Pueblo chieftain., 1921-11-04
Messages From
the People
REACHES CONCLUSIONS

Editor the Cbieftain:-
Reading with interest the statements
in your paper for anu against the city
Manager Charter Amendment / have
come to the following conclusions:
First. The desirability of the Amend
menti not changed in the least be-
cause of the change in the organization
backing II. The original committee OF
eighteen did not drop the Charter AM
endment because OF change of mind
1t was washed out OF the committees
control by the Flood which came only
a short time before the time set for the
special election.
A vote for this Amendment is not
vote for nor against any Pueblo or
ganization or club. The charter am
endment is so drawn that II adopted
no one but the whole people through
our representative council will have
any control of the government.
Second. The Flood and the consc-
quent rcconstruction and prevention
program do not make undesirable a
change in the form of government. but
rather make such change as Is pro-
posed more than ever desirable. II
change for the better anytime, then
most of all so now. Just at this time.
In the face OF the Flood itself Pueblo's
city government was ,clpless. and had
\ Il not been for volunteer leadership
from capable citizens and the aid OF
the military Pucblo's recovery would
have been shameful instead OF some
thing of which all are proud. Tho
forming OF extra governmental bodies.
committees OF twelve and of one hund-
red shows further the inadeduacy OF
the present city government. The very
fact that Pueblo city is financially
4 crippled and facing tho need for large
additional expenditures in flood pre-
vention demands fo.m OF government
that will insnrc one hundred cents on
a dollar.
Third. The proposed Amendment fol-
lows closely form of city government
Z that Is no longer an experiment but Is
a demonstrated unqualified success. II
u successful in cities much larger than
Pueblo. and in cities much smaller. as
we'll as cities OF our own size Only one
city has ever been known to abandon
the plan after trying II. That city Is
Hot Springs, Arkansas. Let the reader
in his wisdom draw his own conclu-
sions.
Fourth. Opposition to the proposed
amendment both in your editorial and
public comment columns has been
directed along lines mat dodge the
real matters at issue.
II the proposed plan Is good anytime
II is better just now.
Those opposed to the plan should he
as unafrald to sign names to their
statements as arc those In favor of It.
An electors vote for city commission
crs IS a vote for the ciiys good and
Is not for any person. Such vote is in
dependent of the proposed Amendment
registering neither for nor against It.
An electors vote for or against tho
Amendment IL vote for the clty's
good and not for nor against any per-
sons. candidates for Commissioners or
otherwise. Such n vote Is independent
of the vote for commissioners.
The two votes are taken at the same
time saving the expense Of a special
election. and every clecror should vote
on each matter entirely on Its own
merits MS though the other did not OK
ist.
II has never been shown or even
claimed by the opposition that tho citv
Manager plan has failed elsewhere. II
has wrongly been called an experiment
In the face OF long. varied. and sue
cegsfui trials.
Sincerely you're
WM loan JONES