The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
IESSE H. JONES, Secretary
BUREAU OF THE CENSUS
WILLIAM LANE AUSTIN, Director
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
OVER 100,000 POPULATION
1937
Prepared under the supervision of
C. E. RIGHTOR
Chief Statistician for State a n d Local Government
UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 1940
For s a l e by the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D. C.
Price $1.00
LETTER
OF
TRANSMITTAL
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
BUREAU OF THE CENSUS
Washington, D. C , Sept. 20, 1940.
SIR:
I transmit herewith the annual
the fiscal year 1937 the
over 100,000
report of the Bureau of the Census showing for
financial transactions of the 94 cities having a population of
and the city of Honolulu, including
net indebtedness, the assessed
revenues and
valuation of taxable
property
expenditures, gross and
and the
tax levies, and
value of specified assets at the close of that year.
The collection
volume were
and
Local
and compilation
under the supervision
Government, and
Lewis B. Sims, technical
Hugh D. Ingersoll.
of these
statistics
and the
preparation
of Chester E. Rightor, chief statistician
Edward R. Gray, assistant
chief
of this
for State
statistician, assisted by
assistant, Cora Higgins, Inez A. Applebee, Leila B. Flagg, and
The text
disousslon
was
prepared by
Iver C. Olsen, consultant in
municipal finanoe.
The Bureau has had the advice of the Director's Special Advisory Committee for State
and Local Government on the revised classification of accounts and the form of presentation of the statistics, and of the Municipal Finance Officers' Association on the classification of accounts.
independent
The cooperation
local divisions
of the finance officers of the cities and other
of government, whose records
were made
available
to the
Bureau, is acknowledged.
Respectfully,
WILLIAM LANE AUSTIN,
Director of the Census.
HON. JESSE H. JONES,
Secretary of Commerce.
Ill
CONTENTS
PART I. INTRODUCTION
Scope of report
Revision of procedure
Divisions of municipal governmentGroups of cities
Securing the data
Purpose of report
TABLE 1
TABLE 2
Page
Year of incorporation, as a cityDate of close of fiscal year
Population
Area
Number of employees and amount of pay
rolls
Inauguration of new series
9
10
PART II. GENERAL GOVERNMENT
SECTION A.
REVENUES
Definitions
General property taxes
Special assessments
Grants
Proportionately-shared State taxes
Total State aid
Sales taxes
Other sources of revenue
TABLE 8
21
21
-22
22
22
23
23
23
TABLE 3
Revenues
Trend of revenues
Sources of revenue
23
24
24
TABLE 4
Per capita revenues
Trend of per capita revenues
Population base used
Shared State taxes
Distinction between shared taxes and
grants
68
Purpose and source
68
68
TABLE 10
Purpose
Source
Total S t a t e - l o c a l flow of funds
73
73
74
TABLE 11
Federal grants
Grants by the county and oilier local
units
82
82
42
TABLE 12
42
TABLE 6
General property taxes
Current and prior years* levies
Other local taxes
Property taxes on other than assessed
valuation
Business taxes
Sales taxes
Poll taxes
All other taxes
64
64
64
TABLE 9
42
42
42
TABLE 5
Percent distribution of revenues
Percent distribution, taxes and
nontaxes
Fines, forfeits, and penalties
Interest
Rents and royalties
50
50
50
Pension assessments
Special assessments for capital outlays
Contributions from public-service
enterprises
82
82
83
TABLE 13
50
50
51
51
51
Charges for current services
83*
Comparison with 1936
83
SECTION B.
COST PAYMENTS
TABLE 7
Definitions
Licenses and permits
Licenses and permits for use of street
Business licenses
Nonbusiness licenses and permits
Revisions in license classification
IV
51
51
51
51
51
101
TABLE 14
Operation and maintenance
Interest
Outlays
101
101
108
CONTENTS
V
TABLE 15
TABLE 22
Page
Per capita cost payments
108
Percent distribution of cost payments- 108
TABLE 16
Operation and maintenance costs of
general government
General administrative, legislative,
and judicial
Public safety
Highways
Sanitation and waste removal
Conservation of health
Hospitals
Charities
Correction
Schools
Libraries
Recreation
Liscellaneous operation and maintenance
116
116
117
118
118
118
118
119
119
119
120
120
120
TABLE 17
Per capita cost payments for operation
and maintenance of general
government
176
Trends in per capita costs of operations and maintenance
176
TABLE 18
Percent distribution of operation and
maintenance costs
Trend of percent distribution of
operation and maintenance
176
177
TABLE 19
Interest payments on general government debt
Special interest payments by Massachusetts cities
205
Difficulty of distribution
205
TABLE 24
Nominal and effective r a t e s of
interest
Average r a t e of i n t e r e s t
Noninterest-bearing bonded debt
TABLE 25
218
218
218
Issue of debt
Retirement of debt
219
219
TABLE 26
Basis of valuation
Cash and other specified assets at
close of 1937
Assets in sinking funds
Assets in public trust funds
Assets in investment funis and miscellaneous investments
Cash in general treasury and general
administrative funds
Cities with largest amounts of assets-
199
229
229
229
229
229
229
229
ASSESSED VALUATION AND
TAX LEVIES
Definitions
Assessed valuation of property subject to general property taxes
Tax levies
189
189
TABLE 21
Capital outlays financed by issuance
of bonds
Capital outlays financed from current
revenues
Purpose of issue
SECTION D.
189
:
Page
204
204
204
204
205
205
TABLE 23
189
TABLE 20
The reporting of outlays and the exclusion of debt retirement
Payments for capital outlays
Gross indebtedness
General obligation bonds
Revenue bonds
Special assessment bonds
Short-term indebtedness
Net debt
237
237
238
TABLE 27
Assessed valuation of property
Basis of assessment
Tax levies and rates
Bank stock tax levies
Poll tax levies
239
239
239
240
241
199
TABLE 28
SECTION C.
DEBT AND SPECIFIED ASSETS
Definitions
Trend of indebtedness
202
202
Cities in v/hich divisions of government have two or more tax rates
Reasons for multiple tax rates
257
257
PART III. PUBLIC-SERVICE ENTERPRISES
Reasons for separate reporting
Contributions to or from general
government
Enterprises included in the scope of
this report
269
269
TABLE 30
Payments
Character of payments
275
275
270
TABLES 31 and 32
Income
Sources of income
270
271
Income of water systems
Payments of water systems
279
279
VI
CONTENTS
TABLES 33 and 34
TABLE 46
Page
Income of electric light and power
systems
Payments of electric light and power
systems
279
Character of indebtedness and purpose
of issue
302
279
Net debt for p u b l i c - s e r v i c e e n t e r prises
302
TABLES 35 and 36
TABLE 47
Income of transit systems
Payments of transit systems-
280
280
TABLES 37 and 38
Income of gas systems
Payments of gas systems-
289
289
Bonded indebtedness by type of enterprise
Predominance of debt of water and
transit systems
302
302
TABLE 48
TABLES 39 and 40
Income of ports and associated
facilities
Payments of ports and associated
facilities
Average rates and nominal and effective rates of interest
309
Comparison with interest rates on
debt issued for general government— 309
289
289
TABLE 49
TABLES 41 and 42
Income of airports
Payments of airports-
293
293
Debt issues and retirements
Net change in debt during the year
TABLES 43 and 44
309
309
TABLE 50
Income of miscellaneous enterprises
294
Payments of miscellaneous enterprises- 294
TABLE 45
Capital outlays financed by bond
issues
Capital outlays financed from current
income
Assets in sinking funds
Assets in public trust funds
Assets in investment funds and miscellaneous investments
Assets in general funds
319
319
DEFINITIONS OF TERMS
323
319
319
294
294
GENERAL TABLES
PART I.
INTRODUCTION
1. Year of incorporation, fiscal year, population, and area: 1937
11
2. Employees and pay rolls: 1937
13
PART II:
GENERAL GOVERNMENT
Section A: Revenues
3. Summary of revenues, by major sources and by divisions of municipal government:
1957
4. Per capita revenues, by major sources: 1937
5. Percent distribution of revenues, by major sources: 1937
6. Revenues from general property and other local taxes: 1937
7. Revenues from licenses and permits: 1937
8. Revenues from fines, forfeits, and penalties and from use of money and property:
1937
9. Revenues from proportionately-shared State taxes, by purpose and sources: 1 9 3 7 —
10. Revenues from State grants, by purpose and source: 1937
11. Revenues from grants from counties and other local units and from the Federal
Government, by purpose: 1937
12. Revenues from private sources, from contributions from public-service entei'prises, and from special assessments: 1937
13. Revenues from charges for current services, by principal services: 1937
Section B:
25
43
46
52
58
65
70
76
86
89
Cost Payments
14. Summary of cost payments, by character and by divisions of municipal government:
1937
.
15. Per capita and percent distribution of cost payments, by character: 1937
16. Cost payments for operation and maintenance, by functions in detail: 1937
17. Cost payments for operation and maintenance, total and per capita, by major
functions: 1937
18. Percent distribution of cost payments for operation and maintenance, by major
functions: 1937
109
114
122
178
186
CONTENTS
19. Cost payments for interest: 1937
20. Cost payments for outlays, by major functions: 1937
21. Method of financing capital outlays: 1937
Section C:
Page
190
193
200
Debt and Specified Assets
22. Gross and net debt, total and per. capita; gross debt by unit of government and
by character; and increase during the year in debt and sinking-fund assets:
1937
23. Bonded debt at close of year, by purpose of issue: 1937
24. Bonded debt at close of year, by rate of interest: 1937
25. Issue and retirement of debt: 1937
26. Amount of specified assets at close of year: 1937
Section D.
VII
206
212
220
226
231
Assessed Valuation and Tax Levies
27. Assessed valuation and tax levies, total and per capita: 1937
28. Assessed valuation and tax levies in cities having divisions of government with
two or more tax rates: 1937
242
258
PART III: PUBLIC-SERVICE ENTERPRISES
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
Income, by type of enterprise: 1937
Payments, by type of enterprise: 1937
Income of water-supply systems: 1937
Payments of water-supply systems: 1937
Income of electric-light and power systems: 1937
Payments of electric-light and power systems: 1937
Income of transit systems: 1937
Payments of transit systems: 1937
Income of gas-supply systems: 1937
Payments of gas-supply systems: 1937
Income of ports, harbors, docks, and wharves: 1937
Payments of ports, harbors, docks, and wharves: 1937
Income of airports: 1937
Payments of airports: 1937
Income of "All other" enterprises: 1937
Payments of "All other" enterprises: 1937
Method of financing capital outlays: 1937
Gross debt, by unit of government and by character, and net debt: 1937
Bonded debt at close of year, by type of enterprise: 1937
Bonded debt at close of year, by rate of interest: 1937
Issue and retirement of debt: 1937
Amount of specified assets at close of year: 1937
272
276
281
283
286
286
287
288
290
290
291
292
295
296
298
299
300
303
306
310
316
320
FINANGIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
OVER 100,000 POPULATION: 1937
SUMMARY
America's large cities were able not only to meet the fiscal emergencies of
1937, through their own devices and substantial intergovernmental a;Ld, but were
able Hlso to make notable progress in consolidating their finances. This was
accomplished notwithstanding a continuation of the fiscal circumstances, largely
introduced by the depression, that have been exerting increasing pressure upon
the fiscal structure of local government. Not only were these municipalities
called upon to provide a greatly expanded range of public services, either necessary or desirable from the point of view of civic progress, but many of them
were faced also with unprecedented demands for local relief.
Although the impact of the depression had materially lessened by 1937, there
remained a substantial group of citizenry who, Instead of being able to render
their normal support to local government, continued to be increasingly dependent
upon the municipalities for shelter, food, clothing, medication, and hospitalization. The problems of coping with this two-way shift in the composition of an
important element of the municipal population, from fiscal asset to fiscal liability, continued to be the most vexing problem confronting local government.
In addition to this situation, those who were bearing the burden of local government demanded more and improved services for the support they were rendering—better streets and highways, improved educational facilities, modern recreational facilities, and the best in public safety equipment. In making these
demands, they were equally insistent that the burden of supporting local government, especially the burden on property, be lightened—certainly not increased.
These fiscal demands were thrust upon the municipalities at a time when
their fiscal structures had not completely recovered from the successive shocks
administered to the bulwark of the revenue structure—the property tax. Not
only had the tax base been seriously affected in previous years because of
sharply declining property valuations, which appear to be fairly stabilized at
the new level, but the productivity of property taxes had been narrov/ed because
of tax delinquency, tax limitations, homestead and industrial exemptions, and
other factors.
Economic recovery and a continuation of recent efficient and
aggressive tax collection policies, however, permitted these municipalities to
be remarkably successful in holding the level of property tax receipts in 1937.
Nevertheless, local government was faced with an ever-present problem of developing or discovering supplemental sources of revenue, but experience has indicated that new sources were not giving substantial yields.
For reasons which were practical, and in some cases also legal, it was considered impossible to increase tax rates in any substantial degree; in the
first instance, it was apparen-t that the maximum productivity of tax rates had
been approached, and, in the other, it was legally impossible to increase tax
rates beyond certain prescribed limits. It was likewise considered impracticable to supplement local revenues through special assessments, a revenue device
frequently resorted to in the pre-depression years, but of doubtful success in
periods when property owners are unwilling or unable to assume additional burdens.
Some local governments sought a partial solution of their problems in experiments with various forms of sales taxes. There was local resistance to
such taxes in certain areas, which caused the experiments either to be abandoned
or to be so restricted in scope that these "general'1 sales taxes were in effect
luxury taxes or selective sales taxes, the latter being levied on such articles
as cigarettes, tobacco, or gasoline.
The receipts from such sources in some
localities were a fairly Important item in the municipal revenue structure.
1
2
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
Other local governments, reluctant to impose sales taxes even if legally empowered, found that some relief v/as forthcoming from a broader use of business
licenses and certain types of permits. In this process of bolstering a sagging
revenue structure, the consideration of whether the licenses and permits were
intended for regulatory or revenue purposes was generally obscured.
For most municipalities, however, the problem of raising sufficient revenue
to meet the pressing requirements was one beyond their individual capacities,
and the natural consequence has been for local government generally to seek an
Increasing proportion of its revenue through the indirect source of grants and
shared taxes. State grants have long been identified with local government.
