Show CITY GITY OFFICIALS OFFICIAL BLAME lA IE NEW NEV LA LAW o I-o Excessive Levy for Sewers to Be Discussed by Property f Owners Tonight t PRESENT TAX TAXIS IS UNJUST 11 I r It Has Been Juggled and andr r 4 Raised too Often to toK K Suit the People fj At a lL m meeting tin of oC indignant property r. r 1 owners living along East Bust Seventh Sev South and adjacent streets tonight the he t. action l of ot the tho city council in ll in levying i 1 exorbitant and unjust a assessments for tor tort t 1 the tho building of oC sewer ewer extension 18 will ho bo generally aired Tho Tim meeting meet meet- C- C ing will be held hold at the Second ward warl I 1 I meeting house hous on Seventh So South bet between between be be- t t tween een Fourth and Fifth East Cast str streets et b beginning at 30 o'clock Decisive c action will wilt be he taken taleen b by the property owners to prevent the thc city t. t from collecting what Is Ig regarded as an excessive levy for Cor the so er that has V. V been laid in the street It Is Js quite likely that a a. Cun fund 1 will vIll be he raised for lor tho the retention of oC attorneys s 's to tl fight ht the thet t attempt of tho city to pilfer the pockets pock pock- T ets of the property owners j t. t To excuse tho unwarranted action of ot the cH city In making two assessments against ar the property owners In sewer extension the tho city officials have haves s n agreed upon a J program ro of blaming tho the lust last legislature for changing the tho law regarding special taxes City neer and City Attorney Dinin- Dinin lt t n ny fly admit that It Is a a. good law but hut say ay a- a that It wa was put Into effect at a n nIt It z time when contracts were ere being heIng- considered considered con con- by tho the city and at a lL tIme timo notice to tho the when tho the cit city had no I. I effect that the tho old law was ras being amended I Tho rho Law They The Blame The Tho In law which tho they blame for causing caus cans ing ing- ingall all nil the tho trouble and compelling the J prop property owners o to pay more than was wa originally paid for tOl sewer sawel assessment I is found In chapter 12 page paRe 1 1 10 J orthe or ortho I tho the session laws of 1 1007 07 It Is as fol Col- Lot Lot- lows p Special 1 taxes ma may be levied as ns the I I t i improvements improvement aro t ro completed in front I of or along or upon any block or lot r or part palt thereof or or ir r piece of ground or at nt tho ho timo tho the Improvement is en entirely en en- completed as ns shall be provided In the die ordinance levying Je tho ho tax provided pro pro- vided 1 that any Jev levy of a special tax for special Improvements shall not he be made until the tho cost of such improvement improve improve- ment shall first ha h been heen en ascertained b by contract duly let to the lowest re responsible responsible re- re bidder after publication of notice for COI at least twenty days in a a. f newspaper of general clr circulation pub pub- Ji hed in the Iho city where such Improvements Improve Improve- ments are arc to be made AND THE TIlE COST OF SUCH IMPROVEMENTS ij- ij HALL HALL- NOT OT EXCEED ED TO THE PROPERTY THE TIlE AMOUNT OF THE TIlE CONTRACT E ENTERED INTO FORTHE FOR TIlE THE PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK provided further that hide bids for Cor the doing of or all nn work worl contemplated by each special Improvement shall be he separately solicited and a tt a separate conI contract con con- I tra tract t l 1 be o le let as above pro pro- vided City Violates r Law aw That pic he city has consistently defied the law violating It Its provisions separately separately sep sep- and generally is shown by hy the I manner In which the property owners affected h by sewer extension have havo been exorbitantly taxed The Tho contract for tor was let Jet for 25 per linear foot toot This is an exorbitantly cx- cx ex ex- high rate considering the fact that owners within the thelast J last two years ears havo have obtained rl th the same work for Cor at least per linear foot The rue property ty owners received notice of the assessment on a i has basis s of of after the work was completed along their property Later Lator they received recel a a. dun lun for 23 cents additional per front foot This 23 2 cents centi per foot was over and above tho the contract price which theIn the law In expressly forbids 1 An error in tho the city engineers engineer's office of of- face fice was wac r responsible for or