Palisadian. [volume] (Cliffside Park, N.J.) 1906-current, 1915-10-16
Kerwein Calls Bluff
Continued from page y

oetliie DoohS IidI ile says dIe oo lICoiy
open to all and found that the
ACTUAL total engineers charges
paid put on this or rather THESE
jobs, was $3,S01.73, which includes
the inspectors fees. Quite diff
ference, Ell? And this is Mayor
Whites ideas of the fair deal! |
wonder that he knows the meaning
of the word. He sums up, adds up,
foots up, and sets up, till he gets
crazy with the heat, all the time
holding in mind the one central fact
that he must deceive the public in
order to beat me at the polls. He
must have the whole borough by the
wool by this time. But my idea is
that he is pulling the wool over the
public's eyes, and | also have an
idea that the voters are going to re-
sent some of the yarns he is telling.
He does not tell enough. | shall
make him tell all, and | am telling
you some of the real facts here"
"Now, from the reports OF the
meetings as appearing in the Fort
Lee Sentinel, from April 7 to Octo-
Der 6, which is claimed to be the cor
rect copy of the proceedings OF the
council, Mr. Mason was paid for gen
eral engineering, $1,576.57. He was
also paid for work performed in
connection with contracts, on a b
per cent. basis, $1,391.07, making a
grand total for the six months as
paid of $2,967.64.
"On Edwin avenue Mr.. Mason was
paid not only the per cent. of the
amount certified to as due the con-
tractor, but was paid in addition
thereto $166.47 for work performed
bv him in connection with this con-
tract work and properly chargeable
to the improvement. On this basis
Mr.. Mason was paid almost per
cent. of the amount certified to the
contractor, and l am informed to
help him out further, instead OF hold
ing back 10 per cent. of the contract
as guarantee from the contractor,
in accordance with the specifications
and contract and lw, only 5 per cent.
was held back, which was direct
violation of the specifications and
law, which made a payment to the
contractor of $538.11 more than the
original specifications allowed on the
semi-final certificate. This would
have made the total amount on
Edwin avenue certified to by Mr..
Mason, had the original specifica-
lions been adhered to, only $5,354.37.
But Mr.. Mason received for engln-
eering on this work $461.10, which is
over 81a per cent. 1t has also been
stated that the semi-final certificate
was issued before the work was
thoroughly completed. An inspec-
ton of the street at the present time
would seem to bear this out. But
this l do not state as a fact Mr..
White knows.
"The above percentages do not IN
clude any inspection, which would
largely increase the total engineer
ing percentage.
"This shows how the present adj
ministration can juggle figures to
suit their convenience.
"Mr. White in making a COMPARE
son of the engineering charges under
the old method and under the new
method, in his Fort Lee Sentinel
statement of October 8, 1915, picks
a period of least activity on the part
of the contractor, namely, from
January to July, when but $15,S5O.99
was certified to, owing to the fact
that the contractor laid off large
number of his men for over six
weeks, according to the request of
the mayor, due to the fact that the
council was getting their finances
Strengthened out and the weather
was very severe. Six months, COW
ering the period from April to Oc-
tober, 1914, the contractor per-
formed $36,69748. Why does he
select such periods unless, as always,
he wishes by juggling figures, to
mislead the public?
Comparing further the systems of
charging for engineering services, II
Mr.. Mason had made the assessment
map of Center avenue, charging for
same at the rate of per cent. per
lineal foot, as he charged on Edwin
and Washington avenues, his charge
for the Center avenue assessment
map would have been $50 for the
grading and $50 for the sidewalk,
making a total of $3.50, while Mr..
Clark was paid for this work for
this work for searching, grading and
sidewalk assessment and all incl
dental thereto $84.25. his would
represent an addlClOnal expense 10
the taxpayers of $75.75 had Mr..
Mason performed the work of pre-
pairing the Center avenue map.
"Now, these are the simple facts
in some few instances of the case.
Mayor White does not let in all the
light. He should tell how under Mr..
Mason he is charging 5 per cent.
for his sewer maps, an extra five
cents per lineal foot for assessment
maps, another five cents per lineal
foot for grading, curling, and side
walks, and still another five cents
per lineal foot for copies for the Dor
ough Mayor White should look
into this. Let him send me word if
it isn't true. 1t beats all how he
hollers Stop theft when there amt
any around. Nobody is being robbed.
He knows this. If he hadn't he
wouldn't have kept Engineer Clark
in office over year, and allowed his
costs to run higher and larger than
under my administration for less
work. Does the mayor see this ?
Why didn't he hold the engineers