The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-12-15
MAYOR VETOES ALL
CITY SALARY CUTS
Action Nullifies Aldcrmen's
Attempt to Save 500, $40
on 1915 Budget.
POINTS OUT ECONOMIES

Mayor Mitchell has vetoed all the re-
auctions In salaries and eliminations of
new positions In the 1916 budget made
ny the Board Of Aldermen. Their at
tempt 10 economize In city expenditures
10 the extent OF one twenty-fourth of I
per cent. OF the total amount of he
budget thus comes to naught. for while
the charter gives the board power to
override the Mayors veto by n two
,hlrus vote. It can't be done. This Is
because the Aldermen may not act on
the veto within ten days after II Is pub-
lished. which would make December "a
the earliest date, and the Aldermen have
decided to adjourn sine die on December
u. The budget must be signed by the
Mayor. Comptroller and City Clerk BY
December rs.
The total reductions as handed up
by the Aldermen were t9O.76O tut the
Mayor points out that one reduction Of
SS2o. because the appropriation from
which II was taken Toes not come out
or the tax levy. must be excluded from
nus total. leaving a net reduction Of
$Ss.S4O. or one twenty-fourth Of 1 per
cent. OF a total budget OF s2l2. 956.17I5t.
The net reduction favored by the Al.
dermen was made up of $4,000 taken
from the appropriation for contingent
expenses OF the Board OF Estimate. S3j,-
" aihf increases HDu ANN.Oin
appropriated for new positions.
Mayor Mitchell takes the broad ground
that none OF the reductions made bv
the Aldermen corrected obvious mis-
takes and that they are not examples
OF disagreement as TO matters of NUM-
cipai policy. the two provinces to which
the charter limits the budgetary action
Of the Aldermen.
He defends the necessity for an ample
m NsN t@V. "
penses Of the Board OF Estimate and
says that to reduce this appropriation
would mean that special revenue bonds
would have to be issued later In the
year. A to salary reductions he takes
issue with the theory Of the Aldermen
that no Increases should be allowed In
the case OF city employees now getting
$4,000 a year or more and that increases
should be allowed only up to $500 In
the case OF the employees who are now
getting less than that. lie describes this
as an arbitrary working principle and
says no increases were made by the
Board of Estimate which were not In its
judgment merited. either because OF en-
ceptional worth or because OF previous
underpayment or by reason of depart
mental reorganization which required
more responsible service or the render
ing Of full time service instead OF part
time service.
Taking W various items Of increase
which the Aldermen disallowed the
Mayor shows that although salaries Of
individuals may have been increased and
new positions created in each case the
total appropriation for the department
was reduced. For example. the 1915 APP
preparation for the Health department
Is less than that OF 1915 by about sl33.-
900 the Law Department gets 10000
less the Tenement House Department
$4,000 less tho Department Of Docks
and Ferries st15 900 less and the Com
missioner of Accounts gets $4,000 less.
The Mayor concludes with a reference
To the fact that the 1916 budget. exclud-
ing the direct state tax, is somewhat be-
low that of 1918. This he regards AS an
extraordinary achievement. considering
the increase on account OF debt service.
He points out that the aggregate of APP
preparations made for, the departments
under his jurisdiction was reduced by
about 81 100000 in spite. of an increase
OF nearly 500. 600 to the Police Depart
ment. the Department OF Charities and
the Department OF Correction.