Bisbee daily review., 1919-09-23
SUPERVISORS
 HOLD MEETING IN PHOENIX

| county in Arizona, With the exception
 of Yuma, was represented today at
 the first annual meeting of the Su- | pervisors' association of Arizona, for which the foundation was laid last
 summer at the tax conference at 1 Grand Canyon.
 The forenoon of the first days ses-
 sion was largely devoted to discus | sion of road matters, particularly the
 handling of the 75 per cent road tax i fund of the state.
 During the discussion of this mat ter the attorney general, Willie B.
 Jones, was called on for an opinion, first as to who could spend this ' money, and later as to the separate 1 power of the boards of supervisors and the state engineer.
 Jones ruled that the fund must be expended by the 'joint action of the board of supervisors and the state engineer" Asked then if either the boards or the state engineer could spend this fund without the consent of the other party, he replied, 'the law does not so provide"
 Later the question was put by one | of the Cochise delegation as, to whether the board of three supervi- sors of county and the state engi- { neer did not constitute a board for | the expenditure of the fund, a majority of which could act, and the attor- ney general again ruled that the su- pervisorswere acting as the agents for the county, and the state engineer for the state, in such road expendi- lures, and were to all intents and purposes of equal Importance in the ! matter.
 State Engineer Thomas Maddock presented data at various times dur ing the discussion, and also presented to the delegation from each county a comprehensive resume of the pro- gram of highway building now under way and planned for the near future Six Million Available. This data showed that. including the special appropriations. the state road tax, automobile tax money, | prison labor fund, federal emergency funds, federal aid funds, federal equipment, and county contingent
 funds. that there is total sum Of $6,170.224 available for road con 1 struction in Arizona. A Questionna~e was included. asking the various boards of supervisors series of ques l tions on policies. Among the ques- l tions akeG were:
 | What road in your opinion should t receive preferred consideration for | 25 per cent expenditure? (This fund
 controlled by the state engineer) Do you approve the expenditure
 of this fund on through routes?
 Are you in favor of state and coun- ties doing highway work by contract l or day labor?
 Have the state highway department employees been unsatisfactory to your community, and why?
 Questions and answers flew thick and fast between the state engineer and Chairman c. M. Roberts. and
 others present during part of the morning session. Maddock stated
 that federal aid projects were being held up by the failure of the board | of supervisors in Coihise county to of supervisors in Cochise county to money to be matched by federal aid Roberts asked if the signing of this | preliminary agreement would not take all power for further action from the board. to which Maddock an- swered: Absolutely not" and then | explained that to set the money aside had nothing whatever to do with ap-
 proving plans, letting bids or inspect ing construction. In the matter of the distribution of
 federal trucks to the counties, Mad l dock stated that 1t would be impos- sible unless the. distribution was con- tinued. the United States attorney
 general having ruled that no more
 should be sent out unless a more spe-
 cific law was passed. The highway
 department, he said, had expected 400
 trucks, of which they needed 200, and
 intended to distribute the rest, but ! had received but 62 so far He has
 hopes. however. of securing enough
 to distribute to the counties for strict
 ly federal aid work.
 No Repairs Allowed.
 WrJ. Moore. highway engineer for
 the federal bureau of post roads. ex-
 plained the operation of the federal
 aid road law in great detail. Asked if roads already constructed could receive federal aid, he replied mo" | To the question as to whether federal
 aid could be secured for reconstruc-
 tion he said possibly. but repairs
 were not considered a reconstruc-
 tion''
 In the afternoon session the com
 mittee on resolutions brought in their
 findings. which were adopted. The
 important point in them was that |, the supervisors association regards ) itself as the logical body to suggest } to the legislature legislative changes l and enactments. Many of the super , visors present brought up 6 number , of changes suggested for considera tion by the next legislature. Among these were provisions pro