He explained that the David.
son Bros. sawmill was active then and
that more families were resident of the
East Side section than of the Heights.
Hood River had no police protection
over this section. virtually q part Of
the town. until il was included in the
municipality, said Mr.. Hershner.
While Mr.. hershner declared that sub
sequent events bad made the action oi
the council appear az poor business that
q. the time oil local residents were
eager that the East Side section be In.
cluded IN the city.
After having spent the day wrestling
with the problem Of diminishing The
proposed approximate $91, 900 total oi
the budget Of the county's expenses b.
The sum Of S, 900, In order 70 comply
with the recently adopted initiative sil
per cent limitation Law. the county
court and its budget committee, wber
lCoatipued on Two Page