Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1916-02-02
DECLARES WATERLOO OFFICIALS
HAVE FOLLOWED RULE IN
OTHER CITIES.
CITES CONVENTION
.& BILLS ELSEWHERE
State Checkers Are Criticized For Not
Allowing Opportunity to Make ex-
planations-Holds That Council Has
Not Exceeded Legal Limit in Antiei-
pat;ns Revenues.

Waterloo, Feb Shorty after
copies of the report OF NJ F. and H
L. Cox TO State Auditor Frank $
Shaw, showing discrepancies in the
accounts of city officials, Vas received
at the city auditors office yesterday
Mayor Il I. Thompson notified men,
hers OF the city council and the re-
! port was carefully dlgested by the city
officials. Each section was taken up.
! and at the completion OF the confer
ence. Mayor Thompson issued the fol-
! lowing statement Tor The officials:
| The city council is criticised for
two things: First that the Incidental
expenses of the city have not always
! been legal, and second, that the coun-
! Gil has not kept within the legal limit
! in anticipating revenues.
In connection with the reference TO
| the EXPENSES not being legal, the colla-
| Gil was criticised FOR sending more than
Two delegates TO the Iowa league Of
Municipalities. It has been the custom
OF . majority OF Iowa cities to send
several delegates 10 these meetings
and 3 comparison Of the state audi
tors report will show that Waterloo
has expended much less than a major
ity Of cities in Iowa Waterloo mas
expended s+S6 for municipal league
expenses in TWO years. which includes
$50 annual dues. making an expense
OF s2I5 each year.
For 1914 other Iowa cities expend-
ed the following amounts fer The same
purpose:
Davenport 5000; Council Bluffs.
$3.50; Clinton, $3.50, and Iowa City.
SI85.
The city officials receiH much in
formation OF value in conducting the
affairs of the ci,y al these meetings
and il has been deemed advisable by
many OF The Iowa cities. including
Waterloo. TO send ali members o: the
council. the mayor. city auditor and
city engineer.
Defend Their Acts.
Relative 10 the charge that the
council has not kept within Ihe legal
limit in anticipating revenues we
have the opinion Of attorneys TO sub
stantia1e our contention ttat the coun-
Gil has not exceeded the legal limit
Figures are presented n the report
showing that there was greater
amount Of outstanding warrants on
Jan /. 1915, than balances. IN the fire
equipment east street, vest street
east sewer, SPECIAL west street. and
special eas1 street funds The total
amount o. warrants outstanding
against those funds On that date was
small and We contend tasI under the
opinion given ire city. that the coun-
ell has the right 10 Anticipate the reye-
nues for the present year All taxes
are Que on Jac- :. bu1 The las gives
the LAX payer TIC right 20 pay the
taxes Ii two payments. eEss-hslf pay
aose before april ! and the balance
"a ya5le before Oct / InasmGch as
re fiscal year extends from March u
70 March 81 i was held that tae city
1as ths right 10 anticipate the reve-
NE 70 De derived from all laxas due
fo- me present year Under that rI;l-
ing we aave thousands of dollars 10
LaEe care Of -re outstanding warrants
listed H-. Cox differed from thu Of
6c1sis On their stand on This question.
when here. Du: he did admit that the
council had the right to anticipate me
revenue 10 5e derived from the taxss
collected before March 81, which vii!
De more than sufficient 10 take care Of
ali outstanding warrants
Criticize State Checkers.
The city officials criticize the state
checkers for not calling the attention
Of city officials TO any irregularities
which may have been discovered while
making their Investigation and thus
giving the officers an opportunity TO
make an explanation, II fl we're pos
sible for them 70 DO so. This has beer
the custom in the past and we viii go
on record as cOndemning the auditors
for this attitude
Waterloo Is not the only city which
has criticized the methods Of the state
auditors; many others have charged
the checkers with dealing unfairly"