Even in the early days of the Nation, people were familiar with the practice of
the States' paternalistic guidance, if not control, over certain basic local
functions, such as education, through grants-in-aid. Not until the depression
years, however, did this source of financial assistance reach a volume of extreme importance or become indispensable to the fiscal structure of local government, as it is today. It is to be noted, in addition, that state supervision
of local activities themselves is furthered, because virtually all grants are
earmarked for specific purposes.
Shared State taxes have appeared in the accounts of local government since
Civil War days and, although increasing in recent years, do not have the same
close relation to the depression problems of local government as grants. Since
the amount of taxes shared is based on the amount collected, such receipts, like
all other taxes, are themselves affected by depression circumstances. Consequently, there has been no marked growth in shared taxes in recent years except
in those instances where the relative proportion of tax^s allotted to the local
units has been increased or where new types of taxes have been shared with
these units.
Federal grants, a new source of municipal revenue during the past decade,
at times reached substantial amounts, but they were not so sizable in 1937. One
important reason for this was the fact that the Public Works Administration was
not especially active in 1937; indeed, it was considered to be in the stage of
liquidation.
The payment* side of the municipal picture was, as previously mentioned,
featured by record expenditures for relief and other welfare activities. There
was also evidence that the retrenchment policies pursued in the early depression years had been lightened. Salary cuts for school teachers, police, firemen, and other municipal employees had been largely restored by the end of 1937.
Expenditures for capital outlays, which had been drastically pruned, were resumed on a wider scale. Municipal plant equipment, which had been neglected,
was more adequately maintained and kept in repair; additions or replacements
were made and additional improvements constructed. These activities may be
taken as an indication that local government considered most of its housecleaning accomplished and its fiscal structure consolidated in a degree sufficient
to permit the resumption of more nearly normal municipal activity.
Despite the continued demands upon these cities,the situation was met without wholesale borrowing. Indeed, the indebtedness, both gross and net, of the
94 cities at the close of 1937 was less than at the close of the previous year.
Even the character of the indebtedness was more favorable. The practice of accumulating an unwieldy floating indebtedness from deficits in current operations, and then funding this indebtedness as a last resort to tidy up the fiscal structure, was generally discarded in 1937.
Moreover, improving fiscal
conditions and more favorable money markets enabled some of the cities to refund at attractive rates a portion of their high interest-bearing indebtedness.
As a result, the Interest burden upon these cities in 1937 was lighter than it
had been in the previous year.
The following report merits study as to the scope and cost of these public
services, the revenues from which this cost was financed, and the influence of
both upon the debt structure of these cities.
The 94 cities represented in
this study furnished public services in 1937 to over one-half the urban population of the United States, and it is believed that this study offers evidence
of the important position of municipal government in the national economy»
PARTI. INTRODUCTION
3
Table 1.—Year of incorporation, fiscal year, population, and area: 1937
Table 2.—Employees and pay rolls: 1937
4
PART I. INTRODUCTION
SCOPE OF REPORT.—The present report of the Bureau of the Census is for the
most part restricted to a presentation of statistics of the financial transactions of 94 cities during the fiscal year 1937, each of which had a population
of over 100,000 as enumerated by the Federal Census of April 1, 1930. This series of reports included through 1931 all cities having a population of over
30,000. By virtue of Executive Order dated June 10, 1933, the annual collection
and compilation of statistics has been limited to cities of over 100,000. The
report also presents financial data relating to the city and county of Honolulu,
Hawaii.
The 94 cities included in this report embrace a total population group of
over 37,600,000, and are responsible for the protection of the lives, property,
and health of almost a third of the Nation's population, in addition to the millions of persons who visit these communities annually. Within this group falls
a substantial portion of the Nation's problems in providing educational and
recreational services, caring for the indigent, defective, and delinquent classes,
and providing a constantly growing number of conveniences and services being
sought by citizens and by associations interested in modern civic management.
The statistics presented in this volume relate to the financial transactions of the 94 cities for the fiscal year ended in 1937, with the exception of
three cities which closed their fiscal year in January 1938. The statistics
are as accurate and as comparable as it has been possible to make them. For
the general functions of municipal government the subjects are: the revenues
and principal classes thereof; the payments for the operation and maintenance
of the various governmental functions, for interest on indebtedness, and for
capital outlays; the gross and net indebtedness; the assessed valuation of
property subject to taxation, and the amount and rate of tax levy. In a separate part of the volume data are presented on municipal public-service enterprises. In addition, certain other subjects are included, as, for example, population, employment and pay rolls, and specified assets of municipal government.
This report is the first one in the series Financial Statistics of Cities
in which the data, to facilitate reference, have been presented in three separate parts. The first part is introductory, presenting general information on
methods of compilation and presentation, as well as a general summary of the
statistical material developed. Part II, which consists of four sections, relates to the ordinary or "governmental" activities of local governments. Part
III relates to the "proprietary" enterprises—i.e., the public-service facilities maintained by the municipalities.
The main tables comprising each of the three parts may be indicated as follows :
Part I
Introduction (tables 1, and 2 ) .
Part II
General Government (tables 3 to 28, inclusive).
Section A: Revenues (tables 3 to 13, inclusive).
Section B: Cost Payments (tables .14 to 21, inclusive).
Section C: Debt and Specified Assets (tables 22 to 26, inclusive) .
Section D: Assessed Valuation and Tax Levies (tables 27.
and 28).
Part III Public-Service Enterprises (tables 2£ to 50, inclusive).
REVISION OF PROCEDURE.— Many new functions and activities of municipal government have arisen, and other services have expanded, since the depression.
5
6
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
New sources of taxes and other revenues have been found and utilized. Municipalities have found it necessary or desirable to meet their financisd requirements through the issuance of forms of obligations that were comparatively unknown in the past, which in itself has occasioned new types of funds and accounts. Federal leadership in a number of fields has resulted in the expansion
of municipal activities into new fields, largely through the grant-in-aid device.
For the 1937 report, therefore, it was deemed essential to revise the classifications for revenue, expenditure, and debt. Perhaps the greatest change in
the procedure followed in this report, as compared with prior volumes, is that
the statistics of public-service enterprises, for tne first time, are reported
separately from those of general governmental functions. This separate reporting permits an improved basis of comparability among the various municipalities,
since it takes cognizance of the fact that the operation and accounting practices followed by the various cities with respect to their public-service enterprises are the subject of wide variance and require separate and uniform treatment. The types of public-service enterprises are themselves reclassified in
this report, and some activities formerly considered within this group are excluded. Public-service enterprises include water-supply systems,electric light
and power systems, gas systems, street railways and other transit facilities,
ports, docks, harbors, and wharves, airports, ferries, housing, and associated
enterprises.
DIVISIONS OF MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT.—The wide diversity of the organization of
municipal government is indicated by the number of independent units employed
to perform the functions and services of local government. In all cases there
is the city corporation, which is charged with the administration of all municipal functions except those entrusted to independent districts created to provide specific services for the community, the extent of authority in each case
being determined by statute or charter enactments. For 32 municipalities the
city corporation was the only local governmental unit, while in the other 62
the functions of local government were administered by two or more governments
as independent units, each having the power of taxation—for the purpose for
which it was created—over all or part of the territory of the city.
With the object of affording comparability of local urban government, regardless of the number of legally independent political subdivisions and types
of administrative organizations established locally to levy taxes, incur debt,
and perform governmental functions, this report for 94 cities includes all
types of funds of each independent division. The statistics, therefore, include
not only the finances of the city corporation, but a proportion of all independent, overlapping units of government virtually coextensive in area with the
city, and, for cities over 300,000 population having an independent county, a
proportion of the county's finances. In all cases, the proportion of financial
transactions included is based upon the ratio of assessed valuation of the city
to that of the overlapping independent division or county.
In connection with the foregoing, it should be pointed out that the term
'•county" appears as the designation of independent governmental units in the 18
following cities: Chicago, Detroit, Los Angeles, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Milwaukee, Buffalo, Minneapolis, Cincinnati, Newark, Kansas City (Mo.), Seattle, Indianapolis, Rochester, Jersey City, Houston, Louisville, and Portland (Oreg.).
On the other hand, in the 8 following cities the original county governments
have been merged with those of the cities: New York, Philadelphia, St. Louis,
Baltimore, Boston, San Francisco, Washington, and New Orleans.
It is clear
that no basis of comparison of local government would be afforded within this
group of cities unless the previously discussed method of apportioning the finances of overlapping divisions or counties was pursued. The data for cities
of these two groups, however, are not comparable with those for cities of group
III, with the exception of those for Denver, a municipality in which the county
organization is merged with that of the city, and the autonomous cities of Richmond and Norfolk.
GROUPS OF CITIES.—-The statistical data presented in this report are arranged
in three principal population groups, for each of which, as well as for the entire 94 cities, totals are given. Group I Includes cities having a population
PART I :
7
TNTRODUCTIM
of 500,000 and over; group II, cities having a population of 300,000 and less
than 500,000; and group III, cities having a population of 100,000 and less than
300,000. The grouping is based upon the estimated population of the city as at
July 1, 1933, no later estimates having been made, except for Washington, D. C.
Data for the city and county of Honolulu are not included in the group or grand
totals of the 94 cities.
In the tables of this report, with the exception of tables 27 and 28, the
cities are arranged in the order of their estimated population, and each is
given a number corresponding to its position in the table. For convenience in
finding the position in the table of the data for each city, there is shown on
this page a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by States, with the number assigned to each. The type or plan of city government effective in 1937
also is indicated.
The location of each of these cities is shown on the map of the United
States on page VIII.
STATE AND CITY
City
number
STATE AND CITY
ALABAMA:
Birmingham l/~
LOUISIANA:
New Orleans l/—
CALIFORNIA:
Long Beach 2 / ~
Los Angeles
Oakland 2/
San Diego 2 / —
San Francisco—
MARYLAND:
Baltimore
MASSACHUSETTS:
Boston
Cambridge
Fall R i v e r —
Lowell
Lynn
New BedfordSomerville—
SpringfieldWorcester
COLORADO:
Denver—
CONNECTICUT:
BridgeportHartford
New H a v e n Wat erbury—
DELAWARE:
WilmingtonDISTRICT OF COLUMBIA:
Washington 1/
FLORIDA:
JacksonvilleMiami 2/
Tampa
GEORGIA:
Atlanta-
IOWA:
Des Moines l/~
KANSAS:
Kansas City l/~
Wichita 2/
KENTUCKY:
Louisville-
89
68
OHIO—Continued
Canton
Cincinnati 2/Cleveland
Columbus
Dayton 2/
Toledo 2/
Youngstown
OKLAHOMA:
Oklahoma City 2/Tulsa 1/
OREGON:
Portland l/PENNSYLVANIA:
Erie 1/
PhiladelphiaPittsburgh
Reading 1/
Scranton
MINNSSOTA:
Duluth 1/
Minneapolis-'
St. Paul l/~
RHODE ISLAND:
Providence-
MISSOURI:
Kansas City 2/~
St. Louis— :
TENNESSEE:
Chattanooga :
Knoxville 2 /
Memphis l/Nashville
l/—
NEW JERSEY:
Camden 1/
Elizabeth
Jersey City l/Newark 1/
Peterson
Trenton 2/
City
number
STATE AND CITY
MICHIGAN:
Detroit
Flint 2/
Grand Rapids 2/-
NEBRASKA:
Omaha
ILLINOIS:
Chicago—
Peoria—
INDIANA:
Evansville
Fort Wayne
Gary
Indianapolis-South Bend
City
number
TEXAS:
Dallas 2/
El Paso
Fort Worth 2/
Houston 1/
San Antonio 1/
UTAH:
Salt Lake City
NEW YORK:
Albany
Buffalo
New York
Rochester 2/Syracuse
Utica
Yonkers
VIRGINIA:
Norfolk 2/
Richmond—
OHIO:
WISCONSIN:
Milwaukee-
l/—\
WASHINGTON:
Seattle.
Spokane
Tacoma
'/.:
1/ Commission plan of government.
2/ Council-manager or commission-manager plan of government.
NOTE: Unless otherwise noted, during 1937 the cities listed operated under the mayor-council plan.
8
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
SECURING THE DATA.—The information presented in this report is not the result
of a mall canvass. The statistics were obtained in city and other local government fiscal offices with the close cooperation of the local officials. The data
for the present report were secured by Bureau agents or by local agents.
"Bureau agents" are employees of the Bureau of the Census trained in the
work and sent into the field to compile the report for a given city. These
Bureau agents spend a varying number of working days in preparing the detailed
report for any one city, depending upon the size of the city and the difficulty
in working up the data from the official records. When the report is received
in Washington, it is examined by the Division of State and Local Government,
which makes whatever changes or consolidations appear to be necessary; In the
case of the reports prepared by Bureau agents, this editing work is reduced to
the minimum.
"Local agents" are of two types, namely, municipal employees and ncnofficial
citizens. A municipal employee may be a person in the city controller's office,
for example; a citizen may be a private accountant or other qualified individual. Whichever of the two types is used, a local agent is selected by correspondence with the local finance officer and other officials familiar with the
financial administration of the city, the purpose being to appoint the best
qualified person available, and he is then appointed by the Director a special
agent of the Bureau. The local agents are paid at the rate of #6.00 a day for
the number of days required to compile the report, the number of such days being determined by the Bureau of the Census from previous years' experience. The
report is mailed to Washington when completed and is then reviewed—usually at
greater length than in the case of a report by a Bureau agent, although not
necessarily so, since some of the local agents have had experience in preparing
previous city financial reports for the Bureau of the Census.1
When the report on any particular city is edited and tabulated, a preliminary report is printed and sent to all names on the mailing list. This procedure allows the data on any particular city to become available many months before copy for the final report can be prepared and the finished volume received
from the press.2
The careful data-collecting process just outlined necessarily makes for a
less prompt publication of statistics than would be possible by means of a mail
canvass, but it assures a greater degree of accuracy and completeness.
To promote the maximum comparability of the statistics, the Bureau has compiled the data for each city according to uniform classifications of revenues,
expenditures, and indebtedness, so far as possible. In reporting the statistics
for any city, therefore, extensive reclassification of data in the city's records
may be necessary. For this reason, it is not possible In all cases to identify
in the Bureau's publication the various items appearing in the city's report.
