A Schoolhouse Fight Over Who Builds Olympia

Editor Tribune: The all-absorbing topic of the day among our mechanics and laborers is, will outside parties build our new high school building, or will it be let to our own mechanics?

These are the facts: Plans were called for by the school board for a building not to exceed in cost $25,000, and none but Olympia architects were allowed to compete. On March 21, 1892, thirteen plans were submitted to the school board. Four of said thirteen belonged to the architects of this city, and nine were drawn by parties not residents of the city or county, and the one now under consideration for acceptance is by a non-resident. Such being the facts, it would seem that the first duty of the board would be to reject all plans received in competition from outsiders. Our own people, city and county taxpayers, should at least have an equal show with non-residents and outsiders.

It is conceded that we have good architects and mechanics in Olympia. Their work shows it; but tell me if you can how much good honest work has been done in Olympia in the past two years by contract by outside architects and contractors. They are few and far between. Our school buildings, court house, and many other buildings I can mention.

Now with all the experience, and it has been expensive, would it not be better for our school board to get the work done by the day, employ a good superintendent and hire our own mechanics and laborers, pay and demand a day's work? In that way you will get a high school building a monument to your intelligence and a pride and credit to our city, and at an honest price, to wit: the cost of material and labor. Our money will be kept at home, our people will be employed and we will get a good building. It will also have a tendency to break up all "rings," it will relieve the members of the board from annoyance and pressure and the money voted by the taxpayers will go into the material and labor in the building instead of the pockets of the architect and contractor.

Now, in conclusion, I would like to say a few words to our school board: Do not be caught again as you were caught before by a "stick" architect. We have the experience, but he got our money. J. W. ROBERTS.

The School Plans. Editor Tribune: I was pleased to see a letter published in the last issue of THE TRIBUNE with reference to the high school plans. The letter is to the point and I fully agree with the writer in saying that Olympia architects and Olympia work has been ignored. We were all under the impression that no outside plans would be accepted and entered into competition accordingly. Now, it is well known that the plans which have been accepted were not prepared by the competitor who sent them in, but by a Tacoma architect, and it is also known that a man came down here to work them up in the office. Three competitors sent in foreign plans. The remainder were competent to do their own work. The board was apprised of this fact before the award was made, through the columns of the Olympian, on the 1st. Why was no inquiry made? A competent architect, and one who is here to stay, is alone entitled to be recognized according to the intention of the citizens. Mr. Hartsuck's opinion that the accepted plans should be rejected for reasons stated in his letter, is the opinion of the Olympia architects and not a few of the citizens who are acquainted with the facts. Yours truly, S. E. BARR.