Watertown weekly leader. [volume] (Watertown, Jefferson County, Wis.) 1906-1908, 1907-05-10
CITY ENGINEER IS
CALLED TO ACCOUNT
ASKED WHETHER HE is SERV-
ING THIS CITY OR OTHERS.
However. 1t Was Generally Con-
Cedfd That He Tended to Bust
ness and Did Not Neglect Work
Council May Prove Penny
Wise and Pound Foolish. Will
Oppose Raising of Dam.
tFrom Wednesdays Daily

A rather lively session of the city
council was held last evening, particl-
pated by all of the members of that
body, as we'll as the city attorney and
city engineer.
The sensational feature of the meeting
came when alderman Ryan arose and
stated that the question had been pro-
pounded to him several times as to
whether or not City Engineer Parsons
was in the employ of Jefferson, Seaver
Dam or the city of Watertown. The
question arises from the fact that Mr..
Parsons has contracts with both of
the outside cities for work in his
particular line in street improvements.
The position of the engineer was we'll
taken in expressing the belief that, he
had this right in view of the fact
that predecessors had done the same
thing for years and that nothing had
ever been said before in the way of
an objection. He EXPRESSED himself as
feeling particularly free to do so this
summer for the reason that there were
no great amount of street improve
ment to be made this year. Mr..
Parsons intimated in the course of the
cross fire that If he could not be per-
mitted to take some outside work,
that it would be Necessary for him to
resign, or receive larger salary.
Alderman Lutovsky made the pro-
position, agreed to by the mayor that
during the life of the contracts held
by Mr.. Parsons with outside cities
that he receive the sum of SIS per day
for four and one half days per week
for services rendered the city, which
would be a reduction of one quarter of
his salary. This was mutually agreed
to between the aldermen and the city
engineer. 1t is the belief of The
Leader, however, that the matter is
only temporarily settled and at the
expiration of the contracts held by
Mr.. Parsons, there is liable to be a
difference of opinion that may prove
more far reaching. 1t seemed to be
the prevailing opinion of the counci!
that the city engineer had performed
his duties satisfactorily and had in no
way neglected them. [ view of the
fact that his services have been Sc
cured for 81, 200 per year by the city,
it would seem wisdom to let we'll
enough alone, or ultimately prove to
the public that they have been "penny
wise and pound follish." Then on
the other hand, if reformation move
ment is to be Inaugurated, it might be
well to make clean sweep. The
reference was made last evening that
the city engineer "could not serve
two masters. Going little fur
Their, it might be asked. how it is in
the case of Mr.. Kading, who is serv-
Dodge county. Just as an illustra
ton, how would it be if Dodge county
brought action against the city of Wa
tertown. or wise versa? The 1.-TWO
master" theory would quickly ex
plode in such an event. 1t would
seem that the time to meet these
issues is not few days following the
election of the officers, but when they
stand for reelection.
The members of the Judiciary and
streets and bridges committees jointly,
to whom were referred the cummuni-
cation from the Watertown Gas and
Electric company, relative to the
proposed raising of the Rough and
Ready dam, reported that they had in
vestigated the matter carefully, being
aided by the report and survey of ali
hydraulic engineer, made for the city;
"that we find that in the event of the
raising of said dam three feet as pro-
posed by bill No 600 a, damage would
be done to the streets overlooked, and
the city would be damaged financially
In the additional expense in connection
with the building uf approaches and
the building of the new Rough and
Ready bridge higher than proposed
Further that there would be damage
to the property owners in the vicinity
south of said dam in the city of
Watertown and that il IS impossible
for your committee to calculate the
immense damage that would be done.
We therefore report unfavorably upon
the matters continued in said communi-
cation.
The report was followed by a reso
luton, which was adopted, authoriz
ing the members of the JOINT committee
on judiciary and streets and bridges,
the mayor and city attorney to appear
before the senate committee at''Madison
on May 9th, in opposition to the bill.
The executive committee of the
Outdoor Art association petitioned the
council for the privilege of placing a
dozen gray squirrels in the city park,
the city to care TOR them. Alderman
Ryan expressed the benefit it would be
to the city and moved that the prayer
of the petitioners be granted, which
carried. The same association petit
toned the council for the privilege of
placing dozen waste boxes on the
streets of the city under the direction
of the proper committee. The prayer
of this petition was also granted.
The committee On streets and brid-