1914 Commissioner Robert G. Dieck
Recall Attempt Failed (20,146 Yes votes 28,297 No Votes)
Reasons for demanding recall (as printed on ballot):
- His administration of his department has been extravagant.
- He is unfit for office because he is entirely lacking in efficiency, stability and good judgement, and the administration of his department has been detrimental to the business and industrial life of the city.
- Under his administration many competent and worthy employees of the city have been discharged without just reason and contrary to the spirit of the civil service law.
Commissioner Robert G. Dieck's justification of his course in office (as printed on ballot):
There are three charges made:
- Extravagance. From appropriations aggregating about $530,000 the Department has completed all work intended and expects to return about $50,000 to the General Fund as savings.
- Instability, inefficiency and injudiciousness. I believe the reply to the first charge answers this as well.
- That many competent and worthy employees have been discharged without just reason and contrary to the spirit of civil service. In the past fifteen months there have been no discharges in the Department of Public Works other than the following: March 26, 1914 R. E. Chase, sewer laborer, physically disqualified. March 30, 1914, Lous Brendler, office-boy, on probation one day. Indiferent and lazy.