During 1937, the unit of government administering certain local services and
maintaining the records of revenues and expenditures thereof, such as outdoor
relief, varied among the cities. If administered by Federal or State agencies,
the figures are not included in this report, which is limited to the official
records of cities and overlying independent local units. The differing practice
resulted in a wide variation in the statistics of revenues and payments for
these services among the cities, which should be recognized In using the figures
for comparisons.
PURPOSE OF REPORT.—The specific purpose of the reports in this series is
twofold: (a) To make financial statistics of local governments available to
those persons who have an economic interest in municipal activities, especially
officials engaged in planning and projecting municipal programs, preparing economic analyses, making estimates of national income and national wealth, and
1/ The two methods outlined were used also to compile the annual Financial Statistics of States,1937.
For the 1938 reports, both for States and for cities,a third method is also being employed, using "Bureauinstructed agents." "Bureau-instructed agents" are local persons selected by a regular Bureau field man
and instructed on the job in the methods and technique of compiling the report. Such agent is paid on a
per diem basis, $6.00 each day, for the number of working days required to complete the job.
2/ In addition to the preliminary reports for individual cities and the final consolidated report,
there is issued, prior to the final report, a Summary Bulletin containing advance information for all the
94 cities.
PART I : INTRODUCTION
9
considering relationships among the three levels of government; (b) to present
municipal financial data in a detailed form useful to those persons who have a
localized and comparative interest in one or more individual cities, especially
taxpayers, investors, administrators, and political scientists. The report also
may prove useful to Federal and State officials concerned with loans or grantsin-aid. These purposes perhaps may be accomplished directly through personal
study of the reports in this series or indirectly through interpretations and
recommendations of practical students of civic affairs and of local civic bodies.
A brief analysis of the data presented in each of the main tables comprising
Part I appears below.
TABLE 1
YEAR OF INCORPORATION AS A CITY.—In the first column of table 1 are given the
years in which the 94 municipalities included in this study were organized as
cities.
DATE OF CLOSE.OF FISCAL YEAR.—The date shown is the close of the year of the
city corporation, even though independent governmental districts or independently administered, funds may have fiscal years which do not coincide with that of
the city.
POPULATION.—The figures on population are furnished to the Division of
State and Local Government by the Division of Population. Except as indicated
by footnotes, the table shows for each city the estimated population as at July
1, 1933. The estimates at the middle of the fiscal year are employed as the
basis for the per capita data presented in some of the tables in this report
because their use results in more accurate statements of per capita transactions than v/ould be secured by using the estimated population as at either the
beginning or the close of the fiscal period.
The estimated population figures were computed as follows: The estimated
increase for the United States from the 1930 census to July 1, 1933, was computed from statistics of births, deaths, immigration, and emigration. The increase during this period,, which amounted to 2,995,000 inhabitants, was distributed among the States and cities on the basis of their proportion of the
increase for the United States between 1920 and 1930. Due allowance was made
for any annexations or detachments of territory that may have taken place and
of v/hich the Bureau was advised.
In separate columns is shown the population of each city as enumerated at
the decennial, censuses of 1930, 1920, and 1910.
AREA.—The data on area of the cities are furnished to the Division of State
and Local Government by the Division of Geography. These data show the land
area subject to the administration of the city corporation on July 1, 1937.
TABLE 2
Information on the number of municipal employees—first made available in
the 1936 issue of this series of reports—was collected on a nonfunctional
basis for 1937, supplemented for the first time by pay roll data. As with other
tables in this report, the figures include a proportionate part of the employee
and pay roll data of all independent units of local government covered as part
of the "city." These figures are presented in table 2.
NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES AND AMOUNT OF PAY ROLLS.-The number of employees of 88 cities, at quarterly intervals, is reported, with a separation of permanent employees from temporary, seasonal, and emergency employees. Except where otherwise noted, school employees have been included, but persons on work relief and
employees of contractors were excluded from the report.
Data on the amount of pay rolls for the calendar year 1937, which v/ere
available for 81 cities, are also shown in table 2. In comparing pay roll figures with number of employees reported, it should be remembered that part-time
10
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
and temporary employees have "been included without any estimate of their "fulltime equivalent," so average earnings of all employees shown are probably lower
than the average salaries of full-time employees only.
It is significant that all cities, even of the population groups covered in
this study, do not maintain a readily available record of public employment and
pay rolls.3 It is true that the data might be assembled, at a considerable expenditure of time, from existing pay roll records in the various departments
and funds. Even then, however, duplications of names appearing on two or more
pay rolls, because of part-time employment in different departments or offices,
might occur.
An ideal control would be one by a personnel office having a
record of all municipal employees, the dates of their entrance into the service
and of their separation from the service,rate and amount of compensation, and
related data.4
INAUGURATION OF NEW SERIES.—Beginning with January 1940, the Bureau is changing its report on the number of employees and amount of pay rolls of cities
to a State and Local Government Quarterly Employment Survey, consisting of a
mail canvass with a quarterly publication of results. This new series covers—
in addition to cities oyer 100,000 population—all States,all cities over 5,000
population, all counties over 50,000 population, all townships over 10,000 population, and a representative sample of smaller cities, counties, and townships.
3/ The personnel records in State governments are also incomplete.
4/ Forms for instituting and maintaining personnel service-records are presented
Public Administration Circular No. 1, W.- P. A. Technical Series (August 28, 1937).
and described
in
PART I : INTRODUCTION
11
TABLE 1.—-YEAR OF INCORPORATION, FISCAL YEAR, POPULATION, AND AREA: 1937
POPULATION
Year
of
incorporation
as a
city
p a t e of
(close o f
L year
Estimated
as at
July 1,
1933
Land a r e a
(acres)
July 1,1937
Decennial census
Apr.
1,
1930
Jan.
1,
1920
Apr. 1 5 ,
1910
2,792,803.1
Grand t o t a l -
22,131,800
4,612,500
10,929,512
Group I
Group I I —
Group I I I -
21,315,411
4,492,864
10,617,363
17,264,019
3,762,796
8,470,194
13,842,358
3,066,638
6,339,627
1,098,855.8
473,862.7
1,220,084.6
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
1653
1837
Chicago, 111.
1683
Philadelphia, P a . —
1824
Detroit, Mich.
1
1851
Los Angeles, Calif,
1836
Cleveland, Ohio
1822
St. Louis, Mo.
31,1937
31,1937
31,1937
< 30,1937
i 30, 1937
31,1937
Apt, 12,1937
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif,
Washington, D. C.
1
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
Dejs.
Dec.
Dec.
June
June
Dec.
June
1796
1822
1816
1850
1802
1846
1832
31,1937
31,1937
31,1937
30,1937
30,1937
31,1937
30,1937
7,154,300
3,490,700
1,972,700
1,666,100
1,354,100
918,400
830,300
6,930,446
3,376,438
1,950,961
1,568,662
1,238,048
900,429
821,960
5,620,048
2,701,705
1,823,779
993,678
576,673
796,841
772,897
4,766,883
2,185,283
1,549,008
465,766
319,198
560,663
687,029
191,360.0
132,267.2
81,920.0
88,255.6
287,594.0
46,774.0
39,276.8
817,100
786,900
678,500
656,200
1/ 623,000
599,100
584,400
804,874
781,188
669,817
634,394
486,869
578,249
573,076
733,8?e
748,06u
588,343
506,676
437,571
457,147
506,775
558,485
670,585
533,905
416 ,912
331,069
373,857
423,715
50,380.8
28,096.0
33,365.2
26,880.0
39,680.0
27,745.2
25,261.0
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
15
16
17
18
19
20
Minneapolis, Minn.— 1867
1805
1819
Cincinnati, Ohio
1836
1853
1869
Seattle, Wash.
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
Apr.
Dec.
31, 1937
31,1937
31,1937
31,1937
30,1937
31, 1937
477,700
471,000
460,100
447,000
412,600
374,100
464,356
458,762
451,160
442,337
399,746
365,583
380,582
387,219
401,247
414,524
324,410
315,312
301,408
339,075
363,591
347,469
248,381
237,194
34,443.3
127,808.0
45,995.5
10,927.0
37,395.2
43,840.0
21
22
23
24
25
26
Indianapolis, I n d . — 1831
1834
Jersey City, N. J . — 1827
1839
1824
Louisville, Ky.
1851
Portland, Oreg.
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
Aug.
Nov.
31, 1937
31, 1937
31, 1937
31,1937
31,1937
30,1937
372,100
333,500
319,900
317,900
317,500
309,100
364,161
328,132
316,715
292,352
307,745
301,815
314,194
295,750
298,103
138,276
234,891
258,288
233,650
218,149
267,779
78,800
223,928
207,214
33,600.0
21,924.8
8,320.0
45,970.5
23,024.0
40,614.4
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
27
28
29 Oakland, Calif.
30 Denver, Colo.
31 Atlanta, Ga.
32
33 St. Paul, Minn.
34 Birmingham, Ala.
35 Akron, Ohio
36
1816
1837
1854
1859
1847
Dec.
Dec.
June
Dec.
Dec.
31,1937
31,1937
30,1937
31,1937
31,1937
299,700
298,900
295,600
293,200
280,400
290,564
290,718
284,063
287,861
270,366
237,031
243,164
216,261
256,491
200,616
181,511
168,497
150,174
213,381
154,839
24,551.7
23,304.4
34,023.0
37,085.0
21,932.8
1856
1854
1871
1836
1849
Sept.
Dec.
Aug.
Dec.
Dec.
30,1937
31,1937
31,1937
31,1937
31,1937
278,000
277,900
273,300
265,100
261,500
260,475
271,606
259,678
255,040
253,143
158,976
234,698
178,806
208,435
162,351
92,104
214,744
132,685
69,067
131,105
26,147.5
33,423.4
32,128.4
34,444.0
29,209.6
1832
1837
1857
1848
1841
37
38
39
40
41
Providence, R. I . — San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Sept. 30,1937
May 31, 1937
Dec. 31,1937
Dec. 31,1937
Dec. 31,1937
255,600
243,500
217,800
214,500
206,600
252,981
231,542
214,006
209,326
200,982
237,595
161,379
191,601
171,717
152,559
224,326
96,614
124,096
137,249
116,577
11,462.0
22,860.5
24,866.8
16,000.5
15,175.7
42
43
44
45
46
Oklahoma City, Okla.- 1891 June 30,1937
Worcester, Mass.*
1848 Dec. 31,1937
Richmond, Va.1782 Jan. 31,1938
1868 Dec. 31,1937
Grand Rapids, Mich.—J 1850 Mar. 31,1937
201,400
198,000
184,900
174,200
172,800
185,389
195,311
182,929
170,002
168,592
91,295
179,754
171,667
132,358
137,634
64,205
145,986
127,628
79,066
112,571
16,064.0
23,808.0
15,360.0
21,544.0
14,735.0
See footnotes at end of table.
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
12
TABLE 1.—TEAR OF INCORPORATION, FISCAL YEAR, POPULATION, AND AREA: 1937—Contlnued
Year
of
inDate of
corclose of
po raf
i
s
c a l year
tion
as a
city
Estimated
as at
July 1,
1933
Land area
(acres)
July 1, 1937
Decennial census
Apr. 1
1930
Jan. 1,
1920
Apr. 15,
1910
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
1872
1784
1855
1784
1 1850
Sept.
Mar.
June
Dec.
June
30,1937
31,1937
30,1937
31,1937
30,1937
169,200
168,500
167,200
162,700
160,100
163,447
164,072
156,492
162,655
147,995
106,482
138,036
91,599
162,537
74,361
73,312
98,915
38,550
133,605
39,578
29,696.0
10,162.9
18,771.8
11,445.0
60,989.6
June
Dec.
Dec.
June
Mar.
30,1937
31,1937
31,1937
30,1937
31,1937
157,000
156,200
153,400
148,000
147,300
142,032
153,866
149,900
141,258
146,716
55,593
118,342
129,614
72,075
143,555
17,809
110,364
Bridgeport, Conn.—
1897
1806
1852
1903
1836
18,182
102,054
18 ,,985.7
13,583.6
20,288.0
13,506.3
9,370.0
Des Moines , I o w a — —
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J.
1857
1866
1851
1872
1851
Mar.
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
31,1937
31,1937
31,1937
31,1937
31,1937
145,300
144,400
144,200
140,500
139,000
142,559
143,433
140,267
134,646
138,513
126,468
137,783
118,110
100,176
135,875
86,368
129,867
92,777
79,803
125,600
34,310.3
12,361.7
33,560.6
11,000.0
5 ,,157.0
Jacksonville, F l a . —
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.—•
1822
1686
1845
1792
1851
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
Sept.
31,1937
31,1937
31, 1937
31,1937
30,1937
138,900
129,800
2/ 129,710
124,100
123,500
129,549
127,412
129,710
123,356
119,798
91,558
113,344
115,777
119,289
57,895
57,699
100,253
67,452
96,815
44,604
19,129.6
12.,147.0
17,920.0
4„630.0
17., 548.8
Kansas City, K a n s . — | 1886
Fort Wayne, I n d . —
1839
Camden, N. J.
1828
Erie, Pa.
1851
Elizabeth, N. J. — '
1855
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
Jan.
Dec.
31, 1937
31,1937
31,1937
3, 1938
31,1937
123,400
120,100
119,100
118,300
117,900
121,857
114,946
118,700
115,967
114,589
101,177
86,549
116,309
93,372
95,783
82,331
63,933
94,538
66,525
73,409
12,938.2
10,955.0
5,554.0
10,368.0
6,231.9
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall Hiver, Mass.
Cambridge, Mass.
New Bedford, M a s s . — •
1871
1883
1854
1846
1847
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
31,1937
31,1937
31,1937
31,1937
31,1937
117,600
116,600
2/ 115,274
114,300
2/ 112,597
111,110
115,514
115,274
113,643
112,597
72,217
104,437
120,485
109,694
121,217
52,450
104,402
119,295
104,839
96,652
13,489.0
26,547.2
21,056.0
3,968.0
12,160.0
Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, Tenn.Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.Tacoma, Wash.
