Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-10-05

rooms was the minimum size for q new
structure, with extensions added as en-
rollment increased
In new neighborhood portables were
used until the population justified an
eight-room building. In the items which
1t added to the estimates last year, the
Budget Bureau suggested some four
room extensible buildings to do away
with portables. In adding the $675.000
the Budget Bureau reduced or elm
mated other items the Commissioners
had submitted. making the net increase
for schools $29,385.
Commissioners Hands Tied.
Another illustration of how Budget
Bureau control over the detailed expen-
ditures of the city divides municipal
authority between the Commissioners
and the Federal, agency was brought
out in the hearings before the House
subcommittee on District appropria-
tions on the bill for the fiscal year
l929-1930
At the outset of the hearings Chair
man Simmons noted that the District
had been accommodating a surplus dur
ing the preceding year or two and that
this surplus would be increased on the
basis of the budget which had just been
submitted to Congress. Inquiring into
this surplus problem, Mr.. Simmons sug-
geSted that either more money should
be spent. or both the Federal contribu-
ton and the local tax rate should be
reduced.
Former Commissioner Taliaferro who
was testifying at the time, explained
that the Commissioners, having in mind
what could be spent on $170 tax rate
and the 100000 contribution, sub
mitted to the Budget Bureau tentative
estimates for $42,478031 The Budget
Bureau replied that the final estimates
should not exceed $39, 962,107 with the
invitation to submit supplemental
list of items thus eliminated Taking
advantage of this privilege, the Com
missioners then submitted final esti-
mates aggregating $42,279,113. The
subcommittee. reduced the final esti-
mates, however, to $39,935, 622. The
amount the Commissioners had asked
for, it was testified, would have used
up the anticipated revenue for that
year. with the exception of a reserve Of
$1,100.000 to meet deficiency appropria-
tons made later in the year, or appro-
priations that might arise from new
legislation.
1t was then brought out in the hear
ings that after the final estimates had
bCCll uOWU oil lIllOIIIldl IIleSSdRS
reached the Commissioners through the
District budget Officer that the Budget
Bureau officials might be willing to en-
terrain some further suggestions.
Mr.. Simmons inquired what action
was taken on that, and Mr.. Taliaferro
replied no suggestions were made. Mr..
Simmons wanted to know If the Com
missioners took the position that If
they could not get what they originally
submitted they would not take anything
Bureau Decision Binding.
"They took this position" Mr.. Ta1ia-
ferro replied, that they had presented
in a formal and proper way what they
thought was right. and If the Bureau
of the Budget in dealing with it In a
formal way had denied it, they had little
hope to accomplish more, and that the
informal suggestion which have re-
ferred to did not hold out much hope
of any success"
Mr.. Simmons observed that some Of
the cuts the Budget Bureau made were
items for new personnel and salaries.
The chairman said it seemed to him
the difficulty between the Commissioners
and the Budget Bureau that year was
as to how much should be allowed for
running expenses as compared with bet
terments. One Of the former Commits