Albuquerque morning journal., 1919-04-21

The last prop is knocked from
under the opposition to the new char
ter. The sole openly made plea
against the new charter was that it
fails to provide for amendment by the
city.
In the proposed charter taken to
Santa Fe there was provision for
amendment. Chief Justice Roberts
was asked to go over the document,
not in his capacity, however. as a jus
tice of the supreme court but as
friendly lawyer.
He struck out the amending clause
as unconstitutional.
The matter was submitted by Com
missioner Connell to Summers Burk-
hart, a recognized authority on mu-
ncipal law, and Mr.. Burkhart, while
not holding the amending clause con-
stitutional said its effect would be
constitutional. as its validity could not
he attacked except in an action
brought by the attorney general IN q
direct proceeding for that purpose
Mr.. Burkhart was right under the
law as it now stands in the law books,
but he had not taken note of house
bill %, introduced BY Albert Clancy
and passed by both houses and signed
by the governor, which provides:
when the attorney general refuses
TO act, or when the office usurped per-
tains to county. village. incoFDo-
rated town or city. or school district.
sue.i ection may he hrcwght in tho
name of the state fy private person
nn his own complaint, by first obtain
ing leave of the court on an ex partc
application or petition"
Under that provision any private
nj Irinu W pra to
proceedings to GUST the commission
ers who might be elected under
amendment of the present law.
Therefore, if we are to have five
commissioners, we must adopt the
new charter.
The Old charter advocates haven't
a leg left to stand upon.
If you favor two more city COM
missoners, vote YES.
If you favor rotation, with election
every two years. instead of only once
in four years vote YES
If you favor electing men who will
serve the city without remuneration, |
vote YES.
If you favor a recall and election of
the successor to the recalled commits |
sioner, vote YES.
The city commissioners do not |
want any addition to their present |
number They want to run the city |
as a private corporation until 1922.
If the new charter IS defeated You |
cannot recall one or two of the com
missioners and then elect a successor |
or successors; the remaining commits |
sioner or commissioners would attend |
to that Job
But if you should recall all the |
commissioners, then the city govern |
p,Nh nd nrf1l1N a. a
ensue.
The new charter eorrects all of this |
Vote YES.
1t has been asserted that efficiency |
il the guiding star of the commission
manager administration. Some bold |
common geezer might suggest to the |
esteemed city officials that it would
be efficient to divorce themselves
from the city's payroll. The new char
ter would furnish the decree OF
course, their pay is only trickle, but
it has been upposed-perhaps erron
eously the genuine without
the-signature efficiency aimed at stop
ping driblets as well as big leaks
The city manager announced tha.
the water department made net pro-
fit of more than $4,000 for the fiyst
three months of the year. If water is
as valuable as all that it's no wonder
the city can't offord to use enough of
it to sprinkle the streets properly.
If the profit-sharing rate of the
water department continues for the
next three-quarters of the year the
profit for the year will be greater
than $4,000. Problems: How long
viii it take the water users to pay the
purchase of the water plant?
For the first correct answer The
Journal will give slightly used copy
of the old charter-interesting chief
ly as relic.
The city commission It'd. favors a
city beautiful-but not at the expense
of the water departments $4,000