The Waterbury Democrat., 1935-12-06

Wms Js EapO
 E. J. Daly.
 The Reply of Mayor
 The mayors letter follows: Dear Sir:
 have received recently . pe- tition signed by you as well as by twenty-one other taxpayers of Waterbury. The petition asks that I consider the acquisition by this city of the Plymouth Airport.
 have already given much thought to the proposition, and I am writing my conclusions on 1t to you because, after studying the petition, believe you are not completely informed of all 1t in- wolves.
 For a long time the acquisition of the Plymouth Airport has been urged upon me by those who were financially interested in it's dispos- al Prior to this experience no one had ever suggested the purchase of an airport for Waterbury.
 Early last November MT. Ches- ter L. Morris of the State Airport Commission called on me and, un- officially, explained the value of the Plymouth enterprise. He re- called to my mind not only that $165,00O.0O of Federal money was available for the airport but also that the securing of the allotment was contingent upon the Owner- ship of the property by . muni- cipality.
 The petition to which your name is attached sets forth that:
 "The finances involved in ac- quiring the Mt. Tobe site by Or- .. iginal corpOrators, the amount expended by the Government WPA project and the sum spent on the road leading thereto from the Plymouth and Thomast0n side as we'll as from the Water. bury end represents already an expenditure of almost $250,- O0O.OO. We believe the property could be acquired for less than half the sum already expended and that the small amount of money in addition needed to make this 8 first class airport would be but 8 small sum from the city of Waterbury taxpayers angle."
 Clearly stated, all this means that the city of Waterbury would be obliged to pay out approx imately SIPS, ,0OO.O0 for the prop erty and also provide "the small amount of money in addition needed to make this a first class airport"
 The net result would be that an allotment of S165, ,00O.0O would be received from the Federal govern ment, the original corporators would get their investment out, and Waterbury would have to operate and maintain at no small annual expense an airport which would, in the language of the pe- tition, ultimately benefit manu- lecturers, merchants and res- idents of this city by the quick transportation accorded by air."
 Admitting the ultimate" value of an airport for Waterbury, the acquisition of the Plymouth prop Nerty would necessitate an immed- fate increase in our taxes and 1t is not consistent with the policy of the present administration to take any such step.
 In passing, I might say that this administration has been criticized for its alleged "wastefuI expendi- ture of the taxpayers money" In view of such criticism it is inter- esting to note that the names of some of the bitterest critics are signed to q petition which, if granted, would compel an increase in taxes.
 However, I made to COmmis- siOner Morris proposition which he considered more than fair. The proposition was:
 That Waterbury would accept as a gift the Plymouth Airport provided a responsible corpora tion, composed of the present owners, was formed to maintain and operate the airport and pro- vided that such maintenance and operation be continued un- til they had been reimbursed to the extent of their investment from the profits of the enter- prise.
 If an airport is 8 good thing for Waterbury and if Waterbury will need one, do you not think that the proposition made is fair not only to the city and its taxpayers but also to those who, wisely or not, have invested their money in the Plymouth property and who are obviously convinced of its future financial, industrial and national value?
 Incidentally, I have heard noth- ing from the owners of the airport since the above proposition was placed before them about Q month ago.
 I would appreciate an expression of your opinion as to whether CT not you agree with me.
 Aa..un-. ~.Mmun.