OCR Text |
Show TO PATCH OR NOT TO PATCH Many of tho property owners alons Twenty-fifth and Twenty-fourth streets are contending that it is mistake to patch those streets as the city has planned. They have been repaired re-paired for the past two or three years and It Is almost like throwing monej away to continue patching There is a question whether, if the city commissioners com-missioners should change their plans and determine to resurface these streets, the city would have to pay the expense out of the general city fund, or whether property abutting tho streets would be taxed for the Improvement Im-provement Some preporty owners have gone so far as to say that if the city would be required, under the law, to pay the cost and have not sufficient funds Irr tho tieasry with which to do it, they would be willing to aid in taking up a subscription for the payment of the cost, rather than to see the streets again patched. Attorneys of the city have been approached ap-proached en the question and some of them are of the opinion that the cit could proceed to levy a tax for the resurfacing re-surfacing of Twenty-fourth and Twenty-fifth streets, the same as was done when the streets were first paved, while others are of the opinion that the city must maintain the streets ftom the general fund whether it be in the repair of them or the rebuilding or repavlng of them City Attorney Valentine Gideon states that he Is of the opinion that tho city might assess abutting property prop-erty for tho recurfaclng of paved streets. Some of the property owners along the streets declare they would resist any attempt to place on them the burden of keeping the streets in repair, re-pair, whether by patching or recurfaclng, recur-faclng, holding to the position that the city must maintnln the paving after the abutting preporty owners have paid for the original construction. |