1847
1815
1845
1865
1875
Jan.
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
3, 1938
31,1937
31,1937
31,1937
31,1937
111,800
110,600
109,800
109,600
108,200
111,171
105,802
104,969
104,193
106,817
107,784
77,818
76,121
70,983
96,965
96,071
36,346
66,950
53,684
83,743
6,119.2
16,896.0
8,218.8
10,793.2
29,728.0
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.Tampa, Fla.
1896
1909
1854
1832
1887
June 30,1937
Dec. 31,1937
Dec. 31,1937
June 30,1937
May 31, 1937
108,200
108,000
107,500
2/ 106,597
106,500
110,637
100,426
104,906
106,597
101,161
29,571
55,378
87,091
110,168
51,608
5,471
16,802
50,217
87,411
37,782
19,386.0
25,811.4
8,716.0
6,243.8
12,160.0
Somerville, Mass.
El Paso, Tex.
Evansvllle, Ind.
Lynn, Mass.
1871
1873
1847
1850
Dec.
Feb.
Dec.
Dec.
31,1937
28,1937
31,1937
31,1937
105,800
105,800
105,100
102,900
103,908
102,421
102,249
102,320
93,091
77,560
85,264
99,148
77,236
39,279
69,647
89,336
2,496.0
8,549.0
5,577.0
6,720.0
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn. 3/Lowell, Mass.
1832
1870
1853
1836
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
31,1937
31,1937
31,1937
31,1937
102,600
101,900
101,300
2 / 100,234
101,740
101,463
99,902
100,234
94,156
98,917
91,715
112,759
74,419
73,141
106,294
10,258.0
39,897.6
17,981.0
8,576.0
Dec. 31,1937
2/ 202,923
Fort Worth, T e x . —
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, C o n n . —
San Diego, Calif.
Long Beach, C a l i f . —
Nashville, Tenn.
1
Springfield, Mass..-—J
Tulsa, Okla.
Honolulu, Hawaii 4/—\ 1907
1/
2/
3/
4/
5/
123,527
88,926
78,466
1.5/)
Estimate as at middle of fiscal year, January 1, 1936.
Population April 1, 1930; no estimate made.
Included because the estimated population at the middle of i t s fiscal year 1930 was over 100,000.
Not included in group or grand t o t a l s .
Not reported.
PART I : INTRODUCTION
13
TABLE 2.—EMPLOYEES AND PAY ROLLS: 1937
NUMBER OF EMPLOlEES
Permanent
Temporary,
seasonal, and
emergency
Permanent
Temporary,
seasonal, and
emergency
Temporary,
Permanent
al, and
emergency
Permanent
40,501
Grand t o t a l 278,791
72,550
136,054
Group I
Group II —
Group III-
12,663
3,951
12,438
245,836
72,262
128,442
23,738
3,268
13,495
221,271
56,769
100,430
15,524
3,410
13,413
246,115
64,934
130,419
Temporary,
seasonal, and
emergency
Pay r o l l s
for
f i s c a l year
29,740
$859,822,860
13,336
2,589
13,815
522,890,161
104,650,217
232,282,482
$103,993,899
61,242,639
83,350,314
60,015,733
28,151,319
25,568,599
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y. 1/Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
51,912
34,694
35,900
30,609
16,176
14,279
(2/)
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
1
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif,
Washington, D. C . —
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
11,922
23,031
12,860
10,302
12,676
12,555
11,875
4,788
(2/)
187
18
1,001
965
716
2,262
1,791
51,798
33,166
37,434
31,787
15,944
14,486
(2/)
341
12
12,061
307
4,931
49,825
24,113
36,673
30,492
15,689
11,026
(2/)
584
49
1,804
1,699
4,961
52,455
33,170
36,911
30,736
16,716
14,967
(2/)
51
148
1,083
1,139
4,707
li/)
(i/>
(i/>
(1/)
(l/>
207
1,183
751
2,472
1,814
0/)
801
1,211
604
2,349
1,121
(±/>
(A/)
(1/)
13,061
10,274
12,876
12,604
12,406
13,361
10,215
12,699
12,942
11,943
(!/>
9,308
10,282
12,810
9,369
11,684
(!/>
(1/)
801
1,186
638
1,940
1,643
(1/)
39,445,721
24,684,141
23,959,562
23,902,333
25,383,278
23,192,623
1,330
63
293
(1/)
(2/)
(1/)
$14,844,188
20,414,500
5,247,720
11,886,391
117
177
267
(2/)
63
279
9,287,221
13,313,863
7,965,635
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn. 1/1
New Orleans, La.
Cincinnati, Ohio
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, Mo.
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.
Rochester, N. Y . —
Jersey City, N. J.
Houston, Tex.
L o u i s v i l l e , Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
6,701
9,822
11,157
7,868
6,880
1,330
132
256
680
(2/)
6,701
9,822
11,282
7,554
6,798
1,350
48
337
309
(2/)
6,165
7,528
3,664
4,892
3,016
4,857
243
301
259
(2/)
(2/)
745
6,189
7,523
3,674
4,892
3,010
4,817
280
320
288
(2/)
(2/)
336
6,701
7,239
11,386
u/)
6,182
6,195
5,321
3,678
2,253
3,056
4,758
1,350
215
401
(1/)
(2/)
6,701
9,783
11,610
239
463
307
(2/)
84
351
6,217
7,485
3,680
4,892
3,012
4,845
(J/)
6,709
(A/>
4,353,620
17,337,079
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, O h i o Toledo, Ohio 1/Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
•
5,227
5,176
4,410
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.Akron, Ohio
Memphis, T e n n . —
4,385
(l/>
3,194
3,250
3,662
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.-Dayton, Ohio
1
Oklahoma City, Okla.|
Worcester, Mass.Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, OhioGrand Rapids, Mich.-|
5,041
3,023
4,400
585
582
70
5,209
3,077
4,420
645
373
(2/)
4,427
80
4,489
(1/)
3,221
3,310
3,610
(1/)
(2/)
342
211
(1/)
1,406
1,531
3,761
127
(1/)
43
375
224
4,545
3,403
3,313
3,313
3,767
37
120
471
171
(1/)
4,139,309
5,744,079
4,161,906
2,465
577
97
757
130
4,915
(1/)
2,477
3,640
2,663
1,664
(1/)
172
850
226
5,881
(1/)
3,652
2,748
2,545
(1/)
172
745
194
9,535,956
2,344,791
3,807,329
7,151,636
4,419,083
164
9
330
(2/)
124
2,208
2,474
1,860
921
1,264
171
53
144
162
148
2,283
3,634
2,964
2,086
2,254
156
19
72
(2/)
131
3,700,195
7,767,807
4,949,581
3,768,439
3,479,445
5,230
3,006
4,417
82
11/)
(2/)
222
328
5,006
3,322
2,487
3,591
2,603
2,492
372
170
4,942
3,349
2,486
3,559
2,629
2,417
3,843
3,089
1,952
2,230
157
52
268
(2/)
107
2,435
3,820
3,027
2,020
2,245
See footnotes at end of t a b l e .
83
777
$5,424,435
2,843
1,360
460
542
503
435
(2/)
2,488
9,009,888
9,278,748
6,409,000
6,074,270
FINANCIAL STiVTISTICS OF CITIES
14
TABLE 2 . — EMPLOYEES AND PAY ROLLS: 1937—Continued
NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES
City number
Permanent
Temporary,
seasona l , and
emergency
Permanent
October 1
July 1
April 1
January 1
CITY
Temporary,
seasona l , and
emergency
Permanent
Temporary,
seasona l , and
emergency
Permanent
Temporary,
seasona l , and
emergency
Pay r o l l s
for
f i s c a l year
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 — C o n t i n u e d
Fort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.
San Diego, C a l i f . —
(1/)
3,662
993
3,164
2,455
(1/)
20
34
116
340
Long Beach, Calif. 1/1
Nashville, Tenn.
1
Springfield, Mass.Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, C o n n . —
2,271
3,333
(1/)
2,552
60
(2/)
(1/)
505
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, Utah]
Yonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J . —
2,005
1,914
2,380
2,972
2,102
200
123
25
Jacksonville, Fla.' 4/1,333
2,140
Albany, N. Y.
1,903
Norfolk, Va.
1,982
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn. 1/1
163
3,622
962
3,101
2,518
2,440
(1/)
965
2,465
935
1,879
1,329
71
(1/)
1,547
(1/)
984
1,734
2,005
1,969
955
2,969
2,099
200
115
75
16
1,089
1,969
955
2,622
2,099
(1/)
2,156
1,903
(1/)
106
20
(1/)
608
2,559
108
91
138
438
2,586
2,505
3,077
2,365
67
2,377
3,238
(1/)
2,556
0/)
(1/)
842
200
266
216
195
125
2,005
1,969
2,177
1,903
(1/)
311
3
(1/)
2,178
1,903
(1/)
U/)
44
3
(i/>
U/)
340
10
333
108
132
739
1,337
1,558
1,560
1,597
356
10
331
77
138
739
1,337
863
1,649
360
13
359
92
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, W a s h . —
1
Fall River, M a s s . —
Cambridge, Mass.
1,368
1,265
1,974
2,312
40
107
36
22
(1/)
1,369
1,269
1,984
2,360
1,821
65
201
37
1,365
1,267
1,947
2,375
176
406
40
144
1,367
1,267
1,961
2,373
(1/)
1,383
164
1,395
$1,321,044
6,039,433
3,825,156
5,014,488
4,531,685
3,332,908
5,1309,358
2,658,081
647
200
99
20
299
102
2,862
2,094
739
1,337
1,569
1,555
1,596
1/394
56
111
104
306
955
Kansas City, Kans.—
Fort Wayne, Ind.
Camden, N. J.
—
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J.
New Bedford, Mass.—
(2/)
(1/)
370
32
3,610,154
5 / l , 832,637
4,935,934
6,929,338
4,064,287
4/ 2,114,995
4,282,001
2,740,117
(1/)
739
1,337
1,573
1,651
1,594
343
10
333
85
146
1,172,264
2,038,581
2,993,881
2,679,556
3,1309,731
74
270
22
170
5/ 1,787,464
2,814,963
2,487,125
4,552,135
(1/)
(1/)
Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, Tenn. l/-
1,417
83
2,382,482
Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.-—-|
Tacoma, Wash.
1,174
1,082
1,122
146
58
74
1,152
1,082
1,109
606
123
86
1,150
573
976
484
69
81
1,163
1,082
1,017
444
58
41
2,226,389
1,836,449
2,637,970
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.Tampa, F l a . ~
1,050
1,451
1,407
1,757
1,546
1,406
838
1,865
976
1,520
1,462
(1/)
1,066
1,025
1,516
1,538
(l/>
1,865
617
6
1,439
100
(2/)
405
1,713
1,865
685
5
1,421
(1/)
(2/)
M\
3,176,904
2,478,264
4,391,296
1,675,557
2,143,385
Somerville, Mass.
El Paso, Tex. 4 / Evansville, Ind.Lynn, Mass.
1,603
480
1,258
1,564
184
24
27
50
1,608
466
1,259
1,666
179
31
30
1,545
492
642
1,083
89
34
82
77
1,665
252
57
37
56
3,141,531
717,636
2,045,234
2,992,176
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.Lowell, M a s s . - —
1,553
1,721
2,127
1,682
225
219
142
(1/)
1,516
1,720
2,123
158
107
19
(1/)
1,009
2,117
(1/)
156
233
162
(1/)
1,467
1,755
2,102
(1/)
152
184
56
3,074,135
3,076,586
3,382,279
2,360,996
1/
2/
3/
4/
5/
(I/)
Not reported.
Included with permanent.
School pay r o l l only.
Exclusive of schools.
Exclusive of pay r o l l for 379 employees.
(1/)
(2/)
496
1,259
1,697
{
(2/)
(1/)
PART II. GENERAL GOVERNMENT
(For Public-Service Enterprises, see Part III)
15
S e c t i o n A:
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Revenues
3.—Summary of revenues, by major sources and by divisions of municipal government:
1937
4.—Per capita revenues, by major sources: 1937
5.—Percent distribution of revenues, by major sources: 1937
6.—Revenues from general property and other local taxes: 1937
7.—Revenues from licenses and permits: 1937
8.—Revenues from fines, forfeits, and penalties and from use of money and property:
1937
9.—Revenues from proportionately-shared State taxes, by purpose and source: 1937
10.—Revenues from State grants, by purpose and source: 1937
11.—Revenues from grants from counties and other local units and rrcan the Federal
Government, by purpose: 1937
12.—Revenues from private sources, from contributions from public-service enterprises, and from special assessments: 1937
13.—Revenues from charges for current services, by principal services: 1937
S e c t i o n B: Cost P a y m e n t s
Table 14.—Summary of cost payments, by character and by divisions of municipal government:
1937
Table 15.—Per capita and percent distribution of cost payments, by character: 1937
Table 16.—Cost payments for operation and maintenance, by functions in detail: 1937
Table 17.—Cost payments for operation and maintenance, total and per capita, by major
functions: 1937
Table 18.—Percent distribution of cost payments for operation and maintenance, by major
functions: 1937
Table 19.—Cost payments for interest: 1937
'fable 20.—Cost paymeuts for outlays, by major functions: 1937
Table 21.—Method of financing capital outlays: 1937
S e c t i o n C: D e b t and S p e c i f i e d
Table 22.—Gross and net debt, total and
by character; and increase
1937
Table 23.—Bonded debt at close of year,
Table 24.—Bonded debt at close of year,
Table 25.—Issue and retirement of debt:
Table 26.—Amount of specified assets at
Assets
per capita; gross debt by unit of government and
during the year in debt and sinking-fund assets:
by purpose of issue: 1937
by rate of interest: 1937
1937
close of year: 1937
Section D: Assessed Valuation and Tax Levies
Table 27.—Assessed valuation and tax levies, total and per capita: 1937
Table 28.—Assessed valuation and tax levies in cities having divisions of government with
two or more tax rates: 1937
16
PART II. GENERAL GOVERNMENT
The second part of this volume is devoted to a detailed presentation of the
finances of the 94 cities, but is limited to what is here called "general government" as distinguished from public-service enterprises.
