Indiana daily times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1914-1922, 1921-06-30

50. 5000 A tuilding program was then
planned of very extensive character,
which should have taken several years to
develop. An Indebtedness of over ten
million Of dollars has already been in
Cured, and apparently no thought has
been given to the fact that a cOntin-
uation Of the existing regime will soon
exhaust the bonding power Of the school
city now limited to about s12OOO,OOO
based upon an assessed valuation, prob
ably in excess of real values
I'VE charge that the anomalous and
perfectly indefensibIe relation between
the city school board and its advisor and
engineers is against public policy has
been condemned by the attorney general
of the State and we insist that no more
bonds for building purposes be approved
so long as II exists"
When DR.. Douglas took the stand he
tried 70 show that the limit Of bonded
indebtedness was not as near as Mr..
Schortemeier and Mr.. Sims had testified.
but that the sum Of S1,S50OOO. which is
now chargeable against that fund as a
result of a temporary loan made to pay
teachers salaries, can be taken out of
that category any time the board so de-
sires. He pointed to Cleveland and De-
troit, where large building programs are
under way and have been since last year.
as examples of the fact that indianapolis
Is not the only city doing building under
existing high cost conditions.
CONDITIONS IN
OTHER CITIES.
He also produced figures showing that
seventy-twO Indiana cities had a school
levy of S10S last year as against so cents
for Indianapolis In answer to Mr..
Schortemeier's statement that one-third
Of The taxes go for public schools he said
that the following percentages existed in
other Indiana cities Greenfield, 50 per
cent; Gary. 40 per cent; Hammond, 40
per cent Cities outside Indiana were AZ
follows Pittsburgh. II per cent; Roches-
ter, n Y. 80 per cent; Denver, Colo. 81
Ter cent; Los Angeles, 40 per cent. and
Kansas City, 35 per cent.
The hearing was resumed at 80
O'Clock in the afternoon.
The schools on which the money re-
sulting from the bond sale will be spent
if the bonds are approved by the State
board of tax commissioners are as fol-
lows: No. 16. Market and Bloomington
streets, eight classroom addition and re-
modelling OF old building, S205, 900: No.
36. Capitol avenue aud Twenty Eighth
street, eight classroom addition and re-
modelling Of old building, S242, 900; No.
3S, Winter and Bloyd avenues, eight
classroom building and remodelling of
old building, 100000; No. 62, Wallace
and Tenth streets. ten classroom addi-
ton and remodelling of old building,
$500. 600
Before the hearing opened It generally
was believed that the attack of the re-
monstrstors would be concentrated large
ly on the relations existing between the
board of school commissioners and the
firm of Snider & Rotz and l.. A. Snider
as an individual. These contracts have
been subject to constant attack from
various sources, including the Taxpayers
League. and the remonstrance itself
makes much of these contracts. By the
terms of the contract between the board
and Snder & Rotz, that firm is paid
per cent on all engineering work done
by the board in return for the firms
services as engineers L. A Snider.
member of the firm, is employed by the
board in an individual capacity as build
ing advisor and is paid 1 per cent on
all general contract work exclusive of
engineering.
L. S. Lesh, attorney general of Indi-
ana, has held this dual relationship lille
gal and the Taxpayers League has
waged a bitter fight against it's continu-
ance.
Parents Of children attending the
schools, on the other hand, have insisted
that the lives and safety Of the school
children should not be continued in
jeopardy indefinitely pending a decision
of the technical points at issue and are
insisting that the building program for
these schools be carried through.
The ten members of the Taxpayers
league signing the remonstrance are Al
fred H. Potts, secretary of the league !;
Thomas II. Span, Henry W. Bennett
Frank D. Stalnaker, e. A. Hendrickson,
Joseph c. Schaf, Berkley W. Duck, John
II. .Judar, Albert NJ Rosenthal and J. H.
Hooker.