The Redwood gazette. [volume] (Redwood Falls, Minn.) 1873-1940, 1925-01-28
Sanborn Sues County
for Highway Funds
CONTINUED from first page)

\SOlIlAuCO 4LOiA hAot pdSCy
tice of having the townships and vii
lagos, through which the state road:
run, contribute a part of the. cost o.
improvement of such roads: The
county has required each village ano
township to contribute One4third OF
the cost of grading and crawling, and
one-fOurth of the cost Of ciuverts anC
bridges. - -. ;.
Some time prior to February l.: 1919
it being intended to improve the state
highway running through Sanbofn and
adjoining townships, the village and
townships signed an agreement that
they would pay the usual percentage
of the cost, and asked that the. i'm
provement be made. The county did
contract for the improvement, of the
highway. The grading work was done
prior to February 1, 1919, and of that
cost the village Of SanoorM+and some
of the townships paid their ene-third
of the cost, Afterwards, and subse-
quent to February 1, 1919. the i'm
provement was completed by gravel
ing, leveling, etc. AS that work was
done, bills for the usual: one-third of
the cost were sent to the village Of
Sanborn and gthe townships involved,
and they paid each their. respective
share.
This being trunk highway. the
county was entitled to. and did actu-
ally receive. government aid in pay
in the cost of the improvement, there
by receiving back, through such aid,
a part o. the total cost. To. raise
money to pay the cost. Redwood coun-
ty issued bonds as usual, y. ~.
In 1921 the legislature passed a
law, under which the state of Min
nesota, through the Highway depart
ment, could assume and take over
bonds issued by any county for i'm
provements done on state, or trunk
highways, not exceeding the cost of
such Improvements, and only SO. far
as that cost applied for work done
subsequent to February lsts 1919. As
the crawling and leveiing on the
roads in question had been done sub
sequent to Februaryl, 1919. the bonds
issued to pay for that work were
within the law, and Redwood county
did apply to the state 70 have it as
sumo those bonds, and the state, af-
ter consideration, did assume SO much
of the bonds issued, including inter
est thereon, as covered HE total cost
of all work done subsequent to Febru-
airy l, 1919, less only the government
aid already given to Redwood county.
When the village, of Sanborn and
the townships learned FIAT the coun-
ty had received back, through gov
eminent aid, and by the assumption
of bonds by the state, every cent of
the total cost of improving the roads
done subsequent to February 1, 1919,
they asked the county to return to
them the one-third of the total cost
the village and townships had con-
tributed, claiming that if the county
retained the contribution Of one-third
made by the village and township, it
would be making a profit on the trans
action to just that extent, because
the government aid and the assump-
ton of the bonds by the state paid
for the improvement in full.
The county took the position that
it need not make such refund, and an
action was brought in behalf of the
village of Sanborn. against Redwood
county, asking that it be ordered tt
refund whatever money Sanborn do.
mated towards paying for whatever
work was done subsequent to Feb
ruary /, 1919. In othei. words, the
village does not. ask for any money
paid for work done prior to February