Attention is directed to the change in terminology adopted with the presentation of this 1937
report. Formerly, the term "general government" was used to indicate the legislative, judicial, and general administrative functions of municipal government,
whereas all municipal authority other than public-service enterprises was
termed "general departments." It has seemed preferable to introduce, despite
its length, the expression "general administrative, legislative, and judicial"
to replace the tern "general government," and to substitute the term "general
government" for "general departments" to denote all municipal functions except
public-service enterprises.
Part II of the report is divided into four sections: Revenues, Cost Payments, Debt and Specified Assets, and Assessed Valuations and Tax Levies. The
data and discussion relate only to general government; excluded, therefore, are
revenues, payments, and indebtedness of public-service enterprises owned by the
cities, whether operated or leased to others, information on which is presented
as part III of this volume.
SECTION A: REVENUES (Tables 3 to 13, inclusive)
As was pointed out in the Introduction, numerous changes in classification
have been found necessary since the issuance of the 1936 report on Financial
Statistics of Cities. As a result, the revenue figures for earlier years were
rendered incomparable to some extent, but an effort has been made to retain
comparability wherever possible. In order to facilitate the effective use of
this report in conjunction with earlier reports in the same series, figure 1 is
presented on the following pages, showing precisely the changes that have been
made in the 1937 revenue classification as compared with the 1936 report. In
this figure the revenue classifications for 1937 and 1936 are placed in parallel columns. The numbers following the names of the revenue sources show the
corresponding classification for the other year. For example, the amounts under
item 23, "Sales and service taxes," in 1937, were in 1936 classified under item
142, "Business license taxes—all other." However, the numbers following this
latter item indicate that it did not consist solely of these amounts but that
it also contained items 3212 to 3218, inclusive, parts of items 22 and 6114, and
all of items 6122 and 613 in the 1937 classification. From this it will be seen
that the 1937 item 23 can be directly compared with no item in the classification for 1936 and prior years. Thus, figure 1 not only indicates the changes
made in 1937 over 1936 but also shows the extent to which the amounts included
in the items in the 1937 classification are, or are not, comparable with the
revenue items for 1936 and prior years.1
The 94 cities in this study reported total revenues2 of $2,708,292,876 for
1937, Including $31,636,434 transferred to general government from the accounts
of the municipally-owned public-service enterprises. Of this total revenue,
general property taxes accounted for 65.2 percent; followed by grants, 15.0 percent; other local taxes and licenses, 6.4 percent; locally-shared State taxes,
3.6 percent; 3.1 percent from charges for current services; and miscellaneous,
6.7 percent.
1/ The 1936 revenue receipts classification has been rearranged somewhat so that the main headings
will be opposite those in the 1937 classification.
2/ Revenues are derived, not only from taxation, but also from certain other sources of municipal income, including Federal and State grants; but revenues do not include borrowings. See also definition,
p. 324, infra.
17
18
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
FIGURE 1.—CHART COMPARING 1937 CLASSIFICATION OF REVENUES WITH 1936
CLASSIFICATION OF REVENUE RECEIPTS
NOTE: Numbers following names of functions and activities show
tion in the other year.
Revenues 1957
1 General property taxes 11
11 Current year's levies 111
111 Real property 111
112 Personal property 111
1121 Tangible personal 111
1122 Intangible personal 111
12 Prior years' levies 112
121 Real property 112
122 Personal property 112
1221 Tangible personal 112
1222 Intangible personal112
13 Penalties and interest 113
2 Other local taxes 12, 13, 142, 2
21 Property taxes on other than
assessed valuation 121
211 Public-utility taxes 121
212 All other 121
22 Business taxes 2, 142
221 Public utilities 2, 142
2211 Privately-owned 2, 142
2212 Publicly-owned 2, 142
222 All other 122, 142
23 Sales and service taxes 142
24 Poll taxes 13
25 All other 122
3 Licenses and permits 102, 14, 15, 2
31 Licenses and permits for use of
street 102, 142, 152, 153, 2
311 Motor vehicles 152
312 Other vehicles 152
313 Parking meters 102
314 Street privileges 2
32 Other licenses and permits 14, 151,
153
321 Business licenses 14
3211 Alcoholic beverage 141
3212 Health 142
3213 Police and protective
142
3214 Amusement 142
3215 Manufacturing 142
3216 Merchandising 142
3217 Professional and occu-
corresponding classifica-
Revenue Receipts 1956
1 Receipts from taxes 1, 2, 311, 312, 32, 61
11 General property tax 1
111 Current levy 11
112 Prior years' levies 12
113 Penalties and interest 13
12 Special taxes 21, 25, 6111.. 6114, 614
121 Property 21, 6114
122 All other 25, 6111, 6114, 614
13 Poll taxes 24, 6114
14 Business license taxes 22, 23, 321,
6113, 6114, 6122, 613
141 Liquor 3211, 6113
142 All other 22, 23, 3212-5218,
6114, 6122, 613
15 Nonbusiness license taxes 311, 312,
322, 6112, 6121
151 Dog licenses 3221
152 General licenses 311, 312,
6112, 6121
153 Permits 3222-3225
2 Receipts from highway privileges 22, 314
3 Receipts from fines, forfeits, and
escheats 41, 42, 653
31 Court fines and forfeits 41
32 Commercial forfeits 42
33 Escheats 653
p a t i o n a l 142
3218 All other 142
322 Nonbusiness licenses and
permits 151, 153
3221 Animal 151
3222 Marriage 153
3223 Burial 153
3224 Building structure and
equipment 153
3225 All other 153
4 Fines, forfeits, and penalties 31, 32,
101, 102
41 Fines 31
42 Forfeits 32
43 Penalties 101, 102
5 Revenue from use of money and property
4, 5
51 Interest 4
511 On bank deposits 4
5111 General funds 44
5112 Sinking funds 41
5113 Public trust funds 42
5114 All other 43
4 Receipts from interest 51
41 Sinking funds 5112, 5122
42 Public trust funds 5113, 5123
43 Investment funds and from investments 5114, 5124
44 Current deposits 5111, 5121
5 Receipts from rent of investment properties 52
51 Public trust funds 52
52 Investment funds and from miscellaneous real property 52
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—REVENUES
FIGURE 1 . — C H A R T COMPARING 1937 CLASSIFICATION OF REVENUES WITH 1936
CLASSIFICATION OF REVENUE RECEIPTS—Continued
(See note at head of figure)
5 Revenue from use of money and property
4, 5—Continued
51 Interest 4—Continued
512 On investments 4
5121 General funds 44
5122 Sinking funds 41
5123 Public trust funds 42
5124 All other 43
52 Rents and royalties 5
6 Revenues from other agencies 12, 13, 14,
33, 152, 6, 7, 8, 10A
61 Revenues from State shared taxes
12, 13, 14, 152
611 For general purposes 12, 13,
14, 152
6111 From individual income
taxes 122
6112 From motor vehicle
licenses 152
6113 From alcoholic beverage revenues 141
6114 From other specified
sources 12, 13, 142
612 For highways 142, 152
6121 From motor vehicle
licenses 152
6122 From motor vehicle
fuel taxes 142
613 For pension funds from business license taxes (insurance) 142
614 For debt service from inheritance taxes 122
62 Revenues from State grants 62
621 For schools 621
6211 From unspecified
sources 621
6212 From specified
sources 621
62121 Individual income taxes
621
62122 General sales
taxes 621
62123 Other 621
622 For charities 622
6221 From unspecified
sources 622
6222 From general sales
taxes 622
623 For highways 622
6231 From unspecified
sources 622
6232 From specified
sources 622
62321 Motor vehicle
fuel taxes
622
62322 Motor vehicle
licenses 622
624 For health and hospitals from
unspecified sources 622
625 For other specified purposes
622
6251 From unspecified
sources 622
6252 From personal property
taxes 622
626 For unspecified purposes from
general sales taxes 622
Receipts from grants-in-aid by other
civil divisions 62, 63, 64
61 Federal Government 64
62 S t a t e 62
621 For education 621
622 For other 622-626
63 County 63
631 For education 6312
632 For other 6311, 6313
19
20
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
FIGURE 1.—CHART COMPARING 1937 CLASSIFICATION OF REVENUES WITH 1936
CLASSIFICATION OF REVENUE RECEIPTS—Continued
(See note at head of figure)
6 Revenues from other agencies 12, 13, 14,
53, 152, 6, 7, 8, 10A—Continued
63 Revenues from grants by counties
and other l o c a l u n i t s 61, 63
631 County and other l o c a l u n i t
g r a n t s for: 63
6311 Highways 632
6312 Schools 631
6513 All other 632
64 Federal grants for: 61
641 P.W.A. 61
642 All other 61
65 Revenue from private sources 33, 7, 8
651 Pension assessments 7
6511 Policemen 71
6512 Firemen 72
6513 School teachers 73
6514 All other 74
652 Donations and contributions 8
653 Unclaimed moneys 33
66 From public-service enterprises 10Aa
7 Special assessments for capital outlay 92
8 Service charges for current services 10,
91*
81 General administrative, legislative,
and judicial 101, 102
811 Court c o s t s , f e e s , and
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
charges (not fines) 101
812 Recording of legal instruments 101, 102
813 All other 101
Public safety 102 b
821 Police charges 102
822 Fire-protection services 102
823 Protective inspection fees
102
824 Weights and measures 102
825 Inspectors' examination
fees 102
826 Pounds 102
827 Scales 0
828 All other 102
Highways 91, 105 b
831 Street and sidewalk assessments 91
852 Street lighting rates or
charges 91, 105
853 Bridge and tunnel tolls0
834 All other 105
Sanitation 91, 104
841 Sewage charges 104
842 Street sanitation charges 91,
104
843 Waste collection and disposal
charges 91, 104
844 All other 104
Health 103
851 Vital statistics 103
852 Health inspection fees 103
853 Clinic fees 103
854 All other 103
Hospitals 106
861 Hospital fees 106
862 All other 106
Charities 106
871 Institutional receipts 106
872 General relief 106
873 All other 106
Correction 106
881 Institutional industry
earnings 106
882 All other 106
7 Receipts from pension assessments 651
71 Policemen 6511
72 Firemen 6512
73 School teachers 6515
74 All other 6514
8 Receipts from donations by private
persons and corporations 652
81 For principal of public trust
funds 652
82 All other 652
9 Receipts from special assessments and
special charges 7, 851, 832,842,843
91 For operation and maintenance 831,
832, 842, 843
92 For outlays 7
10 Receipts from earnings of general departments 8, 43, 315
101 General government 81, 45
102 Protection to person and property 812, 821-826, 828, 45, 515
105 Conservation of health 85
104 Sanitation 84
105 Highways 832, 834
106 Charities, hospitals, and corrections 86, 87, 88
107 Education 89, 89A
1071 Schools 89
1072 Libraries 89A
108 Recreation 89B1, 89B3-89B6
109 Miscellaneous 89C5
10A Receipts from earnings of publicservice enterprises6
21
PART II: GENERAL GOVERMDSNT—REVENUES
FIGURE 1.—CHART COMPARING 1937 CLASSIFICATION OF REVENUES WITH 1936
CLASSIFICATION OF REVENUE RECEIPTS—Continued
(See note at head of figure)
8 Service charges for current services 10, I
91 b —Continued
89 Schools 1071
89A L i b r a r i e s 1072
89B Recreation 108 b
89B1 Golf fees 108
89B2 Auditorium and stadium fees 0
89B3 Other admission and use
fees 108
89B4 Concessions 108
89B5 Refectories (net) 108
89B6 All other 108
89C Miscellaneous 109 b
89C1 Markets 0
89C2 Cemeteries and crematories 0
89C3 All other 109
I
a/ In 1937 the transactions of public-service enterprises are reported separately from general government transactions. The item From public-service enterprises consists of enterprise earnings that are
turned over to the general fund. In 1936, all public-service enterprise revenue receipts were included
in item 10A.
b/ This total figure includes some items classified as public-service enterprises in 1936. These are
indicated by footnotes.
c/ Formerly classified as a public-service enterprise.
DEFINITIONS. — A t the close of this volume (see pages 323-327) may be found
definitions of the terms used in the report.
GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES.—Although receipts from the general property tax still
constitute the largest single item of municipal Income, its relative importance
continued to decline in 1937. For many years the property tax was the principal
support of both local and state government, under which practice the local governmental units in effect supported the States. In more recent times the situation has been reversed; the States have . abandoned the property tax as an important source of revenue3 and, in addition, are making substantial contributions to the support of local government through grants and shared taxes. With
the yield of property taxes narrowed because of tax delinquency,tax limitation,
homestead and industrial exemption, and other factors, local government has
been faced with an acute need for supplemental sources of revenues. Since it
has been found that the former practice of supplementing local revenue through
special assessments has the same limits of practicability as the general property tax, and since most revenue sources alternative to 'the property tax are
not readily susceptible of local administration, the natural consequence has
been for local governments to obtain an increasing proportion of their revenue
through the indirect source of grants or shared taxes. Some local governments
have experimented with various forms of sales taxes, and others have become increasingly dependent upon licenses and municipally-owned public-service enteiprises to provide funds for general governmental purposes.
The importance of general property taxes in relation to total municipal
revenue varies widely among the 94 cities considered. For example, the following cities received over 80 percent of all revenue from the general property
tax: Waterbury and Des Moines over 88 percent; New Haven and Erie, 86 percent;
Bridgeport, 83 percent; Hartford, 82 percent; Kansas City, Kans., 81 percent;
and Portland, Oreg., 80 percent.
In contrast, other cities reported general
property tax receipts in 1937 amounting to less than half of their total revenue. In the case of Jacksonville, only 39.6 percent of total revenues was
from general property taxes; almost a third of all its revenue was derived
from public-service enterprises owned 'by the city, and a substantial proportion of the balance came from grants. Turning to Birmingham, it is found that
only 47.4 percent of its total 1937 revenue came from general property taxes,
large amounts being derived from grants, business licenses and permits, and
3/ State property taxes accounted for less than one-tenth of the State
cial Statistics of States: 1937.
revenues in 1937.
See Finan-
22
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
special assessments.
Spokane reported only 47.9 percent of municipal income
from general property taxes; almost a third of its total municipal revenue was
derived from grants.
