The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1899-08-02
KELSEY UP AGAINST IT
Charges and Specifications Made
and Defense Outlined.
HEARING FRIDAY NIGHT
TWO REPORTS FROM SPECIAL
COMMITTEE BEFORE COUNCIL.
Geddes' Accusations Found to Be
Groundless-City Engineer Asks
Permission to Let U. S. Irrigation
Engineer Copy His Maps and
Water Data, But Is Refused.

Water Data, But Is Refused.
The issues relating to City Engineer
Kelsey's alleged offense of having made
fictictious reports to the city council in
the matter of the surveys for greater
water supply, were all made up at last
evenings council meeting, but by
agreement, the hearing of the charges
and the defense was set for Friday
evening, before the committee of the
whole
The report of the majority of the
special committee, recommending the
engineers removal from office, and the
finding of the minority, demanding
proof of the alleged acts ,of omission
and commission, were submitted, but
both went over for consideration until
the adjourned meeting. There was
little or no discussion on the main ques-
ton, the debate being reserved till Fri
day night.
There was likewise no discussion on
the subject, as presented by another
special committee, finding A. S. Geddes.
an employee of the city engineer, guilty
of making wild and baseless aceusa-
tons against members of the council
on matters pertaining to the proposed
exchange of canal water with Mill
Creek farmers for canyon water. but
there was breezy exchange of words
on the engineers request to permit the
United States irrigation engineer to
make copies of his maps and other
water data.
Kelsey's Removal Recommended.
Councilmen Howe, Weller and Fern
strom. reporting upon the methods in
in aIS
submitted the following:
We. your special committee to whom
was referred the communication of the
city engineer submitting plans. maps.
prohles and other data relating to his in
designations towards an increased water
supply for Salt Lake City, together with
his statement of expenditures of the
regular allowance of the engineering de-
partment. as well as for special work for
other departments of the city govern
ment, beg leave to report as follows:
We have examined the maps, etc. as
presented by the engineer. and although
as yet in an incomplete condition, we
believe they may prove of great value
J to the city. We are however of the
opinion that the city engineer has great
ly exceeded his authority in the work of
the investigat ton. as conferred upon him
| by the adoption of the report of the
special committee on water supply,
adopted in October. 1898.
We would therefore recommend that the
whole matter, with the data submitted by
the engineer. be referred to the commit
| tee of the whole.
Fictitious Report.
We find upon examining the report of
| the engineer giving the expenditures of
| the regular allowance for his department,
as also the amount expended for special
work done for other departments OF the
| city government from October l, 1898, to
! April l. 1899. ii appears to us that said
report is fictitious. deceptive and cal
! culated to deceive the city council in a
number of instances.
In reporting to the council the manner
I of the disbursement of the regular allow
! ance. number of regular employees of
/ the department are gwen, with "a state
ment of the monthly salary of each, as
follows:
! Engineering department
| Once man -...--.-.- .---.--....-..Sl 00 W
craftsman -. --....'......-.'.-'-.... ~ ~
Total for engineering department. 500 %
: Sewerage division
/ Foreman and plumbing Inspectors % %
Flushing gravity outlet sewer. -
Total for sewerage division ......$l50 81
| Vouchers for materials, etc.. 10 "
Making a total monthly expendi
! ture for the department of ......$ilS y
| leaving balance of but 81. 10 per month,
according TO the report of the engineer.
! that could possibly be spent for field or
! special work. or as he plainly states there
is nothing left for field or special work.
What Pay Rolls Show.
Upon investigation we found on the pay
"a salary of 500 per month. We can find
! by the rolls no person drawing a salary
of $50 per month as craftsman. Mr.. kel-
sey stated to the committee, however
that Mr.. Albert Johanssen was the
regularly employed craftsman, although
appearing on the pay rolls at so much pei
| day. There does not appear upon the pay
! rolls any boy or other person at a salary
! of $50 per month. In the sewerage de-
| partment we find Mr.. G. j. Spencer on the
! pay rolls as foreman and plumbing in
/ spector at 800 per month. The hushel
and horse appears on the rolls as F.
| Lunn, teamster with horse; sometimes al
$50 per month. at other times at $40 pei
day.
More Specifications.
On examination of the expenditures fol
special work we find that some of tho
| regular employees of the department had
I been charged under the several headings
| for special work although the report OF
the engineer shows that the full amoup1
of the allowance had been expended dur
| ing the time covered by the report, ac-
cording to the segregation given by him
| In the case of the regular craftsman
| Mr.. Johanssen, the maount OF work per
formed by him during the period OF time
covered by the report Is SOD although
the full amount allowed him from tht
as expended. In regard to the amount
of Mr. Johassen's salary during this
time according to the pay rolls, together
with the rate is as follows: October
1898 eight and half days at $50 pei
month. S21.95: November. 1898 thirty-twc
| and three-quarter days at $50 per month
1915; in December, 1898. twenty-eight and
three-quarter days at s. per day, $3.50
| in January. 1899, twenty-six ana one-hali
days at $40 per day. $685.: in February
1893, twenty-three days at $3.50 per day, IT
| March, 1899, twenty-seven days at $3.50 pei
day, $3.50. The only month during this
| time that he. has drawn as much as ~
! being in March. 1899. although the
| engineers statement shows that SSo pei
| month has been paid for this work from
| the regular allowance during the period
mentioned and also that the sum or $50 2
| has been charged TO other departments for
work done by him.
| We also find that Mr.. Spencer the fore
man and plumbing inspector, has been DO
| ing work which has been charged 10 other
! DEPARTMENTS in the amount OF SsI.5i, and
| that the regular allowance has Deen
| charged each month with $50
| In the examination of the amounts re-
| ceiyed by the department and turned over
| to the city treasurer, the sum or 81 for
| sewer permits and of 81 for plumbing
| permits issued and which the engineer
| in his report credits his department with
| as being special work while admitting
| to the committee that the issuing OF
| these permits was a portion of the duties
| of the regularly employed man who hao
| been already paid from the regular al