Show THE PUBLIC BUILDING I H D J Discusses the Proposed Pro-posed Consolidation HAS THE COUNTY AUTHORITY i I A Belief That Ample Additions Conld Bo Made at OneThird the Cost To the Editor of THE HERALD At the risk of being charged with impertinence im-pertinence in interfering in any way with a local question in which I as a citizen have but a slight financial interest in-terest desire with your permission to be heard on the pending question the proposed partnership between the City of Salt Lake and Salt Lake County in the erection of a city hall and county court house It is possible that the time has passed when objections to the proposition will avail anythiug in preventing its consummation 1 con-summation but even if cash is the case I for one feel disposed to enter a protest pro-test against It and this protest is not nade solely on my own account but in I he interest of the taxpayers of the sity and county I observe that THE HERALD very woperly as I think remarked that joint control of a publto building is lot relished Trae the people I take It do not relish the idea of a joint I ownership and occupancy of a public building built by the proceeds of their aonest toil by their agents without haying been COBSULTED ON THE SUBJECT But this is not the only reason for objection to the proposed plan There are several points of objection affording in my opinion good and sufficient reasons rea-sons why this lately promulgated aoheme for spending the peoples money should not be carried out Some of them I will briefly allude to In the first place it is denied that the County Court has any legal warrant I war-rant for the expenditure of any of the county funds in the erection of any building saps for county purposes pur-poses in the interest of the people peo-ple of the county It is true that to the County Court is granted authority au-thority to locate sites for public buildings build-ings and to erect the same but with due deference to the County Court and to the City Council I confidently premise pre-mise that such power does net extend to the location of a site for ajcity hall nor to the erection of the same IT IS BEYOND QUESTION that the City Council is clothed with authority to locate the site for and to erect suitable buildings for the use of the city but it is confidently denied that it has any authority to expend city funds in the erection of county buildings Thus much as to the rights of the respective corporations I will now refer to the necessity for the erection erec-tion of a building so expensive as is contemplated and the policy of such expenditure The county had a right to erect a court house in which the business of the county might be transacted This right was exercised in the erection of the present court house on Second South Street which was supposed at the time to be large enough good enough and elegant enough for the purpose This building is a very substantial sub-stantial one and it is supposed to I have been one of sufficient external appearance to satisfy the tastes of those who planned and built it It may be urged that this building is not suited to the tastes of the present generation which require more grand and imposing public buildings but this is not cosidered a sufficient reason for the proposed innovation besides it raises a question are the tastes of the present generation more refined than of the last This is a question I do not wish to discuss now BUT IT IS URGED that the present Court House is too small for the present business of the county To this objection I suggest a remedy Lilt the County Court expend che 20000 which it proposes to pay the gity for a half interest in 10x10 rods tround in the erection of an addition to the old Court House and they might so plan as to add an exhibition of the tastes of the present to that of the last generation thus exhibiting a contrastthe solid and substantial with the more ostentatiously fine It is also alleged that the City Hall is not large enough nor fine enough for the present uses and tastes Very well if such be the case why not add an annex an-nex of sufficient capacity and beauty 10 gratify the taste of the present generation genera-tion and to afford ample room for the transaction of the business of the city It occurs to your correspondent that the sum of 20000 judiciously expended would be amply sufficient for the purpose pur-pose This plan of enlargment of the two public pub-lic buildings if carried out would result in teautiying two sections M the city whereas tae proposed joint building would benefit one section of the city at I the expense of all other sections We are all anxious that I 1 SALT LAKE CITY SHALL CITY BECOME A GREAT the metropolis of this intermountain region and it seems to me that all that we do to further this laudable ambition soald be done wisely and well The first great tning to be done in order to accomplish this object is for us to furnish an adequate supply of water for the influx of population upon which we rely for a healthy growth of the city and the county If therefore it is thought best to expend 150000 or 200000 of the money of the taxpayers would it not be better to expend it in the erection of reservoirs in the dieging of ditches and in such other ways as will store up for use when required the waters flowing into Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County The city can legitimately spend money for the purpose of furnishing water for its inhabitants and the county can legitimately do the same for the purpose of furnishing water for irrigating in the rural districts If the borrowed surplus now in the treasury of the city and the taxes paid by the people of the county and city must be spent I humbly suggest that the better way to expend it is as I have suggested and to close I will briefly hint to the City Council and the County Court that possibly wisdom would dictate the prounely of consulting their constituents consti-tuents before entering upon so expensive expens-ive scheme as the erection of the joint public building H DJ |