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS.—Municipal revenue from special assessments for outlays4
has sharply declined in importance In recent years. In 1928 this source of
municipal income for the 94 cities reached a . peak of #205,000,000, hut in 1937
only $33,361,000 was received from this source; 48 of the 94 cities reported
less than one percent of total municipal income from special assessments. The
decline may reasonably be attributed in part to the impracticability of requiring local property to assume additional assessments during depression periods
when the burden upon property owners becomes increasingly heavy.
It also is
probable that some of the decline may be attributed to the fact that certain
types of local improvements were financed to a large extent by the Works Progress Administration, while others, which normally would be financed through the
sale of special assessment warrants to contractors, were constructed with the
financial participation of the Public Works Administration under terms which
imposed certain restrictions upon prevailing practices in special assessment
financing.
GRANTS.—Second in importance in the municipal revenue picture are receipts
from grants, which in 1937 totaled $404,957,525, and represented 15 percent of
all revenues reported for the 94 cities. These grants were from the State, from
county and local governmental units, and from the Federal Government, the major
portion, 83 percent, being from State grants.
Intergovernmental aid of this character, while a relatively insignificant
source of municipal income until the present decade, has had a long history in
this country, state grants to local units made their first appearance shortly
after the adoption of the Constitution, but Federal grants to cities were not
in evidence until the last decade. Fiscally speaking, intergovernmental grants
were of slight importance even in 1916, amounting to only $30,462,000 and accounting for only 3.9 percent of the total revenues of the 94 cities. It was
not until the early '30's, when depression conditions had severely strained local finances, that grants assumed their present position of major importance
among municipal revenues. The trend of growth of this source of revenue in recent years, and the percentage it represented to total income of the 94 cities,
are indicated In the following figures:
Year
.
1926
1928
1930
1952
1934
1936
1937
Grants
$89,238,000
111,207,000
126,236,000
180,938,000
329,540,000
377,004,^00
404,958,000
Percent of
total
revenues
4.3
4.6
5.0
7.7
13.5
14.5
15.0
Federal grants directly to the cities amounted to nearly 16 percent of all
grants received by the cities in 1937. Virtually all of these grants were for
P.W.A. projects for capital improvements. County and other local grants were
slightly more than 1 percent of the total of all grants, and were for a variety
of purposes, chiefly schools.
PROPOBTIONATELY-SHARED STATE TAXES.—The local shares of State taxes are received
from the State, as are State grants, but under different conditions, for the
former are taxes collected by the State and returned to the city, the State acting only as agent for the city in the transaction. Locally-shared taxes have
4/ In prior years' reports, special assessments and special charges were lunged, and a distinction
was made on the basis of purpose—whether "for outlays" or "for operation and maintenance."
Beginning
with this 1937 report, the term "special assessments" is confined to those for outlays, anci. all assessments for purposes of operation and maintenance (exclusive of public-service enterprises) are classified
as "charges for current services."
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—BEVENUES
23
existed since Civil War times, hut have assumed a conspicuous place in the municipal revenue system only in recent years. Beginning with the 1937 report,
revenue from this source is reported separately, under the general heading of
"Revenue from other agencies." In prior years, these revenues were classified
"by the type of tax, regardless of the fact that they were levied by the State
and received through the State on a shared basis determined by the State. The
amount received from State-shared taxes In 1937 was $97,486,655, or 3.6 percent
of all revenues.
It is not possible to present comparative figures showing the trend of
growth of shared taxes as was done for grants, because the data for earlier
years are not available. It may be stated In a general way, however, that revenues from shared taxes during the depression did not show as rapid an Increase
as grants. Since the amount of locally-shared taxes is controlled by the amount
collected, which collections ordinarily decline during periods of depression, a
growth in this type of aid to localities has been restricted for the most part
to cases where the relative proportion of taxes allotted to the local units has
been increased or where newly imposed taxes have been shared with these units.
TOTAL STATE AD).—The total amount of revenues received by the cities in 1937
from the State, either as grants or proportionately-shared taxes, was $434,062,251, of which approximately four-fifths was grants and one-fifth shared taxes.
The largest portion of these receipts was for schools, followed by charities and
highways. While the greater portion of these State-aid revenues was from unspecified, or general, revenues, one-third came from specified sources, the
most important being motor vehicle fuel taxes, alcoholic beverage revenues, and
Income taxes.
SALES TAXES. —Although receipts from taxes on sales and services constituted
only a negligible proportion of total revenue for the 94 cities in 1937, they
are of general interest largely because of the newness of sales taxes on the
municipal level and also because of their importance in the revenue structures
of those 7 cities that have adopted tax devices of this type. New York, for
example, received almost $50,000,000 in 1937 from a 2 percent tax on retail
sales, with certain common exemptions. It also imposed a personal property
tax designed to be complementary to the sales tax in reaching specific articles
on which no sales tax had been paid.
A sales tax, which, because of numerous
exemptions was in effect a luxury tax, was imposed by New Orleans, and provided
approximately 7 percent of the city's total Income. Tampa, in 1937, levied a
municipal sales tax on wholesale and retail merchants and brokers and also a
sales tax on gasoline, both of which were declared unconstitutional by the
courts after the close of the year. The 4 remaining cities in the sales tax
group—St. Louis, Kansas City (Mo.), Birmingham, and Washington, D. C.—levied
sales taxes only on gasoline, Washington's being levied by the city In the capacity of a State. Local sales taxes vary greatly in scope. Some being imposed
upon the sale or consumption of a narrowly-selected list of articles, whereas
New York City's sales tax is clearly a general sales tax.
OTHER SOURCES OF REVENUE.—-The sources of municipal revenue other than those
discussed above are fiscally not important. They will be considered briefly in
connection with subsequent tables.
An analysis of the data presented
A appears below.
in each of the tables comprising section
TABLE 3
Revenues received by the 94 cities in 1937, classified by major sources, are
shown in table 3. A more detailed breakdown of these sources is afforded in
tables 6 to 13, inclusive.
BEVENUES.—Of the total revenue of $2,708,292,876 reported, for the 94 cities
in 1937, slightly more than half is accounted for by the revenues of New York,
Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit, and Los Angeles. New York alone accounts for
24
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
more than 28 percent of the total revenues reported by this group of cities. It
may be of interest to note that the revenues of New York City were 1.5 times the
total revenues reported by the State of New York; revenues of Chicago were 1.4
times those of the State of Illinois; and those of Baltimore were in excess of
the revenues of the State of Maryland.5 In short, these three local governments
have fiscal operations of greater magnitude than the States which contain them,
New York City being second in fiscal importance only to the Federal Government".
TREND OF REVENUES.—Total revenues reported for 1937 were 240 percent higher
than the revenues of $784,000,000 reported for the same group in 1916. The
volume of revenues increased progressively to $2,548,000,000 in 1930, but In
1932 a decline to $2,354,000,000 was reported, reflecting, of course, the influence of depression conditions. A return in the volume of revenues to approximately the 1930 level was apparent in the $2,603,000,000 reported in 1936,
and the 1937 total, which continues the upward trend, is a record high for such
receipts. The figures are as shown herewith.
The increased volume of municipal revenues may
1926
$2,096,342,991
be attributed in part to an improvement of general
1928
2,415,106,587
conditions within this group of local governments,
1930
2,548,117,410
but it Is due in part to the fact that new and
1932
2,354,297,618
1934
2,445,300,134
important sources of income have appeared in re1936
2,602,954,735
cent years.
1937
2,708,292,876
SOURCES OF REVENUES.—As indicated in the opening discussion of this section, there was during
1937 a continuation of the developments which have occasioned significant shifts
in the revenue sources of the 94 cities. Increasing demands upon local government for general services, and for social welfare and relief activities, were
not met through general property taxes or special assessments, probably because
of considerations in most cases practical but in some cases also of a legal nature. Since the problems of these local governments involved State and national implications, a consequence has been for these cities to find the solution
of their fiscal problems in an increasing dependence upon State and Federal
grants. This source of revenue yielded only $30,000,000 to the 94 cities in
1916, as compared with $405,000,000 in 1937.
Although revenues from locally-shared State taxes are not new, having made
their first appearance as early as 1865 in the sharing of corporation taxes in
Massachusetts, their significance is increasing. They totaled $97,486,655 in
1937.
Seven of the 94 cities found the sales tax an important aid in solving
their revenue problems in 1937, particularly New York, which received over
$49,000,000 of the total of $55,852,014 of such reported revenue. Revenues from
alcoholic beverage licenses and taxes were also of increasing importance in
1937.
The relative Importance of the various sources of revenue in the 1937 fiscal structure of the 94 cities is presented in table 5. Before discussing revenue sources on a relative, or percent distribution, basis, however, the per
capita figures will be presented.
TABLE 3.—SUMMARY OP REVENUES, BY MAJOR SOURCES AND BY D I V I S I O N S OF M U N I C I P A L GOVERNMENT:
1937
OTHER LOCAL TAXES
CITY, AND DIVISIONS OF
MUNICIPAL GOVERNIENT
Grand
Group I
Group I I
Group I I I
Number
of
funds
reported
Percent
of Independent
divisions
inoluded
total-
—
—
L i c e n s e s and p e r m i t s
Total revenues
General p r o p erty taxes
S a l e s and
service
Property
Use o f
street
Business
( T a b l e 6)
(Table 6)
(Table 6)
( T a b l e 6)
( T a b l e 6)
( T a b l e 6)
( T a b l e 7)
( T a b l e 7)
$2,708,292,876
$1,766,972,358
$2,485,368
$53,971,646
$55,852,014
$2,235,027
$3,785,523
$12,253,182
$36,455,840
1,863,279,962
318,883,047
526,129,867
1,194,225,008
215,382,832
357,364,518
1,472,168
113,955
899,245
39,349,897
8,570,346
6,051,403
52,885,764
235,679
67,707
1,931,641
3,639,364
62,646
83,513
9,007,459
933,714
2,312,009
21,775,298
5,364,540
9,316,002
$1,286,226
1,286,226
$3,518,456
3,518,456
$199,697
199,697
5,711,249
5,711,249
8,772,187
8,702,276
59,597
381,489
279,981
101,503
2,546,517
419,733
GROUP I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 AND OVER
1
$771,045,939
764,578,519
39
B r i d g e , p a r k w a y , and
tunnel d i s t r i c t s
8
Forest preserve
3
district
$26,148,320
26,148,320
5,031,029
4,818,687
100.0
6,467,420
16
6
6
9
4
4
82.3
100.0
100.0
84.5
82.3
281,586,398
141,637,738
27,464,331
62,849,124
27,008,096
20,719,561
1,907,548
107
9
6
100.0
100.0
112,197,354
77,335,097
34,443,500
418,757
193,000,947
80,147,735
19,143,980
53,206,667
23,377,249
15,365,276
1,760,040
77,859,128
51,506,927
25,953,008
399,193
24
27
78.9
114,061,647
91,109,751
22,951,896
82,776,320
68,012,702
14,763,618
108,114,094
36,549,239
32,894,985
63,225,838
22,919,243
21,173,776
38,669,870
19,132,819
2
School d i s t r i c t
$459,755,607
459,755,607
Philadelphia, Pa.
4
5
26
40
6
56.3
f 88.4
\ 87.4
I 81.3
$49,129,460
49,129,460
10,314
212,342
$174,998
174,998
460,323
460,323
60,632
5,207
55,425
$44,920
44,920
70,235
70,235
403,950
403,950
103,753
252,734
252,734
508,561
508,561
104,685
24,910
79,775
1,371,141
1,306,898
64,243
103,753
1,156,565
1,156,565
184,598
184,598
329,012
19,919
997,237
895,766
101,471
TABLE 3 . — S U M M A R Y OF REVENUES, BY MAJOR SOURCES AND BY D I V I S I O N S
OF M U N I C I P A L GOVERNMENT:
1937—Continued
OTHER LOCAL TAXES
CITY, AND DIVISIONS OF
MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT
Number
of
funds
reported
Percent
of independent
divisions
included
Licenses and permits
Total revenues
General property taxes
( T a b l e 6)
Sales and
service
(Table 6)
(Table 6)
(Table 6)
Use of
street
(Table 6)
(Table 6)
(Table 7)
Business
(Table 7)
Nonbusiness
(Table 7)
GROUP I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 AND OVER—Continued
8
10
18
3
64.0
100.0
64.0
$62,958,858
27,467,239
14,763,598
20,490,959
237,062
•38,331,015
17,246,121
6,122,824
14,773,838
188,232
29
8
100.0
41,393,960
30,140,425
11,253,535
28,875,802
19,057,394
9,818,409
6
7
City corporation
8
13
53,747,829
34,100,708
9
84
78,512,758
55,210,497
55,150,693
21,225,775
18,350,266
15,574,652
44,854,995
17,981,889
13,610,463
13,262,643
10
16
18
14
65.5
100.0
11
18
47,970,729
31,512,492
12
28
43,917,338
22,070,626
24
15
4
77.8
79.8
45,153,150
30,864,298
10,888,183
3,400,669
29,962,154
20,591,237
6,749,742
2,621,175
72.9
100.0
47,469,215
38,627,776
8,837,411
4,028
32,688,878
26,260,792
6,428,086
13 Milwaukee, Wis.
City corporation
14
City corporation
28
10
2
$2,676,472
2,665,195
11,277
$1,214,900
14,546
$1,177,526
1,177,526
702,534
58,288
58,288
14,546
$99,815
93,610
6,205
$129,098
72,108
56,990
843,960
843,960
869,350
869,350
80,887
80,887
22,066
1,085,398
99,756
$227,083
70,708
1,655,516
150,625
8,596
2,264
2,198
66
85,614
83,589
2,025
125,189
106,532
18,657
137,536
8,596
366,111
7,092
$18,985
18,985
49,312
289,281
468,864
2,334,362
223,339
43,584
40,661
2,923
85,820
622,618
620,938
1,680
140,186
129,891
10,295
57,837
57,837
20,351
20,351
159,049
158,417
632
58,778
50,155
2,648,834
2,578,778
$3,490,691
85,820
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
$34,074,613
27,921,658
6,152,955
$21,238,361
18,365,293
2,873,068
$35,526
35,526
29,072,113
18,979,912
7,163,189
2,929,012
19,306,004
11,084,820
5,342,678
2,878,506
684,099
684,099
34,680,752
18,757,793
17,854,308
9,423,179
59,263
59,263
8,727,349
3,748,882
7,165,056
30,554
4,657,463
43,373,011
36,475,441
6,897,570
30,007,122
24,896,911
5,110,211
22,009,555
10,903,776
3,957,335
7,148,444
16,210,649
6,744,365
3,510,376
5,955,908
303,587
303,587
89.2
100.0
Seattle, W a s h . —
City corporationCounty
School district--
21,869,735
9,474,000
5,365,960
7,029,775
13,523,239
5,668,218
3,853,190
4,001,831
712,494
712,494
81.1
98.5
Indianapolis, I n d . — —
City corporationCounty
School d i s t r i c t —
18,069,341
7,695,106
3,785,483
6,588,752
13,758,151
6,007,323
2,442,113
5,308,715
19,871
19,871
85.2
100.0
Rochester, N. Y.City corporationCounty
32,233,244
25,802,800
6,430,444
22,126,849
17,415,519
4,711,330
125,213
125,213
Jersey City, N. J . —
City corporationCounty
34,307,551
28,128,688
6,178,863
24,166,983
19,125,588
5,041,395
17,104,120
8,278,020
2,718,874
5,473,931
599,274
34,021
12,287,690
6,188,054
1,762,433
3,704,009
599,274
33,920
Minneapolis, Minn.
