The Waterbury Democrat., 1937-09-29
Our City Departments

With the closing days of the municip- al campaign at hand, the attacks upon the City administration seem to be get- ting more and more general. The claim of waste and extravaganza is accomplish ing nothing in the face of the ndls- putable reduction of the tax rate during the Hayes administration, very consiu- erable reduction, as any taxpayer will sec by looking at his tax bills for 1880 and the ensuing years and figuring how much saving it has meant to him. The increase of indebtedness claim has no foundation, as shown by the statement of the certl- fled accountants who have examined the City's books, and, as matter of fact, the indebtedness and its amount vary great deal with the time of the year when t is taken, whether just after the tax col lections or just before them, when the City has borrowed in anctipation of their collection, which, of course, it has to do and always will have to do, unless the collection date is set forward to the be- ginning of the year, when the expendi- lures begin. It is absolutely clear to everyone that it costs less to run the City than it did at the beginning of the Hayes administration. Then at what particular part of the City administration is the criticism directed?
 It was little surprising to read, the ether day, of criticism directed at the Po- lice Department, and the claim that, when Superintendent Mclean retired, some one should have replaced him other than Superintendent Roach. We doubt if there is a voter in Waterbury who, if lie said what he honestly thought, wouldn't admit that our Police Depart rnent was never more efficient than it IS today. Isn't our traffic we'll handled? It is, exceptionally well. Our low rate of accidents in the last year and our low cred insurance rates show 1t. Superir- tendent Roach knows his business and IS onto his job. Of course, there are always a few in every community who find fault because the police do not spend all their time in Suppressing bridge playing for prizes and other gambling instead of protecting life and property, but we do not agree with them.
 Is there anything wrong with our fire or school departments? If so, what IS it? What changes would the opponents of Mayor Hayes make?
 Then there is the street and sewer de- partment. Too much waste, they say. Where and how? Our streets have been and are being wonderfully improved. IL costs money, of course, but it's worth II. And it is true that most of this work has to be done in summer and the outdoor work reduced in the fall, resulting in the letting of some of the help go, but this tS unavoidable.
 The real situation is that no sponsor of the opposition ticket has definitely pointed out where the City's expense could be reduced more than 1t has been during the present administration. So, what does all the abuse and criticism mean?
 Just this,-the so-called Independent Democrats want the jobs and if all the jobs were given that have been prom ised by the ruler of the Republican and Independent Democratic organization, city taxes would rise at least fifty per cent in the next two years. That is what it all means. Fire these fellows out and put us in." ..
 We'll, why not keep the men who have the experience and have shown their ability to reduce the tax rate, to improve our streets and to protect our lives ana property?
 Any business concern or factory organ iZation would do just this and why shouldn't the voters of Waterbury do it? We think they will It is just ordinary common sense.
 Living for Poet