Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1890-08-03
GENERALLY CORRECT.
The Books and Records of County Off
GERS Oyerhauled

The Books and Records of County Off
GERS Overhauled.
Following is the report of A. ]. Hopper,
County Expert, made to the Grand Jury,
and filed by that body with its report:
The accounts of the Sheriff and Tax Collector
were found correct, with the exception of the
following: The jail register showed fines col
leeted to the amount OF S2l. which had been
overlooked at the proper time. This amount
was paid to the County treasurer, June q, $780,
Before the County Government Act was
passed, under Sections $40 and 1918 OF the Pc.
liticA Code the Tax Collector was entitled to
and has always retained the charge of so cents
collected on each duplicate cetificate of sale,
and also one. half of the so Genus charged col
lected on each separate assessment delinquent
Under the County Government Act no cOun y
officer is entitled TO retain any fees or commits
sions outside on his salary, unless so specified
| in the Act, which says that the TaxCollector
of Sacramento is entitled TO 81 500 per year
salary, the charge of So each for each tax deed
| made by him. The Collector retained on the
delinquent tax rolls of 1855 and loS9 one halt of
these charges, amounting to s2S7 80, which he
states he will pay into the County Treasury.
In regard TO Section $40 of the Political Code
there is question as to whether the so cents to
be collected on each separate delinquent as
sessment applies 10 all, as soon as the tax be-
comes delinquent, or only on delinquent assess
ments advertised. In this county 1t has been
collected only on those advertised. In some
| assessments as soon rs delinquent.
If your honorable body win examine this
section OF the Revenue law you might have the
question determined in regard to this county
The accounts of Assessor Frost are found TO be
all right, and statements of collections given
in detail
The books of the County Clerk are found to
be correct, except that there are errors amount
ing to 81 80 in favor of the county.
The disbursements OF County Superintendent
of schools Howard are correct. with these ex-
ceptions He charged $40 to the Brown School
District, Instead of Alabama District; and he
made an error when he paid from the school
moneys incidental expenses of attending teach
ers exsmic atom meetings.
Section ITO OF the School Law SAYS that these
expenses are TO be paid out of the County Gen.
eral Fund. The amounts thus paid in the last
eighteen months aggregate Sos 2s.
The Superintendent has an account in his
school ledger called the Contingent Fund
inherited from his pre6ecesso in ofhce-which
should be abolished, as there is no authority
tor it.
The books of the Auditor and Recorder are
correct. except that there is an error OF 81 in
his favor
The only thing uud not entirely correct in
the accounts of License Collector Dolan is that
the settlements each month are not made
strictly in accordance with Section 5 1858 of the
Political Code, which requires a settlement on
the first Monday in each mouth. During 1890
the monthly settlements are from three to four
weeks behind time.
The accounts of Coroner Clark agree with
his Office record of inquests.
The Treasurer's book and accounts were all
correct.
A number of errors are found in claims al
lowed by the Supervisors. In some instances
the vouchers have not been properly fled and
in others there are errors in adding up the
figures etc. But little attention has been paid
TO the law requiring that lists of claims shall
be filed with both the Auditor and Treasurer.
But one cory has been filed. and that with
the Treasurer, which is also very incomplete,
info aaf rh<af anna
and amount allowed.
The attention of the Grand Jury is called to