City corporationCounty
New Orleans, La.
City corporation
School district
Levee district
100.0
100.0
Cincinnati, Ohio
City corporation
County
School district
Park district
79.0
96.2
79.0
Newark, N. J.
City corporationCounty
Kansas City, Mo.
City corporation
County
School district
Houston, Tex.
City corporation
County
School district
Navigation district
Drainage district
85.0
93.1
85.0
80.0
$62,646
47,318
15,328
$1,921,931
1,921,931
$8,745
8,745
$606,457
600,918
5,539
144,567
144,567
1,636,178
1,636,178
5,048
5,048
77,314
70,453
6,861
24,784
$79,025
31,554
47,471
3,216,151
3,216,151
753,867
753,867
$105
105
624,586
624,586
448,549
448,549
812,088
717,688
94,400
3,910
226,879
208,769
18,110
3,910
34,930
18,578
16,352
2,748,182
2,748,182
266,321
266,321
67,327
15,311
52,016
275
275
22,399
22,399
60,751
59,321
1,430
1,071
1,071
50,685
50,685
33,222
33,222
414,520
414,520
191,273
191,273
131,521
76,615
54,906
TABLE 3.—SUMMARY
OF REVENUES,
BY MAJOR SOURCES AND BY D I V I S I O N S
OF MUNICIPAL
GOVERNMENT:
1937—Continued
OTHER LOCAL TAXES
CITY, AND DIVISIONS OF
MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT
Number
of
funds
reported
Percent
of independent
diTi8 ions
Ineluded
Licenses and
Total
rerenues
General property taxes
Sales and
service
Property
(Table 6)
(Table 6)
(Table 6)
GROUP I I . — C I T I J S S HAVING A POPULATION OF 3 0 0 , 0 0 0
33
3
14
6
4
1
(Table 6)
(Table 7)
(Table 7)
Nonbusiness
(Table 7)
500,000—Continued
$135,588
135,588
$59,895
57,845
2,050
$419,006
419,006
$26,606
26,606
82.0
$10,310,934
8,737,084
1,573,850
14,592,542
6,240,022
4,269,349
3,690,077
393,094
264,051
264,051
15,035
15,035
90.1
93.1
92.7
18,242,329
8,348,094
5,373,082
4,128,059
393,094
175,274
174,333
941
110 685
101,063
9,622
$5,481
5,481
$33,831
33,831
$51,471
51,471
117,220
117,220
67,237
67,237
27,706
27,706
156,978
156,978
223,540
223,540
95,397
95,397
64,183
64,183
341,590
341,590
49,390
49,390
14,674
717,642
9,059
26
City corporation
County
TO
(Table 6)
Business
$13,846,683
12,159,385
1,687,298
25
City corporation
(Table 6)
Use of
street
permits
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S
HAVING A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0
3
13
3
98.8
25
20
97.0
13,983,624
7,545,322
6,438,302
8,439,193
4,368,280
4,070,913
14,833,720
7,013,566
9,729,728
5,152,952
28 Toledo, Ohio
29
8
City corporation
\High 2
1
100.0
95.9
55.4
25
2
100.0
fEl.
Utility district
2
30
City corporation
31
Atlanta, Ga.-
~—-—-—-
$8,303,891
5,138,914
3,164,977
$14,340,010
9,404,323
4,935,687
£7 Columbus, Ohio-
9
7,171,591 1
648,563 j
20,120,345
14,407,693
5,712,652
10,717,485 1
::::::::i
.::::::::::
3.928.213
648,563
11,919,287
6,293,233
5,626,054
5,976,471
—
$171,547
171,547
408,795
$117,249
St. Paul, Minn.-Birmingham, Ala.
Akron, Ohio
City corporationSchool district-
9,498,117
6,776,539
159,501
13,293,217
8,214,891
428,714
6,219,009
2,949,595
290,394
12,358,800
6,856,868
5,501,932
7,176,005
3,712,109
3,463,896
#856,543
$73,759
$286,460
28,676
33,693
156,050
73,636
1,824
378,958
23,958
22,006
569,283
22,887
2,664
2,664
26,030
26,030
255,133
213,811
55,420
27,008
364,920
31,816
9,275,961
5,728,699
16,681,180
12,639,956
San Antonio, Tex.City corporation—
School d i s t r i c t —
7,025,033
3,640,903
3,384,130
5,235,070
3,111,282
2,123,788
144,212
144,212
99,065
99,065
61,536
61,536
23,155
23,155
Omaha, Nebr.
City corporation
School district
8,718,466
5,321,256
3,397,210
6,728,710
3,815,025
2,913,685
360,141
360,141
199,304
199,304
360,552
216,169
144,383
50,039
50,039
Syracuse, N. Y.
City corporation
County supervisors*
15,543,724
15,296,993
246,731
10,660,049
10,413,318
246,731
41,668
41,668
33,420
33,420
33,139
33,139
Dayton, Ohio
~ City corporationSchool district-
10,562,529
6,366,570
4,195,959
6,813,473
4,059,413
2,754,060
11,368
11,368
4,516
4,516
38,997
38,997
25,448
25,448
Oklahoma City, Okla.City corporationSchool district—
7,568,083
3,690,813
3,877,270
4,612,948
1,567,626
3,045,322
123,208
123,208
96,647
96,647
50,022
50,022
94,637
94,637
9,305,202
5,615,076
213,584
7,507,092
3,690,009
3,685,073
132,010
4,772,540
2,332,373
2,385,088
55,079
Grand Rapids, M i c h . —
City corporationSchool district—
6,939,809
3,764,880
3,174,929
4,317,188
2,405,416
1,911,772
Fort Worth, Tex.
City corporation
School district
6,889,293
3,753,476
3,135,817
11,851,291
11,357,311
493,980
Memphis, Tenn.
Providence, R. I.-
51,599
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
City corporation
School district
Park district
Hartford, Conn.
City corporation
Metropolitan district—
99.6
100.0
:::::::::::
107,968
269
259,611
9,455
47,488
257,616
612,120
14,082
34,928
15,536
34,928
15,536
:z::::z
1,630
1,630
4,862
4,862
44,413
44,413
23,724
23,724
4,447,054
2,721,232
1,725,822
29,675
18,713
10,962
52,234
52,234
20,814
20,814
8,233
8,233
9,748,162
9,490,520
257,642
40,775
40,775
4,658
4,658
8,879
8,879
30,260
30,260
I!
Dallas, Tex.
275,713
275,713
TABLE 3.—SUMMARY OF REVENUES, BY MAJOR SOURCES AND BY DIVISIONS OF MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
OTHER LOCAL TAXES
CITY, AND DIVISIONS OF
MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT
Number
of
funds
reported
Percent
of independent
divisions
included
Licenses and permits
Total revenues
General property taxes
Sales and
service
Property
(Table 6)
(Table 6)
(Table 6)
(Table 6)
Use of
street
(Table 6)
(Table 6)
(Table 7)
Business
(Table 7)
Nonbusiness
(Table 7)
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
49
18
5
100.0
#8,345,131
4,503,379
3,841,752
$5,397,821
3,041,893
2,355,928
37
2
100.0
9,645,156
9,607,330
37,826
8,317,073
8,279,855
37,218
25
4
97.8
7,955,247
4,403,006
3,552,241
4,825,859
2,997,353
1,828,506
8,963,072
4,702,647
5,384,209
2,941,555
4,260,425
2,442,654
23
5,448,420
3,652,674
15
11,428,473
8,473,937
10
5,748,232
2,718,562
4,402,697
2,337,294
3,029,670
2,065,403
50 New Haven, Conn.
— City corporation
Improvement association-
51
52
10
f 80.2
7
\ 80.8
53
54
Springfield, Mass.
55
8
56
Bridgeport, Conn=
57
Des Moines, Iowa
J 87.3
1100.0
$35,219
35,219
$12,145
12,145
8,327
8,327
13,798
13,798
30,959
30,959
$130,428
130,428
4,052
4,052
106,220
106,220
74,222
74,222
41,156
41,156
48,250
48,250
170,078
170,078
58,474
58,474
112,079
49,021
144,810
11,878
9,016
187,342
2,682
10,458
10,458
18,628
18,628
14,528
14,528
$1,170
1,170
$235,445
235,445
a
H
85,958
151,852
151,852
31
8,453,022 1
7,059,105
£4
3
5,553,434
2,798,450
2,754,984
57,469
57,469
98.8
6,290,348
3,352,554 j
2,937,784
13
5
5,338,315
2,238,325
3,099 990 1
3,866,130
1,637,518
2,228,612
16,784
16,784
100.0
58
City corporation
$5,700
5,700
250,254
65,335
18,353
46,982
933
10,873
10,758
19,244
19,244
130,332
130,332
42.963
42,963
7,737
7,737
12,850
12,850
8,770
8,770
Salt Lake City, UtahCity corporationSchool d i s t r i c t —
5,543,640
2,854,058
2,689,582
,136
,191
1,945
Yonkers, N. Y . ~
13,467,874
',299
Paterson, N. J . -
8,463,528
,165
Jacksonville, Fla.
City corporationSchool district—
5,844,426
3,894,109
1,950,317
i,021
,270
,751
Albany,
25,248
25,248
29,557
7,747
138,268
138,268
20,790
20,790
4,940
41,860
21,739
7,130
211,502
22,597
290,007
287,511
2,496
1,876
1,876
48,599
48,599
567,760
12,449
11,045
11,045
6,724
6,724
8,195,198
3,800
1,360
12,127
7,601
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Term.'
6,124,718
7,473,490
4,251,234
69,927
249,396
392,526
300
38,371
375,404
169,356
88,321
24,218
19,555
6,651
Kansas City, Kans.
City corporation—-——
School d i s t r i c t
—
Drainage distriot—
3,664,697
1,826,997
1,596,921
240,779
50,662
50,662
4,437
4,437
82,719
82,719
9,764
9,011
753
59,681
40,867
18,814
1,005
1,005
20,550
20,550
13,047
13,047
2,072
1,364
164,367
9,878
2,252
2,252
2,600
2,600
Y.-
96.0
86.8
38.6
Fort Wayne, I n d . ~
City corporation—
School district
3,359,793
1,373,594
1,986,199
—
5,738
2,593,731
987,788
1,605,943
5,022,192
Camden,
4,541,536
1,975,320
2,566,216
Erie, Pa.
City corporationSchool district —
25,773
3,906,251
1,711,781
2,194,470
1,041,494
10,526
10,526
Elizabeth, N. J.
5,892,548
4,580,156
268,446
3,129
158,956
20,771
Wichita, Kans.
City corporation
School district
University district-
4,669,780
1,969,800
2,253,165
446,815
3,715,616
1,300,559
2,199,373
215,684
50,130
50,130
11,366
11,366
71,328
71,328
23,776
18,889
4,887
Spokane, Wash.—
City corporationSchool d i s t r i c t —
4,345,096
2,425,354
1,919,742
181,230
181,230
710
710
33,863
33,863
10,831
10,831
Fall River, Mass.Cambridge, Mass.—
New Bedford, Mass.
Reading, Pa.———
City corporationSchool d i s t r i c t —
5,589,990
8,644,002
5,942,095
5,136,060
2,040,098
3,095,962
2,082,053
1,291,833
790,220
3,495,933
6,426,386
3,596,090
3,971,101
1,712,533
2,258,568
406
396
1,160
3,988
3,988
116,441
165,722
126,498
22,390
22,390
2,474
13,473
2,805
8,792
8,792
97.2
100.0
1,379
495
9,789
9,789
55,844
41,671
53,880
90,639
90,639
TABLE 3.—SUMMARY OF REVENUES, BY MAJOR SOURCES AND BY D I V I S I O N S OF MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT:
1937—Continued
OTHER LOCAL TAXES
Number
of
funds
reported
CITY, AND DIVISIONS OF
MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT
Percent
of independent
dirisions
included
Licenses and permits
General property taxes
Total revenues
(Table 6)
Sales and
service
(Table 6)
(Table 6)
(Table 6)
Use of
street
(Table 6)
(Table 6)
Business
(Table 7)
(Table 7)
Nonbusiness
(Table 7)
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 — C o n t i n u e d
78
Knozrille, T e n n . — —
79
Peoria, 111.
13
14,566,980
|3,417,243
4
4
1
2
1
96.8
92.8
93.1
100.0
5,123,835
2,388,217
1,886,557
189,748
429,610
229,703
3,089,570
1,262,988
1,355,038
127,354
333,097
11,093
8
4
100.0
3,240,681
1,313,614
1,927,067
2,424,923
949,280
1,475,643
11
5
2
4,077,315
2,048,471
1,888,853
139,991
2,024,790
1,231,276
686,706
106,808
265,499
265,499
98.3
99.4
7
3
7,302,722
5,442,037
1,860,685
4,614,100
3,442,756
1,171,344
33,359
33,359
54.2
14
2
100.0
4,001,172
1,632,331
2,168,841
12
5
98.1
80
City corporation
School district
81
Tacoma,
—
—
W a s h . — — — — — —
Park district
82
83
Miami, Fla.
