Illinois News Index

Sheridan Road News-Letter (1889), 2 Feb 1900, p. 3

The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

VIM "on! Saturday morning .1 Hill) land Put. ML. Ind Whmcth. "1.. by the Sheridan” Road Publishing Co. W at the Pout-Ollie: at Highland Park u mend-elm mutter. “Wald-c run I.“ know- 01 enter out“. 0.. Wm”... Neva-w B lldln . 255 C ml Avenue. flung“ Pm" Puhllc “Improvement 0! Streets In ' Highland Park. The sentiment is steadily‘ growing throughout the country at large that the modern method of improving streets by special assessments pretty generally works against economy and against public welfare, if indeed it does nht generally work gross injus~ fine. The very fact that the legis- lature two years ago radically curb’ ed the imperial pavil- of coudcils in the matter of street improvement: is evidence that the public sentiment, slow as it always is to move. is satis- had that the old system was r'ong, ,i.[_ not‘wholly‘, at least in war instance, was there any justice. in making the property ownersopp'osite the depot pay wholly for the brick paving ofthat street when it was clearly for the general good of 'evéry citizen of Highland Park? Can-it be for a moment claimed that all the benefit accruing from the improve ment of that street goes to the prop- erty owners on the street? Unques-, tionably the Chicago Northwestern road were benefitted by the improve- ment. and yet'they were assessed a great deal less than half while bene- fitted, no douhtr vastly more in pro- portion, than the property owners on the other side. We venture to say that there is riots citizen in High- 13nd Park accustomed to take the trains. who is selfish enough to deny 2‘." innit the public in justice ought to K have paid part of that improvmnent. A m 01 North Shard lntelllunce. Tmuanmghwpisk. FRIDAY. FEBRUARY 2. mus 3L5!) PEI! YEAR. OFFICES: THE :1 SHERIDAN ROAD NEWS-LETTER. Some years ago In mutant tree epreed over e large pert of the city to cover the cost of building a bridge It it true, it was not eulorced, and the bridge was built at public c:- pense. ' _There in precisely the same principle involved in the one of ctreete, though it might not be on the {scoot it quite so evident. but the streets are used by the whole public just as much as a bridge is used by the public. The law in Michigan on this point by which improvements are paid wholly or in part, as the council may direct, out of the general fund seems to be very fair. .To illustrate: 'The general taxation in our opinion,ought to have been responsible {or at least one half or three-fourths of the im- provement on St Johns from Laurel avenue to Central. Asa streets radiate from the center further and further out towards the rural portions then it might be argued that the general taxation should pay less and leasiand the city council would be the author- ity to decide. When you have reach? ed the outskirts and property own- ers want to have streets paved for the sake of opening up unimproved property and placing it advantage~ ously upon the market, then, if neces- sary, they should pay the whole ex- pense of improving. " ' o If not perfectlyjapparent, it can be easily show n that the special assessment methOd is an extravagant one; saddling Upon the property ownersa cost from 20 to 30 per cent more than it need cost the city to do it. But of this we shall speak at another time. If we are right, and __we believe we are, then it is desira- ‘ ’ble to change the policy .of pav~ ing our . public streets by spe- cial assessment wholly, to a plan whereby at least a reasonable part shall be paid out of general taxation. That doneand the improvement of our public streets would go on at a much more rapid rate and in the end be cheaper for all concerned. It may be claimed that the public would not stand the taxation. Then there is no reuon why the property owners on e given ureet should etend it un- less they volunteer to_do go, and if they volunteer then the city should allow them the privilege of paving it in their on we]. subject to such control as would prevent them from endangering the public welfare. At the last meeting of the council, held on thel‘26th, the mayor called two of the members of the council to order on the ground that they were discussing a motion tgélio on the table,” which is not a batable question. In doing so the mayor did what was plainly his duty. and not only did his duty, but did it in a very graceful and' afi'able manner. But what did puzzle us a little was that he should immediately have al- lowed a motion “to amend” be acted upon, for a motionto lie on the table is not subject to amendment; and what surprised us still» more was that an ex-alderman, one who had no earthly right to the floor or to take part in the discussion of ahy ques-. tion, debatable or non-debatable, without the consent of the council," should be allowed to discuss the very question when two members of' the council had been called’to order, and appropriately so, for doing it. Not only that, but for the ex alder: man of the Third ward. to thrust himself upon the‘council was notori- ously an- insult even to his own fol- lowing in that body;.for.it assumed theyhad not brains enough to know ‘ what to do and what to? say without his advice. But then we suppose the ear-alderman gets little chance any more to talk, except when there is a meeting of the city council, and he has been j 80' long acustomed‘ to tickle himself with the sound of his . oiwn voice that we presume he feels lonesome unless he can hear himself at least once in a while. One of our‘aldermen at the last meeting .Of the 'cOunoil, in advocat. ing the filter, made the remark that “there is a nigger in the wood- pile somewhere." Quite possibly the alderman is correct, and allow us to. remind him that. that is just what the public is afraid of. There are

Powered by / Alimenté par VITA Toolkit
Privacy Policy