Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1906-05-15
AUDITORS REPORT
TO CITY COUNCIL.
ryperts Make Thorough lnvestl-
cation Of Last City Admin.
lstration's Affairs.
GROSS CARELEsSNEsS SHOWN
thousands Paid Out OF City Treasury
without Auditing, Approving or
Verifying Claims.

ogden. May 15.--At last nights ses-
sion Of the Ogden city council the com
pleto report was presented OF the spe-
elal auditing committee, Messrs. G. X.
lIollingsyorth and r. G. Harris, who
were appointed at the instance of for
mer Mayor William Gassman, TO in
yestlgate the affairs Of ogden city dur
ing Glasmann's last term. 1904 and 1905.
The auditors began their work Feb. y
last and made complete and thorough
investigation of every expenditure from
Jan, !. 1904, to Dec. 81. 1905. Their re-
port In part follows:
In seeking authority for all disburse-
ments, we found several instances
where no authority of the city council
at all existed for the making Of the
disbursements; In other Instances there
we're discrepancies between the amount
of the disbursement as authorized by
the city council and the true amount or
khe subsequent disbursement Then
again as shown by the auditors war;
rant register. warrants We're actually
drawn on dates prior to the AUTHORIZE
lion OF their issuance by the city coun-
Gil. We cite the following as rev
instances!
Ian. g. 1906 appears ON the minutes of
the city council as being for 1890,
whereas the warrant register shows the
total of such payroll TO be S5i3.i0.
Warrant No $3.50, IN favor Of j. =.
o'NeilI. was actually for s3,1oo.5o. while
the minutes of Aug. s, 1905. show the
amount authorized by the council to
be $3.50.
roll. police department, aggregate
Ss25, whereas, on Aug. 9, 1904, the
same was allowed by the council for
si32. >,
spargo, is 1890, but the allowance by
the council Aug. /, 1904. Is 74.b.
Warrant No. $3.50, in favor OF W. q.
Wilson. is $S66.23, but we fail to find the
record Of any allowance OF same by the
C,,v enrineers payroll. covered by
warrants No. 52iS3 and 62204, aggre-
eating S2.120. 30, we fail to find any rec
ara NJ The allowance Of the pay-roil by
the city council. ~
Warrant No. 1896, In favor or L. =.
Kelsey. si20ts.lt, Is dated Dec 0, isV',
Il while the minutes of the city council OF
reference Of the claim TO committee.
ana the minutes OF Dec. II, 1904. show
the report OF the committee and the
allowance, and payment ordered of the
claim.
miscellaneous lot Of claims waa
maid by warrants No. b3,S22 ana 53,SN,
same dated Jan. 80, 1905, while the rec
ords Of the council show that the same
were allowed and ordered paid on Feb.
s 1905.
Two payments of interest upon bonds
Of sl.505.25 and s., 257S1 were made b>
warrants dated Jan. 49, 1905, while the
city council allowed and authorized the
payment of same on Jan. %, 1908.
Warrant No. 57,0S6, for payment OF IN
terest upon city bonds, II for Sl,O035o,
while the city council minutes Of Oct.
%. 1905. show the amount to be 1880.
LIMIT IN CARELEsSNEsS.
We cannot find words strong enough
with which to criticese the very care
less manner In which the claims, vou-
chers and pay-rolls generally were pre-
pared, audited, certified verified and
considered by the city council approved
by the mayor and finally paid by the
city auditor. From Jan. |, 1904, to Dec.
81, 1905, 9,4S6 warrants were issued by
the city auditor, and this will give one
Of vouchers, claims and payrolls. We
are absolutely safe In saying that not
10 per cent OF the total number are
complete and free from objection. The
law requires all claims TO be fully
itemised and to be verified. They
should be approved by the officer re-
ceyng the material or ordering the
service rendered. The city auditor
should then audit same, and before pre-
n Ia
should be considered and approved by
the proper committee. The action of
the city council ms to allowance or re-
lection should be noted on each claim
by and over the signature OF the city
recorder. Next they should be present
ed to the mayor for his action. II he
approves OF the disbursement, then, as
required by law he should endorse his
signature on the claim or payroll;
on their return to the city auditor war
rants are drawn in payment. A most
doplorable disregard of any uniform
system respecting these claims and
vouchers and pay-rolls IL most appar-
emit in fact, In many INSTANCES no con-
ceptlon at all OF the duties resting up
on public officer seems to have exist
ed Page after page OF this report
could he used In citing claim after
elaim, payroll after payroll. which in
lact are no claims or pay-rolls at all.
/ We, however, beg to call your atten-
ton 10 the following. which illustrates
Generally the conditions In this respect
found to exist The council has allowed
such claims as the following:
ogden, Utah, -, l.. Ogden City
corporation to l.. J. Butcher. Dr.. side
walk building, s2lS65.' This is every
thing that appears on the claim.
The payroll Of the police department
Tor July 81. 1904, IL not verified nor
audited, does not bear the approval OF
ne committee on police. does not bear
the signature OF the mayor. has no no.
tation thereon by the city recorder
showing Its allowance by the city
council
PAYROLLS NOT VERIFIED.
Pay-rol after payroll, particularly
OF the police and street departments
a'e not, verified or certified at all.
Again we ind a claim, No. SIS, 26i. f.
w, Nichols, $50, which states, "See
minutes of council held" This claim Is
nnt ltemized verified, certified, audited
moved BY the council. approved by the
mayor or receipted.
lain 1896, " l.. Maginnls, says
retainer, etc, 1850" II bears no no
h,lon Whatever showing Ii ever 10 havs
neen allowed by the council and was
hve approved by the mayor
% naS-roll covered by warrants SO, $50 Il
h'~v was not approved by any mem.
ner OF the council.
claim Si.iS9, Western Union Tele