Twice-a-week plain dealer. (Cresco, Howard County, Iowa) 1895-1913, 1905-08-25
81 PER YEAR
to vindicate every councilman in the

bltled 10 81 for each NEE ting as a
board of equalization there is at the
present time no doubt. but misun-
| derstanding (not stretch) of the law
at that time led the members to ac-
, cept.
For many years past the members
, OF the council have received S1.OO
from the city for each board of equal
ization meeting attended and SEEM
ingly Sec. $50 of the code of Iowa JUS
Titled them in so doing Here is Sec.
500:
\; "Councilmen in cities of the first
class shall be paid an amount pre-
scribed by ordinance not in excess of
S2o0, w per annum, which shall be in
ruli compensation of all services of
such councilmen OF every character
connected with their official duties
and In all other cities and towns not
10 exceed S1.0O each for every regular
or special meeting and IN the aegre-
gate not exceeding $50 90 in any one
year but In such cities and towns the
members shall be paid in addition to
the foregoing for services as mem.
bers OF the board of review an amount
not exceeding s1.0O for each session of
not less than three hours"
Would you have taken the 81. 90 per
meeting for this work had you been
on the council?
The object OF the following plain
facts will be to show how the council
came to ask for an extra dollar and
also to show, If you please, that an
investigation of the double pay ques.
tion was being made and was salts
factor lily concluded before the P. d.
probed it
On April Is, 1905, the city clerk re.
ceived letter from f. G.. Pierce, sec.
retary of the League of Iowa Munlci-
pallties In which Mr.. Pierce said ST
nnd that In many cases the council
men have not received pay as mem-
oers OF the board of equalization.
VIII you please let me know at once
whether or not your councilmen re-
ceived pay from the county for the
years 1908 and 1904 as mem bers Of the
board of equalization. II not I will
send you information that will be
valuable to them.'
The city clerk wrote for the inform
alton and received the following re-
ply:
Your favor Of the 25th received.
In reply will say that Sec. $50 Of the
code as amended by the 2sth General
Assembly provides that members OF
the city council in cities of the second
class and towns shall be allowed 81. 90
for each meeting OF the board of
equalization of not less than three
hours to be paid from the county treas
ury. II you will figure up the mum.
ber of meetings held by your council
In the years 1908, 1904 and 1905 and
file bill with the county auditor In
the name Of the different councilmen
am sure that the same will be al.
lowed especially if you call the at
tention Of the code to this section as
amended.
Trusting that you may be able to
secure your councilmen little aCl.
ditional pay by this means remain
Yours respectfully,
Frank G.. Pierce"
The council took it that the amend
ment entitled them to an extra s1.0O,
so the various bills were presented to
the board of supervisors and allowed
at the June session. Later the writer
having some doubt as to the legality
OF receiving $500 per meeting for
this work consulted Mr.. @. @. Upton,
stating the facts as they existed and
asking him to look the matter up ful.
ly, that there might be no question as
to the right or wrong of it. After
looking 1T up Mr.. Uptons reply was
that there could be no question but
that the sl.oo per meeting from the
county was all councilman should
receive for this work and that the sl
per meeting received from the city
should be handed over to the city
treasurer.
i aIn order to more fully understand
Mr.. Pierces position taken in the
above printed letter and to have him
better understand the position of the
council, he was written as follows: e
Mr.. Frank G. Pierce, Sec'y,
Marshalltown, iowa.
/ My Dear Sir: Some time ago you
wrote onr city clerk regarding pay of
board Of board of equalization saying
that the county should pay each mem.
her 81 per session for services and re.
ferring to the section of the code
which treats of same,
Now l wish to ask If in your opinion
members of the council are entitled
under the law to 81 from the city and
81 from the county for each meeting
of the council as board of equalization
or should they receive 81 from the
county and nothing from the city for
such meetings..
We have always received 81 from
the city for these meetings, and after
getting your letter, presented our
bills to the county for the last three
years work and they were allowed,
but the question now arises, should
we keep the money or turn 1T into the
city treasury?
i Understand please that we now
have 81 for each of these meetings at
tended in 1903 and 1904. Will very
p,nch opprnofa<o ~ oo.Iu ...,