The most admirable feature of the Bullitt Bill is the concentration of power in the hands of the mayor, with the major municipal functions entrusted to responsible department heads. The experience of Philadelphia, as well as of most other American cities, bears witness to the superiority of this organization over those formerly in vogue, in which power and responsibility were deliberately diffused over a number of officials.

What reason have we to feel assured that in the years to come Harrisburg will give us a police administration less "political" than that which we have given ourselves? It certainly is plain that the municipal home rule for which so many of our citizens, and some of our best officials, have been pleading for years is here threatened with a serious setback. We want less Harrisburg, not more!

No amount of complicated governmental machinery can take the place of continuous, intelligent citizen interest, the kind that gets active on the prosaic, unspectacular, every-day matters of government. Instead of whirling like Charlie Chaplin from pillar to post in the hunt for a panacea and dodging the responsibility for failures in government, our citizens have got to buckle down and help and guide officials in the big job of making government a success.

The way to keep an official on his good behavior is to fix responsibility on him and then turn on the non-partisan publicity.

to fill

fill gap

ARCITIZENS BUSINESS

BUREAU OF MUNICIPAL RESEARCH

What Should the 1918 Ta
Rate Have Been?

February 13, 191

The $1.75 city rate produced more than four million dollars more revenue in 1918 than was needed to cover all of the city's expenses during the same year. A rate of $1.50 would have taken care of all of the expenses.

The Day of Reckoning

Now that the year 1918 is completely behind us, and the city's accounts for the year closed, and a preliminary report of the city's financial operations and condition presented to councils, the time is ripe for citizen-stockholders of our immense citycorporation to review the financial results of the past year's operations.

Our city is a huge business corporation organized for the common good. Unlike ordinary business corporations, it does not exist for the purpose of making monetary profits for its stockholders. Nevertheless, its financial operations are essentially the same as those of a railroad, a telephone company, a steel plant, or a department store.

Before a profit-seeking undertaking can show a profit for a given period it must obtain enough revenue, or earnings, or income, to cover all its expenses (including depreciation). In other words, it must maintain its net worth.

This brings us to what is, perhaps, the most important point to be watched in the city's fiscal operations.

Pay-as-You-Go.

It is contended-and admitted-on all sides that the city should pay-as-it-goes. Everyone seems to believe this to be the first canon of the city's financial program

But what is meant by pay-as-you-go? Like most popular slogans, this one does not define itself. Nevertheless, it is perfectly clear from the explanations that are elicited from time to time, and from the attempts that are made to force a pay-asyou-go policy, that it means obtaining sufficient

revenue to cover expense-that is, to maintain the net worth.

The strong movement in various parts of the United States for limiting the term of bonds to the life of the assets acquired with the borrowed money is one of the many more or less crude means of seeing to it that expense is fully covered by revenue. The oft repeated assertion that the taxpayers should be required to pay for what they receive from the government is another form in which this slogan is defined.

It is obvious that cities, business undertakings, and individuals cannot be said to pay-as-they-go unless they avoid an impairment of their net worth. Maintaining net worth means simply obtaining sufficient revenue to cover expense-replacing expired value by earnings or income. Ordinary business undertakings recognize this without question. Cities and other governments are beginning to recognize it also.

Did We?

Let us now see whether in 1918 the city paid-asit-went. Let us see whether or not the revenues equalled the expenses. An examination of the city controller's preliminary annual report for 1918, issued to councils on February 6, shows that the city's revenue exceeded the city's expenses by more than $4,000,000. In other words, the city not only lived up to a strict pay-as-you-go policy during 1918, but it "got ahead" by more than $4,000,000.

In view of the fact that in many previous years the city habitually got behind, this is a good showing. Of course, it is well to bear in mind that the city tax rate has been increased from $1.00 in 1916 to $1.75 in 1918.

If we assume that the city should have aimed