The Chickasha daily express. (Chickasha, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1899-current, 1921-10-17
4 COMMUNICATION


street when the paving o. this
street VAS a. first proposed.
Ia tho iiri place. toe paving of
Seventeenth street j. public de-
mand BY the entire citizenship o.
chlekaaha and no, tie demand of
the Iccal property owners u Seven
teenth street Il "a ny honest ana
conscientious opinion that the sen
eml public should nave this street.
but nevertheless the property own.
era seFc called upon originally 10
pay onchalf Of the expense ol paw
inE thia street and Il ens proposed
that a macadamiscd or rock. or
gravel atrcet should be provided.
and tho property owners we're In
yltod by tho Mayor and city Council
tdaie not remsmbcrcd1 20 meet with
their honorable body TO discuss and
agree upon ways and means 10 meet
this public demand These property
owners. headed by President Austin
of the Oklahoma College for Women.
accepted this invitation. aud at the
only meeting which the writer nj.
tended. President Austin made quito
talk before tho Mayor and City
Council and I quote below parts Of
his talk and pledges to the Honor
able Body and the property owners
of Seventeenth Street.
Mr.. Austin stated that the prop
eriy owners of Seventeenth street
we're not able to pay moro than $500
per foot for tho paving or this
amount woull be an imposition up
ON them. and that he would no, be
a party 20. In fact would not allow
these people to be imposed upon for
more than $500 per foot.
The writer stated his position TO
the Mayor and City Council a..d
properly owners Of Seventeenth
street as follows:
That personally. he did not want
any paving from tho fact that when
he came TO town he went the back
way from his home TO the street car
line and the only time he was ever
on Seventeenth street was when he
paid 75c for a taxi to take him TO
or from HIS home. but from the fact
that he was a citizen OF C1icknshn
and believed that each and every
citizen OF a community should help
TO bear the burdens OF his commun-
ity, he would be willing. on account
OF this public demand and in the
interest OF the Oklahoma College for
Women. TO pay $500 per foot. and II
was positively underetood at this
meeting that the property owners
should not and would not be i'm
posed upon TO the extent OF more
than $500 per front foot for ulis
paving
A few days later Mayor Durbin
published an article in the Chick
asha Daily Express, pledging the
property owners of Seventeenth
street that lie would see that they
were not imposed upon to greater
cost than $500 per front foot.
After the assurances as above, OF
Mayor Durbin and President Austin,
the present Mayor and City Council
have increased the cost to the prop
erty owners to $577 per front foot,
saying nothing of the cost of grad
ing, etc.
Further; in event payments are
not made promptly when due,
penalty of Is percent will be as
sessed against such amount as is
due and unpaid, until same is paid.
Now, after the above facts have
been stated. as to the assurance
given by Mayor Durbin and Presi'
dent Austin, is it right that the prop
erty owners of Seventeenth street
be imposed upon by the influence OF
President Austin after he obligated
himself to see that they were hot
imposed upon, stating positively that
they could not afford to pay more
than $500 per front foot?
am for o. c. w. first, last and
all the time.
I have been for President Austin
in his every effort, believing him to
be sincere and candid in his every
act, but can the property owners OF
Seventeenth street have this conf
dence in him further? Is he treat
ing these property owners as he
promised in the beginning, honor
ably, or is he double-crossing them
and allowing them to be imposed
upon by this increased cost to So.77
per foot? saying nothing Of the cost
for grading, etc.
|, for one, and there are many
other property owners on this
street, who are opposed to this high.
handed imposition and ! resent
most bitterly the unfair treatment