The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1906-05-10
OF
THE BOARD Of
WORKS
Continued from First Page)

cost of such work or material, and
said estimate in writing shall be at
once placed on file with the records
Of said board"
We do not find any. estimates of
work Done by the board have been
made as required by this section.
90 We find that street improve
ments have been made without being
authorized as required by Section 40
of the Charter, which reads as fol
lows:
mo member of either board shall
have any power to act on behalf of
same, except pursuant to an order OF
the board regularly made at a meet
irg at which a majority of said board
shall have been present"
As an instance of this we mention
the work on North Spring street from
DeSOtO street south.
80 We find with very few excep-
tons that no bills have been pre-
sented to the Board of Work for ap-
proval but same have been paid with
out any action of the board. We do
not find that any payrOlls have been
presented to the board for approval
but that same have been paid with
out any action of the board. Your
committee is of the opinion that all
bills and payrolls should be present
ed to the board for approval and that
no bills or payrolls should be paid
until ordered paid by the board.
1O The rule that has been fol-
lowed is that all bills are to be APP
proved by the party receiving the
goods, Clerk, Mayor, Comptroller and
Chairman of the board, and duplicate
Inns furnished 1t has been the rule
to have payrOlls approved by the
Mayor, Clerk, Comptroller and Chair
man of the Board of Works and time
sheets approved by the Mayor and
Street Superintendent. These rules
have not. been followed in every case
as per Memo. herewith.
CID The evidence shows. that the
garbage contract was awarded to Mr.
Wright early. in October at $215.O0
per month and that the garbage was
removed under this contract by Mr..
Long for MI. Wright. for about half
Of October. During this time, accord
ing to the testimony of Mr.. J. A.
Daw, some of the garbage was remOv-
ed by the city teams. Wright having
failed to qualify, the. contract was
later in the month let to Mr..
Y. Long at $250.00 per month. A
ZOucher was issued to Mr.. Long for
$4,000 for the removal Of garbage
for October. 1t appears that from
October 1st, 1905, to March 3Ist, 1906,
no deduction for work done by the
city teams has been made from
Longs vouchers except $500 in the
month of March.
Q2) On the l4th of February the
Chairman of the Board of Works re
ported that the city had unlOaded
seven ships Of ballast. It appears
that a warrant was issued to the
Chairman Of the board for $4,000 for
500 tons of ballast purchased from
the wildwood" and the "SpiCer," as
Ter receipts filed, and that the city
paid 10 cents per ton wharfage on
this ballast. The Custom House
nanifests show that one Of these yes
sells had cObbla stone ballast and the
other had cobble stone and sand. The
city also paid wharfage on $40 tons
of ballast from the bark Miranda. "
The city in all cases hauled away the
ballast from the ships. It does not
appear that the city has ever receiv-
cd anything for removing ballast
though the usual price paid for taking
sand ballast from ships is from 10
cents to % cents per ton.
13) Referring to the reports to
the Council by the Chairman of the
BOARD of Works, it appears that these
reports were prepared by the Street
Superintendent and the Chairman Of
the board did not make much if any
investigation of the matters con-
tanned in the reports but presented to
the Council what the Street Superin-
tendent prepared for him. Your COM
mittee is of the opinion from the tes-
timony Of MI Zelius that he signed
payrolls and vouchers with but lit
tie examination and that he is not
well posted as to the details Of his
department
14 We have examined to some
extent the work on the streets and
in our opinion the cement and brick
work in some cases is very inferior,
particularly on parts OF East lnten-
dencia and East ZarTagOssa streets.
05) We find that the Board Of
Works has not in all cases as per
Memo. herewith complied with Sec
ton SO of the Charter providing
that no bills shall be contracted br
larger amounts than $4,000 without
The concurrence Of the Council.
Whether the fact that the Council
having made the annual apDTOpTia-
ton to be expended by the Board Of
Works thereby gave the board power
tc contract bills for larger amounts
than $4,000 without the consent of
the Council is a legal question that
we are unable to determine.
H6) Mr.. Zelius was paid $3.50 as
neY voucher of March 10th.
Section SO of the Charter reads as
follows:
"No member, officer or employee OF
either board shall be directly or in
directly interested in any contract or
work of any kind whatever done
under Its direction
II is claimed. however, that most OF
the articles IN the above bill could
- hA y,,,rrhased from anV one eX-