THE CITY FINANCES.

Evening Star, Issue 14037, 19 April 1909, Page 4

THE CITY FINANCES.

THE MAYOR'S REPLY TO CR SMALL. His Worship the Mayor has sent us the following:— ' " • ■ An article by Cr Small appears in your issue of ldth inst. dealing with the expenditure incurred by the City during the past year. Inter alia your correspondent states that the total sum spent in excess of municipal receipts was £10,407. This involves a very large deficit, and deserves serious consideration as to how it occurred. Cr Small himself framed the budget at the commencement of the financial year 1908-09, so that if any reproach exist, the responsibility lies at his door. However, as far as one can judge, the whole matter is easily explained, and for convenience I publish the following figures : Excess of hospital and charitable aid over estimate £2,090 Excess of Neuchatel asphalt, Rattray street, over estimate ... 1,275 Removal of house refuse 550 Street widening (other than King Edward street) 431 City dust plant 311 Anderson Bay road stables 214 George street slip 187 £5,058 Now, take the given total of sums spent in excess of municipal receipts as £10,407 and deduct above 5,058 we have .*.. £5,349 from which we have to deduct the amount which should have been paid by Drainage Board £3,000 so that the net ordinary expenditure in excess of revenue was ... £2,349 which amount is actually £338 less than for the year 1907-08. These large amounts have been exepnded, and for which no provision could have been made in the estimates as approved bv Council for 1908-09, Cr Srnalfalso figured as chairman of the Finance Committee for the year 1907-08, when the deficit was even greater (£338), and it is necessary to fall back upon this gentleman for an explanation, the figures not being at hand. There is no getting away from the fact that precautions should be adopted to more closely approximate revenue and expenditure, and in future it will be the imperative duty of the Finance Committee to endeavor to correctly forecast same. Our present chairman, Cr Barr, is a gentlemar/of unquestioned ability, and we may reasonably hope that under his guidance more satisfactory estimates may be effected. I would remind Cr Small that in the year 1905-06 no less than £22,000 was taken from the water department. Why did he not call the Council's attention to this? In 1907-08 he (as stated above) was chairman of the Finance Committee, and had to take £7,500 from the water and gas departments.' In 1908-09 £6,140 wa? taken from the same departments, he again being in charg" of the finance. Experienco shows that Cr Small does not view matters in an altogether optimistic way. and this want of hopefulness on his part oeasionally leads him wofully astray in his calculations—e.g., the trams, the electrical department.