The Waterbury Democrat., 1932-12-15
Litchfield, Southbury, Watertown Among
 Progressive List
Tax Commissioner BIOdgett's Plan Keeps Expendi- lures Under Direct Control = Forward Step in Municipal Management Aids Every Community

Connecticut's effort to obtain a more positive control of local finances has caused at least twenty.eight towns to adopt the standard sirnplified budget which State Tax Commissioner William H. Blodgett recently prescribed on instruction of the General Assem- bly. In making public to-day the names of the towns conforming to the uniform system, Commission CT Blodgett made the statement that only by very carefully laid financial plans can any municipal ity hope to keep expenditures un. der direct control and provide in- tclligible information for it's tax payers.
 There are two general types of local boards of finance in Con- necticut, the commissioner pointed out. One group consists of those boards created by individual spe- cial acts of the legislature, num- bering thirty-seven. The other group exists under authority of the general statutes and numbers thirty-six towns. Legislation passed in 1881 requires that the towns in the second group operate their financial systems under q uniform plan prescribed by the tax com missioner.
 The following twenty-six towns, according to the most recent inc formation, ahve adopted the ap- proved standard budget plan, in conformity with the states: Avon, Berlin. Cromwell, Easton, Enfield, East Hampton, Fairfield, Farm ington, Glastonbury, Groton, Litch- field, Newington, North Branford. old Saybrook, Plainville. Putnam, Bedding, Salisbury, Southbury, Suffield, Trnmbuli, WatertowD, Westbrook, Westport, Wethersfield and Windsor.
 Tn addition, the towns of Green- wich, Winchester and Kent have voluntarily accepted the tax com inissioner's plan and have put 1t into use. Greenwich and Winches- ter, two of the largest towns in the state, having boards of finance created by special act, are not re- quired by law to use the budget. Neither is the town of Kent, one of, the very small towns of the state, having no board of finance, obliged to conform. However, the fiscal officials of these towns have become sufficiently impressed with the value of uniformity as among municipalities on this subject to accept 1t in its entirety. This is considered ample evidence of the adaptability of simplified budget for the large as well as the small towns. Commissioner Blodgett vcntured the opinion that event. ually all towns will see the desir- ability of the standard plan in order that taxpayers may have ac- cess to important fiscal informal tion in all municipalities on the same basis.
 created under the general statutes East Hampton, Easton, Norwich, oxford. Putnam and Bedding. Their creation reflects the deter imitation of the taxpayers, the commissioner feels, to see that more efficient and painstaking local financial management is at- tained.
 With the adoption of the uni form budget termino1ogy by these towns, Commissioner Blodgett de- clared that for the first time in the history of the state it is thereby made possible for towns in the group to make exact comparisons of receipts and expenses, item by item. In this way economical management, as well as tendencies toward extravagance and wasteful- ness. may be shown with certainty.
 The standard terminology brought into use in these towns by the adoption of the uniform sys- tenn represents q very forward step in town management, Commission CT Blodgett feels. In connection with the budget summaries, the state tax department issued an