The San Francisco call., 1909-06-10
GRAND JURY SAYS
BILL IS ENORMITY
Bridge That Originally Cost
$S,440 Is Repaired at Cost
of $S,5S4

OAKLAND, June $40 repair
bridge near Livermore that cost $S,440
10 build originally, Cotton Brothers &
Co.. contractors. charged the county
OF Alameda sS,5S45L The bill was al
lowed by the supervisors. and the tax
payers Of the county would have been
forced 10 pay a claim that the grand
jury today characterized as IAN enor-
nifty and grossly excessive" if Au
ditor Pierce had not held it up and
the grand jury begun an investigation
into it.
The grand jury today rendered a
partial report, in which the contractors
are severely censured and the super
visors held responsible for methods
that permitted such an overcharge.
CHARGED 20 PER CENT PROFIT
When Cotton Bros. & Co. were
awarded the contract the supervisors
gave them permission TO charge a
profit of % per cent on the actual cost
Of material and labor. Under this
profit was charged for freight, carriage,
car fare livery hire and telephone bills.
The method by which this was done
was to add together ali the expenses
incurred by the contractors in con-
nection with the construction of the
bridge, and add 20 per cent TO it.
When Cotton Brothers used the tele
phone the county was asked TO pay
the telephone cOmpany's charge and
20 per cent additional. When one of
the employees had TO pay car fare he
charged the county the amount of his
ticket and an additional 20 per cent.
and cartage charges.
Besides the 20 per cent profit on the
actual cost Of material and labor, the
contractors were permitted to charge
for the use Of machinery / per cent
Of the value for each day it was in
use. Under this heading. the county
was charged Sl.326 for the use Of two
pumps for so days. two centrifugal
pumps and machinery for 35 days and
a pile driver and machinery for p
days.
ENORMITY OF BILL
According 10 the testimony that Cot
ton Brothers gave before the grand
jury. the total value of the machinery
is $4,000. Had it been used 100 days,
the charge for its use would have
paid for it. Expert evidence given be-
fore the grand jury showed that the
usual charge for the use of machinery
on similar jobs is 10 per cent of the
total cost Of the machinery, except
that in the case where 20 or 25 per
cent profit is allowed no charge is
made for the use of machinery. In
this regard the language of the grand
jury's report is as follows:
Had the most liberal practice been
followed in this case. the charge would
not exceed. according to custom of
trade, $3.50"
The report goes on to say:
The enormity of this bill is shown
by two facts. viz: First, that there is
q clear profit 10 Cotton Brothers on
this claim of Al 2-3 per cent of the
amount actually expended; second. that
the bridge originally cost SS,440, while
the repairs to the foundation of the
piers and one bulkhead amount to
$S,5S451.
TAX PAYER NOT PROTECTED
This charge is grossly excessive,
and the system which permits such
charge is radically wrong and with
out any regard whatever for the pro-
lection Of the tax payer. We realize
that at times it is necessary for the
board to let emergency contracts.
which power is given to them by law.
yet the method followed by the board
OF supervisors in this instance fosters
excessive charges against the county.
Expert testimony produced before the
grand jury shows that 20 per cent for
supervision is excessive and that the
charge which is customary to the
trade is from 10 10 per cent"
The grand jury also took up the
conduct Of lotteries in the city of Oak
land and after examining a number
OF witnesses, including various city
officials and the justices and acting
justices Of the police court. reported
today that higher bail should be
charged than heretofore when vioIators
Of the anti-lottery ordinance are ar
rested