TEACHERS, THOMAS ORPHAN ALYLUM, SEPTEMBER 5, 1895.

TEACHERS, SCHOOL FOR THE BLIND, BATAVIA, SEPTEMBER 17, 1895.

ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT, HOUSE OF REFUGE, ALBION, SEPTEM

CHIEF EXAMINER'S SPECIAL REPORT

ON INVESTIGATION OF THE

ROCHESTER CIVIL SERVICE BOARD,

HELD NOVEMBER 26, 1895.

ALBANY, N Y., November 30, 1895.

To the New York Civil Service Commission:

GENTLEMEN.

I have the honor to submit the following report of my investigation of the administration of the Civil Service Law of the city of Rochester, made pursuant to the instructions of your Commission:

In the absence of specific charges against the Municipal Civil Service Board or city officials, I proceeded informally to examine into the following matters, namely: The manner of conducting examinations, the subjects included in such examinations, the method of certification from the eligible lists, and the number of appointments made from such lists since April 1, 1895, the commencement of the fiscal year. I examined the records and examination papers and system of marking of the municipal board. I also examined the records of all the city departments, and obtained a list of the appointments made in each since April 1, 1895. I was compelled to proceed somewhat hastily in this examination, owing to the limited time at my disposal, but I think sufficient facts were found to show the general condition of the Civil Service of that city, and to accomplish the purpose which your Commission had in mind in ordering such investigation.

I found that during the period covered by my examination, and for a considerable time prior thereto, the enforcement of the Civil Service Law in that city has been practically abandoned. The responsibility for this rests largely upon appointing officers who have almost entirely ignored the requirements of the Civil Service Law and the rules of the municipal board by making appointments outside of the

eligible lists, and, when made from the lists, not confined to those in line of certification. Some blame must also rest upon the Civil Service Board for not doing its full duty under the circumstances. I find that on one or two occasions, when requested so to do by appointing officers, this board certified their entire eligible list to such officers, instead of confining their certification to the three highest names on the list, as required by the rules

I find also that, having sent in a certification of three names to appointing officers, they have sent in subsequent certifications without requiring action to be taken upon the first one, in that way permitting persons not legally in order of certification to receive an appointment with the apparent indorsement of the Civil Service Board. This board has also not required appointing officers to give them notice of appointments made.

According to the records of the Municipal Civil Service Board and the admission of their clerk, this board, during the time covered by my examination, has not received notice of a single appointment made in the city of Rochester. During all this time salaries have been paid of persons irregularly appointed in violation of the provisions of the act of 1894.

The city officials undertake to excuse their failure to observe the Civil Service law by saying that many of the appointments were temporary; that the duties of the positions were such that an examination was not practicable; that many of the appointments were made to meet emergencies, and other similar excuses, without any apparent validity. The magnitude of the violations in the different city departments is disclosed by an examination of the lists of appointments made in these various departments during the time covered by my examination, which is herewith submitted.

In the fire, street and water departments, appointments to which are made by the executive board, it will be seen that since April 1st last appointments have been made as follows:

In the fire department 12, including pipe-men, extra men, drivers and 1 lieutenant.

In the street department about 35, designated as "local inspectors." In the water department about 40, including inspectors, flushers, draughtsmen, assistant engineers, levelers, rodmen, clerks and 1 stenographer.

In addition to this there were about 180 miscellaneous appointments made in these departments of about the same character. The Municipal Civil Service Board has no record of such appointments, and none

of them have been made from their eligible lists as I have been able to discover.

I submit herewith, also, a copy of the eligible lists for this department, obtained from the records of the Civil Service Board, showing that during the time these irregular appointments were being made there were names on the eligible lists for nearly all of these positions. Two or three irregular appointments seem to have been made during that time in the office of the city clerk.

I examined briefly into the duties of the above named appointees, and see no reason why they should not be appointed from the Civil Service lists. In most cases the duties require some skill or expert knowledge, but no difficulty has been found elsewhere in filling such positions by competitive examinations, and none should exist here.

I would suggest, however, to the board of examiners, that in such examinations they associate with them some person skilled in the duties of the position for which the examination is held, and give, in addition to written questions, an oral examination, and, where possible, a practical test of the fitness of candidates. This suggestion I made to the examiners, and was readily agreed to by them, and I think will be followed in the future.

After having obtained the above information, I had an interview with the city auditor, in which called his attention to the condition of the city Civil Service, as disclosed by the lists herewith submitted, and also called his attention to the provisions of the act of 1894, which charges him with the duty of refusing to audit the salaries of those who have not been appointed in accordance with the Civil Service Law. I brought this matter also to the attention of the Civil Service Board, and suggested that their board act in harmony with the city auditor, and each month examine the pay-roll of each of the city departments with a view of cutting off the salaries of all irregular appointees. If this suggestion is adopted it will prevent a repetition of these violations in the future and will correct such as at present exist. The mayor-elect, who takes office January 1, 1896, declares it to be his intention to proceed in this way, and to see that every person irregularly appointed is discharged from the service, so far as it lies in his power.

I do not wish to be understood in this report as censuring the Municipal Civil Service Board. The members of the board and their clerk were recently appointed, and made many of the errors alluded to before becoming familiar with the Civil Service rules and the law. I believe it is their intention now to enforce the law so far as it lies in their power.