Evening star., 1954-01-11
Public Works Program Alternatives

FuDHC WOTkS Program alternatives
Estimates of city revenue and costs for the
next 10 years can be wrong in more ways than
one Estimates of revenue from existing and
projected taxes can be short or excessive in rela
ton to the actual yield. Estimates of cost--in
meeting future payrolls or in building school
or bridge-can be equally wrong.
The Commissioners the Budget Officer, the
Assessor. and others at the District Building
know all this, OF course. They learn it anew
every six months. BY adopting necessarily arb-
trary assumptions based on past experience
and intelligent forecasts, they have made an
honest effort to show what lies ahead for the
District in the fiscal picture of the next 10
years. They have related this picture to the
proposed public works program
The result must be viewed as relative not
an absolute. forecast. It's purpose is not to say
precisely what will happen, but to compare
what might happen under the public works
program with what might happen under two
alternatives. It is important to remember that
the comparisons deal only with the general
fund. They do not include the highway fund,
or the water fund, which are separate and dis
tinct. although both of these funds are also
provided for in the public works program.
One alternative facing the District is to
do nothing That would mean for purposes of
Illustration only that we would not increase
local taxes or anticipate any increases in the
Federal payment of S11 million to the general
fund Under this assumption, we would have
no revenue for any construction. Yet, at the
end of 10 years, We would be shy by $92 million
of merely meeting the costs of running the city.
There is another alternative. The condi-
tionS being the same as regards no local tax
increase and no increased Federal payment,
suppose we spent for the next 10 years the
average amount spent in the past 10 years on
public works, namely, about $40 million a year.
At the end of 10 years we would be shy by 1888
million of meeting the cost.
The public works program would mean an
immediate $40 million annual increase in local
taxes (about $45 million coming from general
taxes and the remainder from increasing the
water tax and imposing a new sewer tax
amounting to so per cent of water taxes); an
increase of 50 million year in the Federal
payment and borrowing program of $50 mil
lion over 10 years, at prevailing Government
rates of interest.
This would provide for about $172 million in
public works charged to the general fund (the
total under the three funds amounting to about
$305 million) in the next 10 years. Under this
program we would still be shy by about $102
million Of meeting all the costs, including debt
service and higher operating costs due to new
public facilities.
Our theoretical deficit under the public
works program, in other words, would be $40
million higher than the theoretical deficit under
the do nothing" program. The important diff
ference, however, is that we would be $172 mil
lion to the good in needed public facilities under
the public works program as compared to no
public works under the "do nothing" program.
The purpose of the comparisons is not to
actual n
Their purpose is to illustrate the serious nature
Of the fiscal problem facing the District. Future
increases in local taxes, under the public works
program, would be greater than If there were
no public works program. The manifest advan-
tages of the public works program however are
twofold:
First, it would provide needed public works,
without which the city faces period of stagna-
tion and decay, ruinous to its future.
Second, it commits the exclusively control
ling Federal Government to financial participa-
ton in the program, to a degree that comes
much nearer meeting it's just obligations in
support of the American Capital than at any
time in the past 80 years.
It is difficult to find workable alternative
to public works program. If one Is devised, it
must be studied in relation to the future devel-
opment Of our city. Those who oppose the
public works program on the ground that it
means higher local taxes are talking through
their hats. Higher local taxes are inevitable,
regardless of what program is adopted.