Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1903-04-01
Mayor Uetoes
The Resolution
.., that by Councilman Eardey Without His APP
,,ool- Sputns The Idea That Capt. Busbidge IS Rank
ma officer Of he Police Department and Says hhe
Resolution is Mil, Void and Absolutely OF No htte't

Dear Sir--Replying 10 your verbal
request for an opinion as to whether
OF not the resolution adopted by the
city council on Monday, March 80, in.
structlng John b. Burbidge, captain of
the police, 20 certify all pay-rolls and
vouchers in the police department. etc,
Is a resolution 'appropratlng or inyolv-
ing the expenditure Of money falling
within the language Of section 1876 of
rho Revised Statutes, and as such re-
quires the signature Of the mayor be-
fore IL can become operative, permit
me 70 say
The statutes maze a well defined dis
tinction between contracts, resolutions
and propositions involving the expen-
dlture of money direct, as a necessary
part of such contract, resolution or
proposition ana other resolutions ara
pi Opositions affecting indirectly the ca
lcnditure Of city moneys without ac-
cOraplishlng an original appropriation,
or creating an original liability TO pay
vi on the part Of the municipality. In
my opinion II cannot be said that the
resolution under consideration creates
a liability against the city, or Involves
the expenditure of money simply be
cause It is an attempted direction to
q certain city official to do a certain act
In connection with the pay roll OF a
certain department which pay roll Is
of necessity q means TO the ultimate
cEd of the Payment of certain city Of
ficcrs, and hence connected with an eX-
rraditure Of money. The original LA
tility against the city. and the PROPOSE
ton involving IN expenditure of money,
was passed upon when the ordinance
coating the police department was
raised and the salaries of the officers
and men fixed,
Ny conclusion Is. therefore that this
resolution does not need 10 be present.
ed TO the mayor for his approval, as a
resolution involving the expenditure Of
money, or creating a liability against
the city.
There Is, however In my opinion an
other view 10 bet aiken OF this resolu-
ton, which makes the approval Of the
mayor necessary before It can become
operative.
On March %, the concurrent action
cf the mayor and a majority Of the
city council, appointed George A.
Sheets as chief Of police. His oath Of
Cfllce and approved bond have been
filed In your Office. He is in charge
OF the police department. and is. In
my opinion, unquestlonahly the head OF
the department. II is true that some
question Is being made as to the le-
gality of his appointment, hut the fact
remains that until the question Is pass.
ed upon by court OF competent iuris-
diction adversely to him, Mr. Sheets
Is the head Of the department.
The resolution under consideration
rtcitcs contrary TO the fact that there
IL now no legally qualified chief Of the
police department and after certain
other recitals, instructs you TO notify
.hc captain Of police that he Is respol-
sihle for the department., and is in
stucted to ignore the head OF the de-
partment, and sign the payrolls, vouch-
ers etc. This resolution is therefore,
al attempted removal Of the chief Of
police by attempting to take away from
him. and vest In a subordinate officer,
certain of the powers and duties. OF the
chief OF police. II this could be ac-
tcmplished by the city council, without
the concurrence Of the mayor. that pro-
vision OF Chapter 2S of the Session
Laws Of 1879 requiring concurrent ac-
tiun Of the council and mayor. would
Lccome imperative and Of no effect
Clearly, such attempted action must
have the approval Of the mayor before
It can become operative.
Finally, in my opinion, this resolution
must be submitted to the mayor, not
because II Involves the expenditure Of
money but because il practically In
wolves the removal Of the present chief
CT police. Very respectfully,
GEORGE /. NYE.
City Attorney.