Press enter after choosing selection

The Board Of Public Works

The Board Of Public Works image
Parent Issue
Day
30
Month
January
Year
1891
Copyright
Public Domain
OCR Text

It is bad policy to take a step backward in progress. It would be very bad poltcy for the council to endeavor to secure the abolishment of the board of public works in this city. In all governments, the legislative and executive functions are wisely divided. The council fs the city legislature, the board of public works is an executive board. The council determines what shall be done in the line of street improvements, the board does it. The work of the board is purely executive in its character. Being such it is very properly divorced from the law-making power of the city. Universal experience has shown that this división of executive and legislative powers is the best. In all branches of our government it is observed. In absolute monarchies it is not observed. If the council had both the legislative and executive powers it would be an oligarchy, with annually changing members. But leaving the theory of government out of the question, the board of public works can be defended as a step in favor of practical economy. Under the old charter, when each ward's alderman looked af ter the street work in that ward, and the aldermen changed from year to year, it was natural that a good many aldermen would be elected who had no practical knowledge of street work. There would be íi,ooo to spend on street work in the ward. That, in too many cases, came to be looked upon as a political corruption fund. One year it would be spent in hauling dirt on the street, the next year in hauling it off. There was no system about street work. There was no central head. The improvements were not of a permanent character. As a matter of fact, more improvements of a permanent character have been made in this city in the past two years, (we are talking now of street work) than had been done in ten years before. The onslaught on the board of public works, is largely due to the fact that certain men have not been given a large share of the work. It is natural that they should go to the aldermen with their complaints. But if the business men and the taxpayers are to be consulted, the aldermen would find that a system which secured for the city the work it paid for was what was desired. The street work should be divorced entirely from politics. It is right to pay $1.50 a day wages, but is right also to require that a good day's work be put in for the $1.50, and that somebody who would not be dependent for his position upon the influence of the man whose work was being judged, should determine whether or not a day's work was being done. This is for the tax-payer's benefit. He pays for it. To state it in another way, it is asked that the board be abolished, so that the present street commissioner can be removed. That is the whole sum and substance of it. We are asked to confer upon the council executive powers to get rid of one official, who is dependent upon the board of public works for his appointment, and is removable by them. As well might the council seek to abolish the office of mayor, because the incumbent might happen to be distasteful to them. The next mayor or street commissioner might be perfectly satisfactory. The charter is not made for one year. If it has no permaneney, it is useless. A constitution or a charter should not be lightly changed. Legislation simply for the present month or year without any regard for the future is folly. Furthermore, if it is sought to abolish the board of public works, the council has hardly time to prepare all the changes which will have be made in the charter, and present the bill to the legislature. A large number of sections would require to be changed to eliminate the distinction made between executive and legislative powers. If these changes are not made, a mere botch of the charter would be the result. Some of those who desire the change entirely misapprehend the powers of the board and the council under the present charter. The board cannot expend over $25 out the consent of thecouncil. The council, itself, determines exactly where strett improvements shall be made, and what those improvements shall be. The board's work is merely executive, to see that the improvements are made as ordered, and work properly and economically done within the appropriations. This is a work which should not be thrown upon the council. It is too large a body to be an executive board.