The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1896-04-01
Mayors office,
Salt 1 a lra C,itr- Nal. no
To the Honorable the City Council. Salt
Gentlemen-The snacia1 a,nro,,r,o.i.,, :.

/
G Gent men special appropriation il
1avor of Houlahan, Griffith, Norris. Hob.
son d. Wilkerson, gravity outlet sewer
contractors, Tor Sl1,OUO, which was passed
! ny the city council at its meeting oil
March 18th. 1886, and transmitted 10 ms
on the 10Th instant for my action there
on, is herewith returned disapproved
Inc facts IN respect to this claim are
substantially as follows:
On August 18th, 1895, the contractors
Med claim against the city with the
board OF public works and city engin
| eer for extra work, labor and materia
done, performed and furnished on th4
| gravity outlet sewer amounting TO &c.
lou 70, upon which was allowed the sun
OF $S,55S.o2 leaving a balance of S37. SOP. 20
which was disaliowed by these officers
| as being an improper claim, and hence
1t was excluded from the final estimate
Afterwards on February y, 1886. the
! contractors presented to the city council
| their claim for said balance and fixeL
/ the amount due themselves at SIS, 429. IS
At a later date, and while this claim
] was being considered in committee oil
! tie council, the contractors o. cred 10 c1m
promise with tie city upon payment Il
them of S15,oC0 and the committee finally
recommended the payment of $Q,0G0 iI
full settlement of ali demands. This re-
! communication has met the approval OF
the council and the appropriation under
| consideration was made in accordance
Herewith
The report OF the committee fails to
specify What particular work, labor OF
material IS extra or the section OF
the contract which entities it to such
classification and payment.
l am unable to ind any provision in
the contract which justifies the payment
of this or any other amount for extra
ready paid to these contractors in settle
ment of their final estimate.
Extra work is defined by the contract
to be all such as is not included in the
contract schedule: and such as has been
done in pursuance of an order in writ
ing signed by the board of public works
and city engineer
The final estimate already paid con-
tains items for extra work amounting 10
SOS, H. which l am informed includes
all extra work ordered and executed &C
cording to the terms of the contract.
One of the principal items in this bill
is for lumber which was used TO re-
tain the sides of the trench while the ex-
cayation was being made, and amounts
to $3.50.
This lumber was simply tool or ap-
pliance employed to enable the digging
and holding up the sides of the sewer
trench: it formed no part of the sewer
structure nor was its use directed by
the board of public works or city engln-
eer. and the contractors have heretofore
admitted that they were not enuIleo 10
compensation lOi It's lASN.
The contract provides for use OF lum-
Der in the following language;
Lumber in the work shall embrace all
of that class of work connected Win lhe
the use of lumber or timber of any d.
mensions and it's erection IN the work.
and may be used as support TOT ma
sorry or in fumes and bridges or IN any
other place and form That the poaTu ~
public works and city engineer snail d.
rect. GOD +ha
contractor shall be paid by the 900 feet
board measure at the rate named n tne
contract, and at no other rate, ana Ior
the nuantity actually used only. Pro-
yided that any lumber which may De
used in the timbering OF tunnels anu
trenches. shall not be included in TINS
class of work but shall be a part OF the
work of grading or tunnelling according
tn its use for one or the other purpose.
Under this clause it seems clear 10 me
that the city is prohibited from paying
claims of this character.
works takes from the city council all
authority over the class of work on which
this appropriation is based, and vests II
in the board whose function IS TO make
contracts, supervise the work done there
under and approve the estimates Oh the
city engineer.
The city council may refuse to approve
any estimate submitted by the board but
1t has no 10 IHotfAC Oil tSti4AAe~tSf
or amend or alter one. Yet it appears 70
me this is what the city council by the
passage of this appropriation attempts to
do with the final estimate.
which the contractors can be paid for any
work done under the contract, and that is
upon estimates certified by the city
engineer and approved by the board.
This appropriation is not based upon
any such estimate but on the contrary,
upon a claim which the board and en-
gineer refused to include therein. or to
certify or approve, and part of which the
contractors admit it is not legitimate
Its payment would therefore be in dt-
rect violation of the contract as well as
the resolution directing payment to be
made in accordance Herewith:
Said contract further provides:
ANY questions. differences or contro-
versies which may arise between the city
and the contractor under or in reference
to this agreement and the specifications;
or the performance or n-performaEce of
the work to which they relate, shall be
referred to the city engineer, and his de-
cision shall be final and conclusive on
both parties.
The city engineer in refusing to include
the items contained in the bill, upon
which this appropriation is based, exer-
cised the duty imposed upon him by law.
and 1 know of no other authority author
lied to review or modify his action in the
premises unless it be a court of compe-
tent jurisdiction.
The second clause of the resolution re-
ferred to directs that all claims of sub
contractors be first paid out of the
amount as the contract provides
This undoubtedly has reference to the
provisions of section 20, which reads as
follows:
eff at any time it shall appear by re-
port from the board of public works and
city engineer that the contractor has fail
ed to pay the laborerS employed upon the
vr-nrl or m taria1c IrGad -fharafh
the city may withhold from the money
which may be due or become due to the
contractor under this agreement such
amount as may be necessary, and may
apply the same to pay for such labor or
such material, and deduct the amount
from the final estimate of the contractor
In the absence of a report of this char
acter from the board of public works and
city engineer, and in view of the fact that
the final estimate has long since been paid
in full, the sewer accepted, and the con-
tractors formally released, | am unable to
how it is possible to pay these
sub-contractors claim under the above
clause, or how the amount can be charged
to contractors who have completed their
work and been discharged; or how any
amount can be deducted from the final
estimate which has already been paid
The report also directs that the amount
shall be distributed among
various parties who have furnished ma
terial and labor, but fails to name them,
or designate the amount TO be paid to
them respectively.
The aggregate amount of these claims
is not even mentioned, but 1 am in
formed that they will likely exceed the
amount appropriated. In that case shall
the claims be paid pro rata, or which
of them shall be paid and which shall
be refused payment, and if any such pay
ment be made, would the contractors be
bound by it? think not
1 am satisfied that the final estimate
tyr1d or- ifsh 0or7tr o.t<,, ii
ready been paid was based upon a very
liberal construction of the contract by the