The Detroit times., 1912-11-20
AND
FACTS VARY,
SAYS HURLBUT
Commissioner Shows Park Main
tenance Charges of Other
Cities Are Misrepresented
HITS AT CRITICS WHO
WOULD HAVE HIM BUSTED
Declares That Charge of Extrav-
agance is False and Basis of
Comparison Fictitious

Park Commissioner Hurlout came
back hard al his critics who are AT.
tempting To have him ousted from the
department, Wednesday, by citing
i1gures from the annual reports of the
park departments OF other cities,
which, he says, give the lie 20 figures
given out by his enemies.
"A fair presentation of the facts
will show that the expenditures IN
the park department OF this city are
not excessive as compared with those
in other cities. he said.
Take Minneapolis. for instance.
continued the commissioner. opening
the annual report of the park depart
ment OF that city for 1911. My critics
In Detroit say that il cost $4,000 70
maintain the park system of Mime
apoiis last year They compare that
figure with s570,2l2 for Detroit The
latter figure tor Detroit includes the
cost OF improvements as welt as main
tenance OF the park system in Detroit.
although only the cost Of maintenance
OF the park systems in other cities is
compared with IT, This 10 begin
with, is an unfair comparison.
Now the report Of the park depart
ment OF Minneapolis, which city had a
population OF 3Ol i0S i'm 1911. shows
that the cost OF maintenance and i'm
provements OF the park system in that
city last year was $TS9, 96S.Sy That
is 1929, 1888 more than the city OF
Detroit is spending this year for the
same purpose. And Gle park system
OF Minneapolis cannot compare with
the park system OF Detroit.
1t is represented by my critics that
the cost OF maintenance of the park
system in Minneapolis was $4,000
Wherever they got that figure is
mystery TO me- Minneapolis annual
report for the calendar year OF 1911
shows that Sl63,355.S7 was spent for
the maintenance OF the system We
spent more for maintenance and less
for improvements. because the sys
tenn in this city is larger but the total
expenditures for the park department
here are very much less than they
We're in Minneapolis, a city OF halt
the population of Detroit"
The commissi Toner also produced the
last annual reports OF the depart.
ments in ST. Paul, Pittsburgh and
other cities which showed that the
maintenance items alone in those
cities were greater than those repre-
sented in Detroit by his critics.
In Minneapolis they keep the re-
ceipts from the various concessions in
the park fund and their appropria-
lions are just that much less. In De
troit, $4,000 receipts from various
concessions we're turned into the city
treasury. Hence they are not shown
as an Offset. although II the amount
OF receipts WAS deducted from the ap-
for maintenance. as they
do in other cities, IT would show just
that much less was needed for main.
tenance in this city.
I'm some OF the cities the boulevard
systems are separate from the park
systems. The boulevards are includ-
ed in the charge for maintenance in
this city In some cities the mainte-
nance Of the bath houses and similar
departments are not part OF the park
department. and hence their cost is
not figured in. but in Detroit it is
figured in Some OF these cities have
park systems which are a joke as
compared with the system in Detroit
This only goes TO show the illogiC .
trying TO make comparisons when you
don't know what you are comparing.
The commissioner said that he con
siders the attack inspired for the pur-
pose Of coercihg Mayor.elect Marx TO
remove him and presumes that very
shortly a candidate satisfactory 10 his
critics viii be suggested