Omaha daily bee., 1922-03-01


Cubic Yard for Excavation.
In answering this claim We wish
10 call your attention 10 a letter writ
Ten by Senator Hitchcock. February
3, 1922, 10 Thomas II. Macdonald,
chief, bureau OF roads, Washington.
ID. c, and Mr.. MaeDonald's answer.
Copies OF same are marked Exhibit
A." page 10.
You will see that Mr.. Macdonald
has given costs per cubic yard during
the federal aid period, on grading
IN seven states in the Missouri Val
ley, having similar soil and Work
ing conditions: also an average each
year for the whole United States.
You viii see that by comparing
Nebraska with all OF the states in the
union, or any individual state in the
Missouri valley, our work has been
constructed at a lower unit cost than
any other state.
County Officials Claim That the State
Is Paying Too Much Money per
Mile for Earth Roads.
In answer to this claim, we wish
10 call your attention TO the state
ment prepared for Senator Hitchcock
in pursuance TO his letter above re-
ferred TO. marked Exhibit b. page
IL, showing the comparative cost per
mile of work in Nebraska, Kansas,
Missouri, Iowa, South Dakota, Wy
omng and Colorado.
By examining the third column OF
the first section OF this report, you
will see the cost per mile for earth
roads is less than any other state
enumerated.
County officials Claim That Sand
Clay Surfacing Costs Too Much
Per Mile.
In answer 10 this claim, we wish
TO call your attention TO the last
column, section /, OF Exhibit b.
page IL.
You will find that the average cost
OF constructing sand-clay roads is the
same as the average OF other states.
County Officials Claim That Grav-
eled Roads Cost Too Much Per
Mile.
In answer to this claim, we call
you attention to column three of
section two of Exhibit B." page II.
You will see that the average cost
OF gravelcd roads in Nebraska is
less per mile than the cost of the
same work in any of the seven states
surrounding Nebraska, and we are
pleased to mention the. fact that 90
per cent of this work was done with !
our own construction. forces with
out letting contracts.
County Officials Claim That Large
=. Part of Work Contracted in 1920
Was Carried Over Into 1921 at
Great Advantage to Contractors
and That Grading Work Was Let
at High Prices and Later Sublet !
at Lower Prices. y
In answering this claim, we call
your attention to Exhibit G." page
p. This is summary of the four
previous pages, Is, 70, 20 and Il. of
the grading contracts let in 1918,
1919. 1920 and 1921.
You will see that the average unit
price, when considering quantity
and classification in each contract,
is for 1918. 80 cents; 1919, SO cents;
1920 60 cents; 1921, 50 cents.
A complete analysis shows that
grading work let the first two years
and carried over until costs in
creased was all advantage to the
state of $525,l625S; and a CORE
spending loss to the contractors;
and the work let in 1919 and 1920
and carried over and constructed
in 1921 was a loss of $l47. .523.02 to !
the state and corresponding gain
to the contractors; and considering
all grading contracts, the work let !
each year in excess of that which
could be completed, has been a net
saving to the state of $575,659.56. |
In answer to the claim that work
was contracted at a. high price and