In many of the large cities the preparation of the budget rests with the board of estimate and apportionment, which apportions the esti mated expenditures among the various munici pal departments. This plan was adopted in New York in 1871, not as a measure of more scientific and honest government but in the interests of the Tweed ring. Under its new charter of 1897 the board consists of the mayor, controller, president of the board of aldermen and the five borough presidents. The first three have three votes each, the borough presidents of Manhattan and Brooklyn two each and the other borough presidents one each. The de partment estimates are sent to this board and duplicates to the board of aldermen. Having made its budget (or more strictly its appropria tion bill) based on these reports, the board of estimate must within five days submit it to the board of aldermen, which within 20 days must have completed its discussions and have taken final action. The aldermen cannot in crease the budget nor insert new items but may reduce it, though reductions are subject to the mayor's veto, which can be overridden only by a three-fourths vote. After the amount of the budget is definitely fixed authority is given to false this sum by taxation and 3 per cent may be added to provide against loss in the collec tion of the levy. In actual practice the city votes expenditures before it levies its tax so that for six months revenue bonds in anticipa tion of taxes must be issued in order to carry on the government, but recently the city has instituted semi-annual payments of taxes and does not deduct interest if paid promptly but adds interest if unpaid after a certain date. Every year a considerable amount of the taxes is unpaid (the uncollected balance of deficien cies written off on the real property tax averag ing 6 per cent, so that the net collections are about 94 per cent of the total levy, while of the personal property tax only about 70 per cent is collected) and provision for the deficit occasioned thereby is made in succeeding budgets. In 1915 the city began the spay-as you-go) plan of financing. Baltimore and De troit also have boards of estimate. The former city forbids its officials to make up deficits by temporary loans but directs that such deficien cies be offset by pro rata reductions in the departmental appropriations. Detroit's board of estimate is entirely separate from the exec utive • departments, since it consists of two members elected by each ward and five mem bers elected at large. In this city the council
considers the budget first and then submits it to the board of estimate which has the dis cretionary power to reduce any item of the appropriation bill or the rate of taxation. See MUNICIPAL ACCOUNTING.
Nearly 50 cities of the United States have adopted the commission manager form of gov ernment, which, as regards the budgetary pro visions of their charters, may be divided into two groups — Dayton, Ohio, comprising one and the remaining cities the other. The char ters of the latter merely provide that at a certain time each year the commission shall cause to be prepared or that the manager shall prepare a list of receipts from all sources and detailed estimates setting forth the necessary expenditures for all purposes for the ensuing year. Although most of these budgets are un scientific in form, they seem to work out satis factorily in practice. Since 1 Jan. 1914 Dayton has been operating under a commission manager charter which provides that on or before 1 November of each year the city manager shall submit to the city commission an estimate of expenditures and revenues for the ensuing year, which estimate is to be based on informa tion furnished by the several departments. Prior to submission the manager has reduced the total request to within the estimated in come for that year. The commission then reviews the budget with the manager, receives his explanations for the recommendations made and makes such changes as it sees fit. The manager is the head of the administrative branch of the government and alone is respon sible for operation of the various departments. Since the department heads are responsible to him and removable by him the city manager controls the expenditures and he is kept in close touch with the work of each department and with the adequacy of funds by frequent cabinet meetings. Thus he is in a position to make curtailments and to recommend increases as the occasion presents itself and the system is removed from the old log-rolling and per sonal consideration in appropriating funds. City business as in fact all governmental busi ness—national, State and local — is a matter of dollars and cents and not of bosses and parties; administering a city is a' specialized business requiring specialists just as much as the largest of our great corporations. See Pus