Payette enterprise. (Payette, Canyon Co., Idaho) 1909-1935, 1920-10-14

You will observe that at the bot
tom of this report it shows
Cash in Funds
Current Expense $6,636.3S
Warrants outstanding
s2,S15.13
which in reality leaves only $3,821.-
rs intact in this fund and that the
former Board of County Commission
ers laid on the table bills aggregat-
ing approximately $S50.00. Had
these been allowed as they should
and paid out of this fund it would
have decreased the amount on hand
in Current Expense Fund to $2,971.-
E25.
+ If you will refer to the above re-
port you will see that the 40 cent
levy on $5,230,170 would raise $40
9206S. Sixty per cent or $12,552.-
Al had been collected, leaving in the
last half of this levy only $S,36S.2S
b to be collected.
This $S,36S.2S plus $2,971.25
cash would make S11,339.53 for the
present Board of Commissioners to
run Payette County during the fis-
lcal year 1919, plus the earnings and
fees of the offices which could not
be- safely estimated at more than
100000 giving them grand total
of S1S,339.53. And this amount, in
face of the fact that the former
Board in 1918 spent as per detailed
statement above 38,046.12, would
prove wholly inadequate and War
rants would have to be issued to pay
running expenses.
7 (Then as further proof that there
was really a big surplus instead of
a deficit, Mrs. l.. Rudolph Hollen-
beck, Treasurer of Payette County,
states that there was not single
County Warrant registered for the
want of Funds during the year 1879
This statement is partially true. The
reason no Warrants were registered
was not because they were not issued
but from the fact that a Resolution
was passed by the Board instructing
Mrs. L. Rudolph Hollenbeck, Treas
urer of Payette County, to pay all
Current Expense Warrants present.
ed out of any monies on hand and
carry such Warrants as Cash items
in her Vault until they could be
taken care of. This was done and
they were so carried in varying
amounts until the 1920 Taxes came
in when they were taken care of out
of the rs cent levy of 1919. And this
rs cent levy was sufficient to take
care of the Warrants issued for
lack of funds in 1919 and created a
fund sufficient to carry Payette
County through the year 1920 upon
an absolute cash bases.
The Banner or Ex-County Audi
tor seems to take great offence at
our using the term deficit and takes
slam at my friend, Will Wells. If
Wells has used the term he got it
from the Author of this Communi-
cation and I am responsible for his
using the term, deficit. 1 analyze
the word deficit as being deficient
not sufficient. Webster, I believe,
defines deficit as falling short,
lack, as a deficit in Taxes, Revenues
etc. My contention is that there
was lack of funds on hand or pro-
vided for to properly conduct the
affairs of the County. Consequently,
there was a deficit. If the Ex-Coun-
ty Auditor wishes me to refer to this
sum of money and uncollected taxes
as surplus I will cheerfully do SO
and say that there was left in the
Current Expense fund at the begin, |
ming of the present administration a |
surplus amounting to approximately |
the amounts as stated above, and
this surplus was acquired from a
80 cent levy-50 cents levied in 1917 |
and 40 cents levied in 1918.
(The present Auditors report
shows that there was a total of
SOL, 100000 in all Payette County
Funds when the present administers
ton took charge. IL suppose you
would have the innocent voter and
tax payer understand from the
above that the present Board of
County Commissioners had at their
disposal to spend $101, 100000. Look
at the above Examiners Report:
CASH IN FUNDS
Current Expense ......... 6,636.38
Road ................ 1,019.59
Bridge ..........-........-.. 2,338.42
School County ......... 13,494.16
State -..--.....--......... 8,076.46
T-41az4 |