New-York tribune., 1922-11-12
Realty Board
Opposes City
Bus Operation
rnapbasizes Reasons for
Hostility to Proposed Hy-
Ian.Whalen Control of
Vital Public Utilities
Political Bias Charged
Approval OF Miller Transit
Program Two Years Ago
C,ised TO Show Attitude

The neal BStase ooaiu oI NEW 10rk
...nSs py its guns in its attitude of
s,s,ilisy to the proposed Hylan- Whalen
,s,v operation of public utilities and
Ewes the reasons therefore in an an
swer. issued yesterday, to statement
~ Commissioner Whalen Of the De-
Ssrsulent Of Plant and Structures.
Commissioner Whalen on November
( toek exception to published state
,osnt made by the real estate men, bas.
,sr bis criticism on these points:
Thst reference was made to the testi-
souy then being taken before the
transit Commission on the operation
Il municipal husses.
That the statement issued by the
bal Estate Board indicated a choice
sar Governor by approving the work
IF the Transit Commission.
That attention was called to the fact
hat taxpayers would be paying more
heayily than they now are paying if the
snoways were operated as the city's
fsrries and buses are being operated
Approved Transit Program
The board answers the political bias
fharge by citing the fact that it nearly
tRo years ago approved Governor Mil
kfs transit program and later ap-
r.ayed the bill which created the Tran
sit Commission The board saws that
u always opposed municipal operation
sf public utilities, and then adds:
Z $50 far as the Real Estate Board is
aware, the Governor-elect is no more
In favor Of municipal operation of pub
Sic utilities than is the present Gov
amor: and his two Transit Commission
sppointees, we believe, while they did
;sVor municipal ownership of transit
lines, advocated regulated corporate
operation of such lines.
I "As to the testimony which was then
being taken, and is still being taken.
Ay the Transit Commission, that surely
kareasonable subject of public notice.
ut may be that the City. of New
York has no proprietary interest in
lzny Of the bus lines, but the fact re-
gssins that the city has assumed the
control of all bus lines, as is evidenced
BY the following items in next years
budget. Next years budget contains
mems aggregating $82,920 for such
employees in the transportation divi-
sioa Of the Department of Plant and
Structures namely: Appropriations
ior one electrical engineer, one chief
bus operator, two deputy chief bus
supervisors, thirty-six starters of
eusses, two clerks and q deputy COM
missioner in charge of busses, track
less srOlleys and railroads for tn.
city, and doubtless there is a propor-
tionste Charge for stenographers, in
yestigators etc. The minutes of the
Board Of Estimate for September and
etiab5 1921 (index pages CRXIV and
ibddpI contain more than fifty refer.
ssets under, the heading of ''Municl-
jsal Service"
Profit on Trackless Trolleys
Whether or not the trackless troll
eys show any profit to the city the
zeal estate board is not able to de-
srnine: but the available reports
sem to show that the Midland troll
sy on Staten Island, from December
3 1920, to June 80, 1921, provided
avenues of $205, ,60455, less operating
COST Of $183,314.70, or according to the
report, met" of $22,289.84. Your esti-
nate of taxes reduces this by $9,977.91.
fhs is without taking into account
Interest on the cost of construction
ii the twelve-mi road or depreciation
n paving, or for cleaning snow in win
ter or sprinkling in summer, or a re-
yolving fund of $4,000 or of the SILL
9QO in special revenue bonds.
S ut is obvious that $12,311.94 (proft
less estimated taXes) would not even
approximate these items, not to men
ton allowance for legal expenses in
defending damage suits and claims for
damages.
"In relation to municipal ferries.
5here is no recent report available to
the Real Estate Board. Last year the
Department of Plant and Structures
pad appropriations for ferries operated
BY the city of S3,2S7 900. Under the
peculiar conditions surrounding Staten
Islands physical relation to the rest
tne city, the operation of the ferries
" NE city may be defensible. But it
= highly improbable that they can re
sssa as an example of profit making
lssa.oagh ~ aolg municipal operation.
. Inc Real Estate Board made no ref
lsrehee to the cost of the Transit Com
mission, but it is, we believe, no more
saa we think less than former commits
sioners had"