Western news and the Libby times. [volume] (Libby, Mont.) 1920-1933, 1931-07-02
Difference Of Opinion Regarding
State Examiners Criticisms

The last report of the state examiner
in regard to Lincoln county affairs
is published elsewhere in this issue.
In it the examiner criticizes the board
of county commissioners in three or
four respects. Possibly a little explain
alton III regard to one OF two points
would clarity the situation and result
in better understanding of the mo-
tives that impelled the county COM
missioners to do what they did =
The examiner criticizes the board for
certain transfers of money from one
fund to another. County Commissioner
Brink states that several hundred dol
lars was saved to the county by that
action for which they have been criti-
cized The commissioners attention was
called to the fact that by transferring
these moneys from one fund to an
other, interest charges could be saved
in that payment on indebtedness could
be made and the interest stopped. In
every instance care was taken to see
that the funds that would be depleted
could be reimbursed within short
time from payment of taxes. In that
way the funds were eventually kept
intact but by using the idle money to
pay off indebtedness interest charges
were stopped and the county saved
money. 1t is estimated that from S100
to $1,000 was thus saved to the county
annually in interest charges. The COM
missioners considered that good BUSH
ness judgment They understood that
the budget law was enacted for the
protection of the taxpayers and that
is what they accomplished by the saw
ing Of this sum of money in interest
SO they state
The board had authorized Commits
sioner Millegan to inspect certain lands
! which the county contemplated taking
over because of nonpayment of taxes.
Most of this land was in Mr.. Millegan's
district. He was much better acquaint
i ed with that district naturally and the
worth of land there. IF Mr. Millegan
! had not been SO employed, it would
have been necessary to employ some
one else to do the work The former
legal adviser of the board advised them
that it would be entirely legal for Mr..
! Millegan to do this work and be paid
! for it if the work done was for the
best interest of the county. Therefore
Mr.. Millegan proceeded with the work,
which proved work of much value
to the county. Mr.. Millegan did good
work, and, it is believed, was fully en-
titled to his pay.
Commissioner Brink was criticized
for including in his bill of expense
i meals and lodgings while attending the
state convention of county commits
sioners. The law provides that one
commissioner may attend these con-
ventions and that his expenses are tc
be paid The examiner contends tina
there is no provision in the law fol
the paying of the commissioners meal:
, and lodging while there The legal adj
wiser to the board differs somewha
, with the examiner in this connection
His Interpretation of the law is tina
transportation expense means all rea-
sonable expense while attending to tn,
, business of the county at the meeting
or convention. Sheriffs are paid no
only railroad and similar fare Will
, on county business but are also REIN
bursed for their meals and lodgings
t The same is true of the county as
! SCISSORS while attending the assessor!
a meetings, held each winter. This ha
: been common and general practice 70
y some time. Commissioner Brink wa
much surprised to see that the exam
liner had taken exception to it. tn
legal adviser to the board says his In
d depreciation of the law sustains M
Il Brink in including those items in h
+ claim.
st The examiner also criticized tt
d board. for raising funds under II
II emergency provision of the budget la,
l. He holds that an emergency is cond
ton arising due to fire, flood, explt