The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1906-06-13
UNFAITHFUL SERVANTS.

The perversity OF the Board OF
County Commissioners of Salt Lake
county IN insisting upon holding secret
sessions In their transactions of public
business. despite all remonstrances
against II. Is one OF the significant In
oications that those gentlemen know
their acts Will not stand public scru-
tiny, on Monday In the sale Of the
three hundred and fifty thousand dol
lars of refundng bonds. the Commits
sioners evaded and lodged reporters to
the limit, but the reporters stayed with
them, as their duty was and faithful
ness TO the public required. Finally,
however, the Commissioners absolute
ly shut them out in their determination
to have a secret session in the award
of these bonds.
The result was necessarily what
might have been expected. The gentle
men composing this Board are not men
Of any particular financial ability. and
they go wrong whenever there Is any
opportunity. on any financial propo-
sitlon They always need advice and
guidance, as their work proves The
figuring made by the Board in their
final determination OF the award WAS
so foolish that an ordinary pupil In
the grade schools ought 70 be ashamed
Of IT. The board rejected a bid at "a
per cent interest, and awarded the
bonds on a Az per cent interest basis.
The difference between the two is over
$500 year In the twenty years that
the bonds would run this difference Will
amount to $26.250. But this large sum
In futurity was lost sight of In the
present receipt OF $3.50, which the firm
to which the bonds were awarded
agreed to put UP, and which Will be i'm
medlately paid out. without opportu-
nifty to earn any interest as the Board
figured upon The county eventually
win lose upward of S17, 900 by
reason Of this mistaken notion of the
Commissioners that they were award
iTg the bonds to the lowest bidder,
AS a matter of fact, no one knows
but the Commissioners themselves what
took place in that secret session. The
session, the anxiety to be rid of all rep
resentatives OF the public, would nat
urally arouse suspicion that there was
something wrong under consideration.
and that a wrong motive was allowed
to prevail in making the award No
one knows what secret bonus or gratu-
tiles may have been agreed upon and
determined on at this secret session. No
enc knows. Of course. that there were
any gratuities or that there was any
thing wrong.
At the same time, II 1t was straight
business, and since 1t was certainly al
together public business. why should
there have been a secret session? What
was there to hide? What transpire6
that the public ought not to know? Ia
there anything in the transaction of
business connected with the public
Frances that the public is not entitled
to know? The taxpayers furnish the
money: why should they be dealt with
in an underhand manner, aud things
done from which the light Of day is ex-
cluded7 Is not a taxpayer entitled to
know what IS done with his money?
Shall he not know in what manner the
finances of the county are handled?
Unless there is something wrong;
something to the individual advantage
of the Commissioners in these secret
sessions, why should not all public
transactions be public7
AS long as secret sessions are held
by public Boards In the transaction of
Iublic business, public suspicion Will
necessarily be aroused and when as in
this case 1t appears that the public has
heen put to disadvantage and large
wrongful cost by reason Of the award
made in that secret session. then the
suspicion becomes rank; and 5hat there
~ seeming cause for that suspicion the
Commissioners have no one to blame
but themselves.