Arizona republican., 1922-02-05
a Braxen Conspiracy

We see in political letter sent out from Phoe-
nix relative TO the matters which it is expected viii
receive legislative attention the following:
One of the more important items to be considered
in connection with the coordination abolishment
or certain governmental activities is the proposed
abolition of county highway commissioner, which
alleged to have proven an expensive luxury for the
taxpayer. Opponents Of these commissions hold that
they do not perform any duties that could be
handled as we'll and certainly at less expense by the
various county boards Of supervisors and point out
that from time irnmenorial supervisors have
sidered building chief qualifications.
The expense of maintaining county highway
missions of five members each $40 per day and
penses plus additional expenses and salaries for
ployes hired by the commissioners, in IA counties of
the state, is said to greatly increased the cost
of road building without giving the taxpayer more
for his money than his county board of supervisors
would have secured for him. To away with this
duplicate effort and additional expense and restore
the road bullding functions TO the boards OF super
visors will aid in lowering county taxes it is claimed
In any event, such measure will be introduced at
the special session.
The foregoing does not take entirely by sur
prise. 1T does not to us as "bolt out of the
blue. !" We recognize in it only another phase
Of an unceasing effort to include politics
among sand, gravel cement, asphalt and
other road building materials. We perceive also
that it is aimed at the Marcopa county method of
building. And it is put forward of course, In
the of the taxpayer.
In the first place the county highway commission
plan is not obligatory upon any county The county
can take it leave it alone. The taxpayer has the
last word to that. In this county we have found
the highway commission plan entirely satisfactory
We have already built many miles Of good roads and
We challenge comparison of them with respect to
quality and cost, with roads that have been
built in Arizona by other
We do not know what may have happened in
other counties which have avaed themselves Of the
county highway commission act but we know that
in one county where road program was under the
direction of the board of supervisors it became
necessary for the taxpayers to resort to litigation to
prevent the supervisors-from giving away large
sum money for no equivalent whatever.
Nothing could be ridiculous than the
ported assumption from time immeorial' of super
visors that building is their chief quail
fcatons." Supervisors are chosen with reference
to any such qualification board supervisors
in Arizona carried out or has had occasion
or opportunity to carry county highway pro-
gram And in the case of an extensive program like
that of Maricopa board supervisors would have
the time to give it the attention it requires.
AS to the expense of the machinery the only part
the proposed legislation would dispense with would
be the salaries Of the commissioners-but small
part of the total The of the engineer
ing and clerical organizations could be down
without disastrously affecting efficiency.
Admitting that the machinery is expensive
all machinery for extensive undertakings must be-.
for many of the counties most of them in fact there
is need Of the machinery and it would be foolish
for them to install it. county with only program
of unpaved roads or but few miles Of paved roads
would need county highway commission but
county with program involving the expenditure of
of olIa ba,a of
economy
The proposal to repeal the county highway COM
mission law is brazen political effrontery the de-
signed consummation of conspiracy which We have
plainly traced in this county in the attempt delay
the completion of county program until this in
iquitous legislation can be effected.
We would add word to the politicians. 1t is
this If the unexpected should happen and this law
should be repealed Marcopa county at the election
next November will administer proper and
whelming punishment to the party whose representa-
ves may be held to be chiefly responsible for the
infamy.