Who Pays for the Streets That Boost Land Values?

Editor Tribune: Our city council has under consideration the question of borrowing from the general fund for the purpose of paying the indebtedness of private individuals for grading streets, the larger part of which is from three-fourths to one and one-half miles from the center of the city. The grading was done to boom town lots, and I think it is an injustice to bond the city for the purpose of paying for such improvements. Take for instance Central street, indebtedness $11,000; how many people are living on that street? San Francisco street, $1,623.75; does anybody know where that is? Fifth street, Hale's addition, $1,549.37 — improved the property of Mrs. Hale almost exclusively. Why should I help pay her share? The bonds in the first place were obtained under the old song, home labor. Where is the money that was to be used for sewers? Is that too going to help pay the debts of our great land owners and speculators? And when we have tried a dozen or more sewer plans at $1,500 and are ready for construction, the council will ask the electors for another bond; this time it is sewers sure and only; and home labor and material (if nothing happens). That chestnut I think is done for and my advice is to go easy with the funds you have; the next bonds won't carry as easy as the last ones.

Citizens have found out that the present generation pays the debt several times in interest and property pays the principal. It is hard work to think, but the people of this city must do it, or we will find ourselves bankrupted through interest on bonds. OLAF FRISCH.