The Bridgeport times and evening farmer., 1922-01-23
CITY AUDITORS ANNUAL REPORT

been done without imposing extra ordinary burdens of taxation. but my advice was not needed and the result has been Q large unnecessary increase in our debt and a larger demand for new schools. ] deem it inadvlSable
 now to meet this demand by taxation much as I would like to do so. 1 favor,
 as soon as p-actica ble, that is, when
 we are gain back to normal COndi-
 tons, a, return to the method of pay
 ing as we go for construction of grade
 schools, so long as they are annually recurring needs, but favor bonding for
 High schools, as the latter are only occasional needs, and the expenses should be spread over period of years, well within the life of the i'm
 prOvements bonded for.
 Sewer Construction
 1 can see no alternative but bond ing for sewer construction, this year, at least. We acknowledge an indebt- ednesS of about $76,000.00 to Leary and Co.,, contractors for West End Sanitary Sewer, being the final pay ment on their contract, which sum they refuse to accept in full payment and have brought suit to recover a larger amount alleged to be due them They ought not to be able to recover any larger sum, but this cannot be stated with certainty, until the 1udG- ment or verdict is rendered.
 There are other obligations, so that it can safely be assumed that the City's indebtedness on sewer account will aggregate at least $l00,000.
 And then the City will need money to carry on the activities of the next year, to provide for necessary sewer " ork, and the only available funds will be the collections of assessments from month to month, and they will prove entirely inadequate to meet re- quirements.
 I think that a Legislative Act, in the shape of an amendment to our City Charter, if it can be constitution ally made. empowering the City to make a uniform pro-rata assessment per front foot for all future sewer construction. whether on line of trunk or lateral sewers, would go far to spect, and do away with the numerous appeals from sewer assessments, and the numerous abatements of such as sessm entS made by the Common Council
 I sugges. that the City Attorney be requested 10 carefully look into this imortant matter, and if possible pre- pare a bill for presentation to" the next General Assembly.
 Mir. Thomas R. LiIPs Report.
 Hae the courtesy been extended to me, of being furnished with a, copy of MT. LilIs report before its publica- be charitable enough to suppose were inadyertent, could have been avoided. could, and would gladly have point ed them out and has them corrected before publication of the report. As I have not yet seen his entire report, I do not intend to discuss it in detail. This is neither the opportune time nor place for that.
 It is entirely proper for me te state that the accounting system now in force in this City. whatever its ner- it's or dem may be, is that which was installed here in 1913, by a man who was ackn Owledged to be a very capable and efficient certified public late MT. Peter White work in. this City, with a corps of able assistants extended over a period of one and one-half years and involved an expense to the City of $30,OoO-
 His work here was supervised by a committee composed of three of the most competent accountants in the City, to wit; Nessrs. Jof7n Taylor, w. Percy Allen and John M. Green. MT. Lin has stated to me that he was we'll acquainted with MT. White, had worked with him and held him in the highest esteem as an accountant and investigator. Surely there have been 10 radical changes in accounting methods during the past eight years, sufficient to warrant any great outlay 1f money to install a new accounting system. Whatever slight defects there Ire in the system can be rectified at ], mere nominal expense in my judg- nent.
 MT. Whites report was approved by he City authorities and the Common Council adopted ordinances designed i've. I then stated to MT. White that, IS he was here to formulate and in ta1 a new accounting system for the City of Bridgeport, he would have my un cooperation and that I would conform to the system he would re- commend when the same was ap- proved by the City authorities and when the necessary chan 2esain exist 1 ng laws were made to render it ef- l ective.
 This have done to the best of my l bility so far as existing laws per l nitted. Before changes of any inn | ,ortance can now be made in the ity'S accounting system, new ordi- 1 ances must be enacted and even some l harter changes will be required.
 If the City authorities deem it wise 0 adopt Q new system and make such | hanges in existing laws, I will, as in | 0 effect. I fully realize that We are wing in an age of progress, and if methods can be shown in ny line they ought to be made eff active. But where experts disagree, that can be expected of those who O not claim to be experts, and who an foreteu what the expert of to- borrow may say of the expert of to- ay?
 If Mir Lil1 speaks truly he will say nat the City's books show faithfully ne City's transactions, aiming at the lbstance rather than the forms and aadows. 1.
 The Investigators of the United tates Commerce Department who | ave visited our City each year, dur lg the past ten years have been un- nimous in saying that they felt leased when assigned to Bridgeport ; it meant less work for them as ley were not obliged to wade trough masses of Irrelevant matter obtain the desired information for leir annual reports. This year, in der to save expense for the National )yernment, we prepared the report { IT selves and have an acknowledge ent from the Census Director com- { imentary of our methods here.
 At this time. particularly, when we ( re endeavOring to econOTnlze, we lght not to throw good City money ( way simply because an expert ac- ountant desires a job.
 l am afraid that Investigator Lill { wells too much on little matters and {