Newark leader. ([Newark, Ohio]) 1917-1946, 1917-12-15
Suggestions Rather
Than Criticisms

City Civil Service Commission.
He puts a good deal in those seven
pages and deals fatty with this i'm
portant function Of city government.
1t is constituted: G. w. Kent, Pres,
w. C. Symons, Vice Pres, Chas. w.
Moore, Clerk and the other member
w. G. Sutor. He does not find lapses
but is pointed with suggestions. His
report covers the time when H. G.
Ashcraft, Solicitor was clerk
and l. NJ. Phillips was member of
the commission.
The minutes are accurately kept
and the public records are amply
signed. 1t is only necessary that they
be signed by the officers. He urges
that the list of eligibles to positions
be accurately kept and that they be
strictly adhered to-, subject to proper
revision. The appointing powers
have not fully complied with the law
in following the commission records,
either by the elimination Of the old
or the appointment Of new employees
in city service. The commission
should hold the heads of departments
to make monthly reports of the en-
ployes in service. Some cities have
established minimum efficiency at
so per cent. The inspector believes
it wise. He says the commission
should insist on medical examinations
as to fitness for service in the
"eligible."
He asks that the commission adopt
such rules for the commission as shall
be in complete harmony with the
civil service laws of 1915. This COM
mission has never filed an annual re-
port with the State Commission in
conformity with Sec. 486-19-G. He
notes that this commission has held
stated examinations for the various
branches of the city service and have
held to the minimum grade of rs per
cent in the individual.
The law of competitive examina-
tions is not complied with according
to Sec. 486-31 of the Civil Service
Laws of Ohio 1915. At an early day
the commission should comply with
the "competition" feature of the law
and investigate the standing of the
individuals employed in the city de-
partments. The eligible list, he finds,
is very limited. He advises the dura-
ton of eligibility be extended to the
maximum period allowed by the law
of 1915. He finds that some of the
employees are not appointed after a
proper certifcation. Many are serv-
ing without having taken an examina-
tion under the law of 1915. He quotes
from an opinion given by the attorney
general. All appointees should have
passed the examination as provided
by law, and with grade as good or
better than the minimum grade of
fitness established by the local COM
mission. He leans heavily on the at
torney generals opinion. He says, no
permanent appointment should be
made except with a compliance with
the law of 1915. The commission has
been diligent in their efforts and have
done all they could to get a sufficient
list of eligibles. He gives a list of
situations in which, in emergency,
appointments can be made. 1t is
covered, he says, that in exceptional
appointments they should follow sec.
484-14-G. C. and the person so ap-
pointed should not hold the position
longer than 80 days.
He gives detailed account of the
expenditures of the local commission
from March 1 to Dec. 81, 1915, Jan.
l, to Dec. 81, 1916 and from Jan. 1,
to May 8, 1917, total of $1179.67.
The commission, he says, have col
lected no fees from applicants for
admission to the classified list. He
says the law is mandatory and re-
quireS the collection of such fees. 1t
is looked over this time but in the
future the members of the commits
sion shall be held personally liable
to the city for the amount of such
fees as they should have charged,
collected and turned into the city
treasury.
He notes that the city had paid
Mr.. A. A. Stasel two fees for con-
Quoting the case of Burke VS.. Collins.
He had interviewed Mr.. Jones, who
was city solicitor at the time and
found that he was reluctant to enter
the case which involved a controversy
in the police department. He finds
though that the commission took the
initiative and not because Solicitor
Jones had refused to conduct the case.