Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1904-03-08

agents in their districts. and, as I find
| that they were not legally appointed or
| confirmed, or their compensation fixed,
| am compelled to reject said items Of
| expenditure.
In the superintendent Of waterworks
payroll, the following items are not APP.
proved, to-wit:
+. r. Kneass, clerk communicable SO
| Nj. G. Phillips, stOrekeeper ...,... $3.50
James Hilton, Don Lambourne and
II. Nelson, highline tankmen,
each Observation-Disclosures. $3.50
II. +. Heath, Joe Mullett and Joe
sennett, brick tankmen, each, $3.50
s. +. Brown, Parey's canyon res
eryoir man"...". ,..",..... 5000
L. +. Davis and Il. j. Swaner,
Thirteenth East reseryoirmen,
each.".,.... 49,. ...," ,""". $3.50
George Hills, Twentieth ward
tankman .,....." ...,",........ 45O
Joseph Phillips, Twentieth ward
tankman. .,.. 49,. -. 2LSs
John Beattie, Twentieth ward
tankman5 ........ 80. $3.50
Maud Hampton, stenographer., 5000
for the reason that said places and each
OF them have been created by the ordi-
nances, and the compensation fixed.
with the provision that the salary shall
be paid monthly; and ] find that the
places so created have not been filled
| as provided by law or the ordinances.
In the same department the following
additional Items are disapproved, to-
wit:
+. Nelson, meter plumber and
rN"ueI go 80 ''''' .r,'..,., S4E,V
Joseph Pugsley, City creek pa
lrol mah"'''''''' .',",. .,.. 1910
In respect to the former | am un-
able to find any ordinance creating the
Office OF meter reader and fixing the
compensation, or that any appointment
has been made and confirmed as re-
CURED by the law; IN respect to the
latter item ] do not find any ordinance
creating the position OF city creek pa
trolman. defining his duties and powers
or fixing his compensation, or any au-
thorty whatsoever for the employment
Of said Joseph Pugsley. Further, in
respect TO these items, the duties per-
formed being public functions. to dele
gate 10 the chief officer of the depart
Lent the appointment and without
designating the compensation, seems to
ignore the specific provision Of chapter
81, Laws of Utah, 1899, which provides,
THE mayor by and with the advice
and consent Of the council, may APP
point ALL appointiYe officers and
agents that may be provided for by law
or ordinance. G Nd In like manner Ill
all vacancies among the same, except
as otherwise provided by law" find
no other provision provided By law for
the appointment of persons who are OFF,
GERS and agents Of the city, and II
seems TO Inc we should try to observe
the requirements Of the law where pub
lie funds are TO be expended.
In the land and water commissioners
payroll the following items are disap-
proved to-wit
Joseph Pugsley, city creek cam
y0n,,,, ...., nan .,'',, .,,. Slb5O
j, l.. Lawson and horse, patrol
Parley's canyon. 49,. o",,. 5000
Chas. i. Sharp and horse, Jor-
dan and s. l.. canal. .,,..,. $500
The ordinances provide the land and
water commissioner shall have such
deputies at such compensation az the
city council may from time to time al
low. | do not find that the council has
created the offices of any deputies for
said commissioner, or fixed the compen-
saton, or that any appointments have
been legally made to fll such positions
when created, as required by law, and
| until this Is done, | am compelled to
disapprove any attempt to compensate
for services unlawfully procured,
In the payroll Of the health commits
sioner, the following Items are not APP
proved, towit;
w. j. Korth, steward quarantine $3.50
w. q, Margetts, acting sanitary
inspector ,.,,,,,', '.',',',,. Ee'V0
Byron Sperry, inspector ...,.." Sl,bO
| for the reason that | do not find that
said positions, the duties of which are
clearly governmental, have been Great
ed and the compensation fixed, This
| must he done, and the places filled In
the manner authorized and directed by
| law, before | feel justified In approving
such and similar expenditure.
Also In the same department. l dis
approve the following Item:
Frank Raleigh, manure dumpman $4,000
lOI lllt ltUsbll liltl NUt NHlIlVs lll'llt
| was unnecessary.
In the payroll Of the city engineer,
| each and all OF the several items are
disapproved, for the following reasons
With possibly three or four excep-
| tions, II appears that the employment
| and compensation for which pay Is
asked, are permanent, based on yearly.
| salaries, and | fail TO find that these
al tN1 NI.
compensation fixed, or the duties pre-
scribed by ordinance, or that the said
| persons or any OF them have been APP
| pointed and confirmed according to law,
There docs not appear TO have been
any authority for the employment OF
any OF the persons named OH the pay
roll Of said department or any author
| Ivy properly given 10 the engineer 10
contract for the work and labor per-
| formed In his department by persons
other than himself II does not appear
that the city engineer has made any
| request 10 the council for assistance
and deputies and the like, In his de-
| partmcnt, and such large expenditure
| OF money as evidenced by this payroll
should not be permitted TO be made
| without first creating the positions, Ak
Hib tiit NVlHptHSNluHi utllllHb lut
duties, etc, There IL no ordinance az
fording any basis for auditing this pay
roll.
| Then again; think whore work has
been ordered to be done by the city
engineer, and an appropriation has been
made to cover the approximate cost
that separate account OF each piece OF
! work. with the names OF the men work.
Ing upon II, and the time they worked,
should be kept, so that Il could be
| checked up. A comparison OF the pay
roll and distribution sheet furnished by
the city engineer entirely fails to fur
nlsh the necessary date by which II
can be determined or inferred which OF
the individuals named In the payrolls
worked on any Of the specific work des-
ignated IN the distribution sheet II
may be that the city II liable for the
actual cost OF such work az II has been
ordered done, but the work was or
Il sH.I IsN h. al 10 nd