The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-11-21


buke should rest upon all who have thus be-
trayed their trust and the courts and the law
win deal with those who have misappropriated
public funds and ialsifed public records
The manner in which bond money has been
expended has perhaps caused more pubic
criticism than any one thing, and much time
and care has been particularly given the man.
ner OF expanding this money on the roads.
The first item of expense in laying out ana
constructing new roads is for the surveys. In
this particular IL is found that many OF the
bills seem to be unreasonably large
A decided laxity prevails III the conduct OF
the BUSINESS affairs OF the county particularly
IN distributing the road funds, and at
least one set of bills, amounting to about
5000 has been paid twice. Notwithstanding
this loss the same merhod OF presenting and
allowing bills for road work is still practiced.
After citing the law regarding members
of the Board OF Supervisors being inter
ested in property purchased for the use OF
the county, the report continues:
II Is found In the records that l.. NJ. Roberts
was paid Tl17S 80 out OF the county fund FOR
work done on the Sumner streets while he was
a membe OF the Board of supervisors.
The claim for work performed was presented
to the board by ]. Il. Brady, an employe OF
T.. NJ. Roberts; was allowed by the board,
audited by the Auditor TO the order OF J. j.
Brady and paid by the Treasurer with the
name of Il. NJ. Roberts only inuorsed thereon.
The manner in which the business was trans
acted suggests that IL was manipulated by
r.. NJ. ROBERTS LOT tile purpose OF tNhuluR the
law prohibiting him as supervisor from doing
the work or drawing the money in his name.
+. A. McGee, who audited the claim, the
Board OF Supervisors the Auditor and Treas
urer, all should be publicly censured for pass
ing upon and paying any claim OF this char
acter. Also the Illegal claim OF 1902 for wood
sold 10 the county while he was Supervisor, all
OF which IS contrary 10 the law and the
statutes.
1t also appears that there are ten claims,
aggregating 1878 60. presented in the name OF
J. Rinedollar, for meat furnished the county by
Briggs 4 Jnstro. IL. A. Jastro, being member
OF the board, was prohibited from selling meat
or presenting II claim to the county and, to
evade the law. used Rinedollar billheaGs. aud
the claim was audited and paid to the order OF
J. Rinedollnr, but the firm of Briggs x Jastro
drew the money through the instrumentality
OF their clerks. J. Rinedollar never having
sold any meat 10 the county nor had he ever
presented claim. Such transactions, TO say
the least, look very suspicious ana reflect upon
the honor OF all concerned.
Scathing comments are made against ii
l.. Packard, as deputy clerk and clerk to the
Board of Supervisors, for putting in false
claims IN addition to his salary in contra
vention of section 2l6, county government
act, which reads:
The salaries and fees provided in this ac
shall be in full compensation for oil services
OF every kind aud description rendered by the
officers herein named, either as officers or eX
oficio officers, their deputies and assistants
etc
Other illegal acts of members of the
Board of Supervisors are mentioned:
large number OF claims have been pre-
sented 10 the board, allowed and paid, when
they should have been rejected and returned
for correction, not having complied with the
law rs 10 being properly itemized. Section Ill
of the county government act of 1891 is very
explicit and requires the board TO be very par.
ticular yet over $4,000 has been paid upon
claims not itemized or neglecting TO make an
allowance for the same on the minutes.
Neglecting TO sign the ordinance and fran
chise books until mandamused by the court %
show cause why.
Negleoting TO pass proper ordinance upon
liquor license and polltaN.
Advertising for bids for the purchase OF
street railway franchise and demanding a
$500 deposit.
Members OF the board presenting large
claims for mileage, the same not itemiged as
the law requires.
Holding executive sessions contrary TO law,
which says; IAN meetings OF the board must
be public"
Peculiar proceedings in the matter of re-
moving distractions in Kern River. Neglect
ing 10 obtain any data as 10 the number OF
sented. without any knowledge as 10 It's cor
rectueSS.
The minutes show peculiar proceedings in
the matter of securing right OF way Tor n
levee 10 protect the town of Bakersfield from
foods in the year 1890 and pay ing the exor-
hitant price of $1,000 for the same.
In reviewing the expenses II Is noticed that
the books and stationery purchased for the
different Offices cost the county large sums OF
money, and no steps are taken by the board 10
curtail this expense. From - per cent TO 30
per cent more Is paid by the careless ordering
that has prevailed than the same material
would cost If competition was invited. The
amounts paid during the past five years are as