Please note: this text may be incomplete. For more information about this OCR, view
About OCR text.
AND
NEW YORK, JUNE 21, 1913
iiiiiiii^^
OBVIOUS NEXT STEPS FOR TAXPAYERS
City's Charges For Privileges, Franchises and Concessions Should Be Developed—Technical
Administration Should Be Improved—Taxpayers Should Lead in Municipal Service.
-Article IV.-
I
By HENRY BRUERE, Director, Bureau of Municipal Research.
''''â– lllllllllllilllllillllllllillllllllillllllllllM
ON .\PRIL 18, 1912, Comptroller
Prendergast introduced, and the
Board of Estimate and Apportionment
adopted, a resolution asking the Board
of Aldermen to authorize an appropria¬
tion of $50,000 to conduct "studies of
the efficiency of methods of administra¬
tion employed by the various depart¬
ments in the conduct of city work, with
a view to establishing uniform methods
of efficiency so far as it is practicable."
In adopting this resolution, the board
approved a report submitted by the
Comptroller outlining an efliciency pro¬
gram.
A Seven-Track Program.
This program provided for six lines
of effort, several of which had already
been begun. The work was to be done
through a Bureau of Efficiency, estab¬
lished as a part of the organization of
the Board of Estimate.
The Comptroller proposed:
(1) Completion of standardization of
supplies.
(2) Beginning of standardization of
salaries.
(3) Standardizing purchasing and
storekeeping methods.
(4) Standardizing office practice, in¬
cluding methods of contract prepara¬
tion, filing of records and correspond¬
ence, organization of clerical service,
etc.
(5) Standardizing departmental re¬
ports, begun and partially completed
by the Mayor's office in co-operation
with the Bureau of Municipal Research.
(6) Standardizing work methods by
adopting a uniform plan for organizing
and supervising labor forces and pro¬
viding uniformly efficient equipment.
The Board of Estimate Propose—the
Aldermen Dispose.
Needless to say, the Board of Alder¬
men declined to make the appropriation
(although it was recommended by their
Finance Committee). Six months later,
at the request of President Mitchel, the
Board of Aldermen approved an appro¬
priation of $56,600, put in the 1913 budget
for the efficiency studies by the Board
of Estimate. To carry out the plan, an
efficiency and budget advisory staff was
to be organized under the Board of Esti¬
mate. More than five months have
elapsed since this appropriation became
eiTective, but the staff has not yet com¬
menced its work. On June 12, 1913, as
this article was being written, the
Board of Estimate and Apportionment
adopted the Comptroller's resolution
authorizing the appointment of the effi¬
ciency and budget advisory stafif of the
board, consisting of eight efficiency ex¬
perts, at an annual salary cost of $25,200.
Except for standardization of supplies,
salaries and reports, the program out-
Economy and Progress
Some of the progressive, socially-
minded members of our community
seem to regard economy as incon¬
sistent witli a liberal concern for
public welfare. This view is falla¬
cious, of course, but its fallacy will
be difficult to point out convincingly
so long as taxpayers permit their
representatives to oppose blindly
every extension of city service
aimed to improve social conditions.
One after another, advancing civili¬
zation will bring to light opportuni¬
ties for social improvement. Non¬
essentials of today become indis¬
pensable s tomorrow. This is the
result of the forging ahead of civili¬
zation, which will continue to forge
ahead whether taxpayers wish it or
not. The question is whether civili¬
zation Is to advance with taxpayers
or over taxpayers.
HENRY BRUERE.
lined a year ago is still to be begun. Had
it been eflfectively undertaken in April,
1912, as planned by the Comptroller, or
begun promptly on January 1 as the 1913
budget provided, taxpayers would be
abie to reap a substantial dividend in
Ihe 1914 budget. This is an excellent
illustration of the efifect of divided re-
sponsibiHty for the city's administration,
part of which is governed by responsi¬
bility, not to the public, but to the plainly
visible vizier of our "invisible govern¬
ment."
What "Might Have Been."
Tlie purpose of this program was to
establish as quickly as possible in every
department the same control over stores
and supplies which has effected econo¬
mies in the Bridge Commissioner's and
the Water Commissioner's departments;
the same reorganization of labor gangs
that has cut down the cost of paving
and sewer-cleaning work in Manhattan:
the same eftective practices which have
increased the efificiency of the Bureau of
Water Register. In other words, the
purpose was to make available to every
departmental bureau information of what
other departments and bureaus have
done, and by means of experts to teach
them how to do likewise.
This equalizing of administrative
methods is an obvious and fairly simple
thing to do. As an obvious next step
to take, it need not await the next ad¬
ministration. Funds have been provided
for it, a plan for the efliciency bureau
has been prepared, and the staff has just
been provided.
No member of the Board of Estimate
in favor of pressing this efficiency pro¬
gram will say that the six months' de¬
lay in starting the efliciency bureau was
justified. If the program which it was
to execute was sound in April, 1912, and
was sound on January 1, 1913, it is
sounder now. Further postponement of
its execution will cost taxpayers thou¬
sands of dollars each month.
Questions Without Answers.
A querulous taxpayer is less effective
in forcing economies than is an inquisi¬
tive taxpayer. An obvious thing for tax¬
payers to do immediately is to organize
about a persistent, intelligent question
mark until they learn, at least, whether
the present cost of government is the
gross cost or the net cost after readily
available economy measures have been
adopted.
The following are some of the ques¬
tions that would help diagnose the city's
economy condition:
If a mechanical device is feasible for
payroll writing in the Water Depart¬
ment and cuts down the cost of payroll
preparation, is it not feasible for every
department of the city government? Do
taxpayers know how many departments
are still writing payrolls in long hand,
and how many have followed the ex¬
ample of the Water Department? How
many, if any, of the Board of Estimate
members know?
M the beginning of the present ad¬
ministration a great to-do was made over
extending the working day from 4 to
5 P. M. When summer came in the
first year, the departments were per¬
mitted to close at 4 P. M. on the theory
that working until 5 P. M. was undue
exertion. How many departments have
returned to a 9 tg 5 o'clock basis? Do
ta.xpayers know?
Payroll Fluctuations.
The Comptroller submitted to the
Board of Estimate and Apportionment
for each month during 1910 and for the
first three-quarters of 1911 a statement
showing the total payroll cost by de¬
partments of the city. Every depart¬
ment was supposed to be giving its at¬
tention to eliminating unnecessary jobs,
wiping out soft snaps and squeezing the'
water generally out of payrolls. No
statement has been submitted since De¬
cember, 1911. Do city oflicials know
and dfc) taxpayers know whether
payrolls reduced in 1910 were subse¬
quently increased, and how much? Does
anyone know by how much the total
payroll cost for 1913 is greater than
1910, where the increases have occurred,
where offsetting decreases have Occurred!
and what are the explanations for both!"
In the budget for 1913 appropriations
were made for the Bureaus of Highways
Sewers, and Street Cleaning in the Bor-