Manawatu Evening Standard. WEDNESDAY, MAY 18, 1932. THE CITY ESTIMATES.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LII, Issue 142, 18 May 1932, Page 6

Manawatu Evening Standard. WEDNESDAY, MAY 18, 1932. THE CITY ESTIMATES.

The preparation of tlie City Council estimates lias been • an arduous task for tlie responsible officials, but it must be conceded that they have performed a difficult duty most satisfactorily. Accompanying the estimates published last evening was the Mayor’s review of the past year’s operations, and the policy to be pursued in the present period. Three points stand out clearly: The anticipated revenue for this financial year is almost half of the figure of two years ago; the City Council’s elimination of all special works, with the reduction of maintenance costs to the barest minimum; and relief to the ratepayers of 20 per cent, of their general rates. It will be agreed with the Mayor that while the past year has been most difficult, the present will be one of still greater perplexity and anxiety for those in control of municipal administration. The shrinkage in revenue and the need to provide for unemployment constitute two major problems. Two years ago the revenue amounted to .£.75,744 and the expenditure to £70,215. In 1931 the respective figures were £50,655 and £57,211. For this financial year the Council has budgeted for £38,466 in receipts and to expend £37,564. These figures provide a cogent reason why the Council should not undertake new works and must restrict maintenance costs to the lowest figure possible. According to the Mayor, the Council will make greater use of No. 5 scheme men for work on roads and footways. Presumably, this means that restrictions hitherto enforced by the Unemployment Board against these men doing maintenance work have been removed, or else made elastic. This journal persistently advocated this course, but the reply was always that the Board would not relax its rules. Had it done so a year or more ago, much valuable work would have been carried out within the city. The difficulty of finding new work no doubt has caused a change of mind. The cost of unemployment to the city last year was £9OOO, and the Mayor states the position when he says it is impossible for this, of any other city, to continue spending money v in this manner on the class of work carried out in the past year. Much has been done in the streets to beautify the city, but the construction of lawns could only be justified by the inelastic conditions of the Board. This year the sum of £6OOO has been set aside for unemployment relief.

It is to be regretted that the Council must reduce the wages of certain lower paid employees, but the economic conditions presumably have left no alternative. The point is mentioned that these employees were not subjected to a reduction last year. The voluntary otter of departments 1 heads to accept a reduction of 12i per cent., making a total of a little more than 20 per cent; in their salaries, will be commended. In the past year streets' and footways have been reconditioned, kerbing and channelling laid, the waterworks service ■ improved with larger mains, and a new artesian bore put dow>i. These works were apart _ fro\n No. 5 scheme labour. This year, however, it would appear ,that the

Council will be largely concerned, maintenance being cut to the “barest necessities,” with unemployed relief work. Like other institutions, the City Council must work within its financial limits. Several of its accounts must close the year with a debit balance and the estimated surplus from the electricity department, whose profits have been a valuable factor in keeping down the rates, is approximately half of the sum realised last year. The Mayor’s appeal to the citizens to conceal their disappointment, if works they favoured are not being carried out, should not fall on deaf ears. The general rates have been reduced by 20 per cent., and a further measure of relief to electricity consumers is foreshadowed in the announcement that the charges are to be reviewed in three months’ time.