a lL notice to the j effect that 1 13 cents would be bo tacked on to the hut but this was rectified and raided to 23 cents which would complete completo the tho cost f the work There Thero was absolutely no excuse under tinder the l law w or under the tho contract drawn in accordance with tho the law for the additional additional ad ad- levy ot of 23 cents Whoa When this new law was pending In Inthe Inthe Inthe the lc legislature there thero vere were several sewer sew sew- 1 er Cr i extension contracts hanging fire The Tho one In which tho the property owners on Seventh South street arc are Interested was as one of or them The taxpayers re received re- re cel a a. notice that tho the assessment would be bc iO per front foot the limit allowed d by a a. resolution passed h by tho the city council and then in force c Contractors were wore glad Jad to come in i or p and la lay sewers sowers for per linear foot loot and the they seemed to make enough money with tho the figure as ns the Iho maximum maxi maxi- mum Just Justas as soon as the new law w was wa pa passed tho the city administration started in to make It odious by saying It hampered hampered hampered ham ham- public improvements Under the old law tho the city en engineer was not required to mal make e an estimate on tho the work but as soon a a. as the now ne' nela law la went vent into effect he be began an to make estimates with the result that In Instead of getting tho the work done for per front foot toot about twice that amount was vas charged against the tho property owners This move not only benefited the contractor but i it helped the city treasury The cit city was frequently obliged under the old J J law w to pay paya a n. small fraction of ot the cost of oC Improvement Im irs- provement In some parts of the tho city tho the cost would exceed per linear foot and this difference could not be taxed against tho the property owners The city therefore paid up this small frac frac- lion tion The Thc average amount p paid ld by the city never ne exceeded one-eighth one of oC tho the total total to total to- to tal cost At the same mo time under tinder the thc present procedure ure the tho Increase In the cost to the thc property owner Is almost ONE O HU HUNDRED DRED PER PEn CE CENT TJ T. T J ado T the 1 h Issue mC iIO When property owners invaded the mayors mayor's office and anI demanded explanatIon tIon Ion of the tho city's outrageous conduct tl h 3 V o city officials merel merely blamed the new now law Jaw but not bl give gl reasons I Cit City Att Attorney orne Dininny sai sale said I that thene thene the ne new ne law Is just that It suits tho the case exactly but that the d d- d Mormons pa passed it without letting letting- the city a ad administration administration ad- ad ministration know a n. thing about It In trying to ascertain just what there Is in the new now law w which jU Justifies a higher assessment The rue Republican has been beon unable to get a satisfactory f explanation from front an any of the city out out- dais clalA They all evade c the tho Issue The levy Y is not made mado now until after afler the tho work Is completed whereas it used to be made from the time of publishing publishing pub pub- lishing the notice of or intention Yet th the contractor did not then thell and does docs not now get his money from th the tho o city until after lac ne has completed the tho work The only advantage o under the old law was that tho the city held the tho property owners' owners mone money until the tho contractor had hall completed his work and then made payments upon UlOn partial partin 1 estimates as the they were approved b by the council Tho The contractor doesn't have havo to wait any longer now for COL his money than he lie did eld before but the city hasn't tho handling of ot so much cn cash h hIt It is argued by by- property owners and not met b by eft city officials that if it the work could have c been done a year cal cala a ago o for IO per linear font tont there thore i Is no reason On wh why it cannot be done for Cor about the same price now allowing something for the tho advance ance in labor and material Tho The law Jaw the they say is not at nt fault Cault and the they agree with tho the city officials that it is a n. W very l' l good law The Tho property owners do not lind anything under the tho new nw law to justify jus jus- tit till an exorbitant assessment nor the levying lc of two assessments nor tho the exceeding of or the contract price |