Jasper County Democrat, Volume 18, Number 99, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 11 March 1916 — Much Opposition to Hospital Project Is Developing. [ARTICLE]

Much Opposition to Hospital Project Is Developing.

The Democrat has received many commendations for the position H has taken regarding the additional appropriation of SB,OOO made for the proposed county hospital, and it is practically assured that the taxpayers will not submit to the imposition. The petitioners whose names appear on the petition asking that a hospital be built and maintained signed the petition with the distinct understanding that the amount to be expended for the building should not exceed SIO,OO0 —and the law also expressly provides that the petition shall state the MAXIMUM amount it is proposed to expend. The petition fixed this amount at J l(f;060 and the signers thereof did not petition for a $20,000 or a $30,000 expenditure.

Councilmen May and Bowdv of Carpenter tp. voted against the SB,000 additional appropriation made Monday, and say that they felt that the county council had already gone further than the petitioners had anticipated when they made an additional appropriation some 'time ago of SI,OOO to secure a site for the building, as it was expressly understood that SIO,OOO was to cover the cost of both site and building. However. had the s old petition been withdrawn or dismissed and a new one filed asking for $19,000 or $20,000, they would probably have voted for such an appropriation. They do noj think it is right to double the appropriation asked for, and voted against the proposition when it came before them. Some other members of the council expressed themselves as voting for this SB,OOO additional against their better judgment, and said that they understood that Commissioners Welch of Carpenter and Marble of Wheatfield had expressed themselves as against expending double the amount asked for in the petition, and had said they ‘ would not stand for it.” If this amount can arbitrarilly be increased to double that set out in the petition, of what use are such petitions anyway? The argument that a building cannot be erected for SIO,OOO is bunk, pure and simple. Of course a $20,000 building cannot be built for SIO,OOO, neither can a man build a SIO,OOO residence for $5,000. But he can build a 00ft residence for $5,000. If it was found that a building of the magnitude desired could not be erected for SIO,OOO, why not dismiss the whole thing and get up a new petition calling for the expenditure of $20,000? It would thereby give those people who signed for the SIO,OOO building an opportunity to say, whether they favored the expenditure of twice that sum or not and be treating the petitioners and taxpayers honestly and fairly