The Waterbury Democrat., 1932-11-04

New York, Nov 4.-The cleanup of Chicago must be thorough-half measures are futile, declares AL fred E. Smith in explaining how he would reform the nations most troubled city, in Redbook maga- zine for December. to be published Tomorrow. While home-rule is necessary, the former New York governor believes that the citizens can get the government they want if they try hard enough and start with Mayor Cermak's program. Outlining the basis for his reform of Chicago, MT Smith writes
 "The operation of city is a business; and no weil-organized business in this country to-day would for minute tolerate such division of responsibility with re- spect to the spending of its money as is seen in a study of the gov- ernments' of our big cities. The city of Chicago is a huge corpora ton. The residents of that city are stockholders who are assessed annually for the operation of the corporation. The operation of the city of Chicago does not differ from the operation of big business cor poration. City laws should be en- acted by the city council. For the regular business operation of the government, the mayor should be held responsible; and the only way to hold him responsible is to give him full power.
 Chicago is one of the most con- crete examples of situation which arises where a legislative body is an opposite party to the local municipal body. The legislature exercises its control to determine matters which should be left to local governments. Even when there is political harmony, thefe is always a temptation to create newpatronage by law. Municipal home rule means that the munic- pality shall keep full control of its own business and it's own affairs. Denial of home rule is of course prompted by politics. Men resident S in parts of the state far away from the cities are eager to retain for themselves by law or legislative ton of the. city. That is absolutely viduals, no personal responsibility.
 Give Mayor Power
 The city of Chicago is not un- like other large cities and govern mental divisions in that for years, {, new commission, a new board or 8 new bureau was set up for every additional activity that the growth of the municipality seemed to re- quire. To-day the city of Chicago has 27 departments, boards and commissions directly under the Jurisdiction of the mayor and city council. These shouIud be ma- terially reduced; departments per- forming similar functions now ex- isting should be merged under a single department. There should be no administrative duties per- formed by the city council. An absolute essential to city as large as Chicago is a budget bureau which should be under the mayor. Through that bureau of budget should pass every request for the appropriation of public money, even if this requires legislative en- actment. In Chicago, as in many other cities and states, entirely too many offices are selected by the electorate. The mayor should be what everybody believes he is the executive head of the munich pality, with broad and sweeping power with respect to all of it's business transactions.
 The ideal set-up of govern naent for the city of Chicago would consist of the office of mayor as the <chief executive, and all busi- ness and executive functions of the city transacted in a small number of departments directly under the control of the mayor; the election of a city council as a legislative body to enact ordinances and necessary appropriations, subject to veto, in whole or in part, of the mayor. No municipality that di- vides it's taxing functions into number of different agencies can successfully operate. That function should rest entirely with a depart a n,art Of taxation and assessmeht.