City corporation
Gary, Ind.City corporationSohool district
—
84
City corporation—
85
13
113,676
13,676
$400
400
:::::::::::
$27,984
9,494
18,490
18,111
|33,933
$86,210
13,288
13,288
275,802
275,802
$11,784
11,784
3,363
3,363
11,008
11,008
7,647
7,647
34,727
34,727
6,141
6,141
100,185
100,185
443,233
441,837
1,396
84,771
84,771
917
917
7,228
7,228
11,696
11,696
27
27
13,434
13,434
9,399
7,905
60,948
18,154
18,111
3,184,598
1,495,862
15,224
1
1,688,736
15,224
4,379,340
2,069,857 1 1
2,309,463
2,456,679
952,503
1,504,176
4,283,234 |
2,476,973
14,990
Tampa, Fla.
City corporationSchool district—
2,784, 196 I
1,933, 226
850, 970
Somervilie, Mass.Kl Paso, Tex.
13
4,677, 416
7
1,811, 993
Kvansville, Ind.
City corporation—
School district
2,188,175
1,155, 360
1,032, 815
3,500
3,500
20,782
10,729
10,729
4,298, 564
4,502, 879
23,776
3,779
3,779
Lowell, Mass.
20,111
10,134
9,977
22,012
22,012
57,386
15
26
—
94,603
52,120
Lynn, M a s s . —
Waterbury, C o n n . —
234,929 I
234,527
402
1,480
1,480
Utica, N. Y.Duluth, Minn.
City corporationSchool district—
$133,273
133,273
16,243
16,243
136,285
4,664
$9,754
4,877
4,877
3,773
3,773
101,331
101,331
5
4,028, 739
2,095, 491
1,933, 248
13
5,106,400
139,630
7,715
12
3,990, 328
39,626
109,009
Honolulu, Hawaii 1/-
4,000,000
97,040
7,978
1,121,662
213,629
1/ Not included in group or grand totals.
S3
TABLE 3.—SUMMARY OF REVENUES, BY MAJOR SOURCES AND BY D I V I S I O N S OF MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT:
USE OF MONEY AND
PROPERTY
CITY, AND DIVISIONS OF MUNICIPAL
GOVERNMENT
Fines, f o r f e i t s , and
penalties
Grand t o t a l
Group I
Group I I —
Group III-
FROM OTHER AGENCIES
Special a s - Charges for
sessments
current
for outlays
services
Pension assessments
Donations
and contributions
Unclaimed
moneys
Contribut i o n s from
publicservice
enterprises
(Tables 10
and 11)
(Table 12)
(Table 12)
(Table 12)
(Table 12)
(Table 12)
(Table 13)
$97,486,655
$404,957,525
#37,538,946
$2,097,841
$755,295
$31,636,434
$33,361,059
$83,997,898
73,680,158
6,150,173
17,656,324
281,323,710
46,163,746
77,470,069
29,528,763
3,781,031
4,229,152
967,262
774,112
356,467
679,552
45,785
29,958
22,686,598
2,376,902
6,572,934
16,946,275
5,780,308
10,634,476
52,529,838
12,754,395
18,713,665
$15,708,086
15,708,086
$4,506
4,506
$534,599
534,599
$12,334,614
12,334,614
$7,761,588
7,761,588
$12,987,388
9,290,940
12,624
4,083
2,017
341,903
341,903
2,456,515
2,436,957
8,680,002
3,684,042
3,297,508
732,192
800,653
49,003
116,604
4,997,950
4,997,950
211,040
211,040
3,216,412
3,143,787
54,055
18,570
2,124,070
2,039,137
84,933
6,844,398
4,705,189
2,139,209
139,296
107,728
31,568
4,159,427
2,575,802
1,478,016
105,609
Rents and
royalties
Proportionatelyshared
State
tares
(Table 8)
(Table 8)
(Table 9)
—\ $12,103,118
•^55,430,843
$9,366,693
6,995,351
1,480,218
3,627,549
45,063,508
4,707,385
5,659,950
7,030,964
1,003,887
1,331,842
(Table 8)
1937—Continued
GROUP I.—CITIlSS HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVSR
New York, N. Y.
City corporation—
—
Bridge, parkway, and tunnel
districts
Chicago, 111.
City c o r p o r a t i o n — — — County
————
School d i s t r i c t
Park district
Sanitary district
Forest preserve district-
$1,605,559
1,605,559
$21,359,420
21,266,087
$442,795
442,795
$39,306,397
39,306,397
$118,963,221
116,285,582
1,194,341
925,116
32,472
4,761,382
2,160,702
204,922
407,016
716,881
1,271,861
869,990
26,947
313,968
313,968
45,460,627
29,702,881
4,198,846
6,452,594
1,258,162
3,848,144
4,551,261
2,358,747
423,481
1,253,214
373,102
120,958
21,759
46,884
22,464
93, .533
236,753
2,677,639
773,021
3,010
57,867
9,145
3,696,448
24,420
72
6,452
Philadelphia, Pa.
City corporationSchool district—
Poor district
378,093
378,045
48
9,261,391
8,283,295
978,096
,710,404
,709,944
1,778,558
1,778,558
8,687,889
2,186,118
6,501,771
1,720,020
763,498
956,522
34,966
34,432
2,479
2,479
Detroit, Mich.
City corporationCounty
794,134
748,088
46,046
156,776
129,531
27,245
15,271
12,790
2,481
5,449,616
921,610
4,528,006
13,960,038
12,778,840
1,181,198
599,937
599.937
18,598
18,535
63
47,878
47,878
Los Angeles, C a l i f . —
City corporationCounty—
—
•
School district—
988,902
763,741
225,161
1,543,766
988,380
555,386
53,503
41,862
9,017
2,624
4,674,947
518,734
4,156,213
27,957,951
3,794,811
4,734,322
19,428,818
674,041
396,106
277,935
16,120
15,780
340
25,128
17,366
7,762
1,025,547
1,025,547
4,855,932
3,468,899
1,387,021
5,91o
5,064
15,900
14,565
1,335
158,619
158,619
1,609,562
777,165
832,397
2,781,169
1,942,740
615,718
189,733
32,978
194,078
194,078
91,812
91,812
87,807
87,807
686,228
686,228
8,161,341
747,393
1,143,468
10,135
612,047
2,339,941
8,255,104
6,022
2,437
3,585
603
6,835
227,048
310,699
2,939,612
2,820,966
118,646
886,853
2,813,252
679,308
679,308
124,866
124,866
,835
7
277,325
14,939
530,668
632
632
443,584
443,584
409,591
363,347
46,244
1,938,136
574,102
639,752
724,282
340,165
340,165
938,929
620,630
318,299
$1,213,577
1,202,282
11,295
$1,054,469
842,690
211,779
539,126
339,646
116,912
81,350
1,218
18,951
2,022
16,929
167,881
167,881
353,332
217,885
135,447
154,557
66,673
87,884
45,042
229,438
1,555,316
64,315
2,484,480
2,076,278
345,523
5,405,685
Pittsburgh, Pa.
City corporationCounty
School district-
253,500
185,224
68,276
554,161
124,239
75,731
44,495
870,128
870,128
335,836
3,836
27,400
870,825
289,000
218,680
363,145
San Francisco, Calif.-
854,357
Washington, D. C.
155,639
469,375
4,727,547
355,119
2,707,091
1,665,337
8,112,625
6,812,426
788,126
13,716
10,227
Milwaukee, Wis.
City corporationCounty
— — —
313,868
299,777
14,091
355,933
355,933
13,019
13,019
87,625
84,695
2,930
909,312
849,519
59,793
41,292
41,292
Cleveland, Ohio
—
City corporation—
County
—
School district
Park district
311,954
293,045
18,909
St. Louis, Mo.
City corporationSchool districtBaltimore, Md.
Boston, M a s s . - — —
Sewerage d i s t r i c t Buffalo, N. Y.
City corporationCounty
—
Sewer d i s t r i c t
94,086
875,187
13,670,893
3,003,835
5,588,358
5,064,078
14,622
411,926
30,815
2,188,633
1,110,346
1,078,287
5,132,791
73,230
1,712,650
1,626,608
1,585,497
35,677
5,434
56,376
48,140
8,236
4,103,643
3,487,868
615,775
5,037,398
2,223,852
2,763,768
97,301
80,112
13,161
4,028
17,527
16,054
1,473
2,724,154
2,044,114
680,040
9,328,017
8,003,643
1,324,374
303,464
381,111
48,027
48,026
1
49,778
1,797,098
272,874
1,362,183
162,041
1,439,933
1,107,229
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.
City corporationCounty
$126,805
121,625
5,180
•671,619
645,992
25,627
#10,759
10,759
New Orleans, La.
City corporationSchool districtLevee district
149,606
149,606
257,659
136,969
120,489
201
Cincinnati, Ohio
City corporationCounty
School d i s t r i c t Park district
236,952
225,321
11,608
Newark, N. J.
City corporationCounty
135,706
77,362
58,344
1153,415
120,207
33,208
$8,054,758
5,097,638
2,957,120
$692,421
692,421
50,175
50,175
24,997
24,997
2,830,201
1,242,408
1,577,793
10,000
215,703
100,568
115,135
46,693
46,653
40
1,041
56
$155,337
155,337
1,772
,772
789,644
743,270
7,054
39,320
1,274,390
1,022,645
126,664
125,079
113,619
105,334
2,713
5,572
2,566,518
1,694,881
871,637
7,216,840
1,891,492
3,195,279
2,125,635
4,434
415,632
254,872
481,095
454,159
12,082
12,053
29
897,874
897,874
1,228,345
864,355
363,990
160,760
26,936
2,126,311
1,711,303
350,086
63,611
1,311
908,125
707,501
200,624
80,897
78,597
2,300
115,702
85,614
30,088
5,299,020
651,673
578,517
73,156
14,769
14,769
519,536
519,536
71,222
71,222
1,436,187
462,751
973,436
4,897,080
401,940
$37,057
33,408
$13,558
13,558
3,649
TABLE 3.—SUMMARY OF REVENUES, BY MAJOR SOURCES AND BY D I V I S I O N S OF M U N I C I P A L GOVERNMENT:
USE OF MONEY AND
PROPERTY
AND DIVISIONS OF MUNICIPAL
GOVERNMENT
Fines, forf e i t s , and
penalties
(Table 8)
(Table 8)
1937—Continued
FROM OTHER AGENCIES
Rents and
royalties
Proportionately
shared
State
taxes
(Table 8)
(Table 9)
(Tables 10
and 11)
Pension assessments
Donations
and contributions
Unclaimed
moneys
Contributions from
publicservice
enterprises
(Table 12)
( T a b l e 12)
(TabLe 12)
(Table 12)
Special assessments
for outlays
Charges for
current
services
(Table 13)
GROUP I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 — C o n t i n u e d
Kansas City, Mo.
City corporation
County
School d i s t r i c t
$55,129
54,984
145
$256,023
5,288
12,340
238,395
$5,619
1,552
2,584
1,483
Seattle, Wash.
City corporation
County
School district
266,561
265,116
1,445
293,712
270,679
9,186
13,847
26,046
5,028
21,018
Indianapolis, Ind.
City corporation
County
School district
66,802
66,802
49,242
14,947
3,332
30,963
Rochester, N. Y.
City corporation-—
County
49,300
41,504
7,796
Jersey City, N. J.
City corporation
County
Houston, Tex.
City corporation
County
School district
Navigation districtDrainage district
L o u i s v i l l e , Ky.
City corporation
County
P o r t l a n d , Oreg.
City corporationCounty
School d i s t r i c t Port d i s t r i c t
$2,126,493
1,359,041
34,693
732,759
$11,912
11,912
$349,371
297,490
51,881
4,605,615
839,905
896,688
2,869,022
521,912
473,526
859
2,708
2,708
249,311
247,790
1,521
2,861,181
740,524
1,062,259
1,058,398
91,959
31,200
8,881
3,089
119,221
110,299
8,922
17,689
17,689
1,898,830
1,478,542
420,288
5,194,363
4,197,422
996,941
374,334
374,334
34,537
6,996
27,541
299,237
191,934
107,303
563,528
563,489
39
58,872
50,337
8,535
3,853,108
3,410,326
442,782
544,872
493,680
51,192
128,608
111,584
17,024
172,740
91,296
39,596
41,747
51,760
48,643
3,117
54,506
54.506
261,439
261,049
390
57,626
55,260
2,368
143,978
57,900
15,336
70,742
23,459
3,413
1,009
19,037
$14,232
13,832
$3,450
3,181
$326,301
326,301
$728,076
215,006
293,840
219,230
4,141
1,102
3,039
197,094
197,094
1,053,975
459,907
497,379
96,689
37,205
37,205
656,302
318,133
214,044
124,125
904,535
904,535
1,318,813
1,037,850
280,963
18,003
18,003
1,349,628
866,550
483,078
400
2,923,398
872,952
392,114
1,658,332
$50,000
50,000
3,011
1,322
1,689
165,671
165,671
1,567
1,955
1,489
37,247
37,247
551,237
551,237
852,836
335,342
448,117
69,377
1,567
101
175,706
159,050
16,656
5,893
727,264
43,089
684,175
962,47?
933,611
28,866
22s106
22,106
158,778
158,190
588
5,397
5,397
236,292
30,909
108,995
96,388
238,507
41,887
10,171
8,011
1,150
556
594
40,976
40,976
774,217
700,924
73,293
914,278
914,278
613,937
294,497
266,405
53,035
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, Ohio
City corporationSchool district-
$212,369
212,369
$134,767
38,313
96,454
$14,597
14,597
$1,224,977
1,224,977
$2,691,571
1,206,100
1,485,471
$108,507
1,420
107,087
$14,365
14,365
Toledo, Ohio
City corporationSchool d i s t r i c t -
91,436
91,436
95,560
50,543
45,017
4,939
4,939
1,127,309
1,127,309
2,627,705
513,584
2,114,121
144,311
13,233
131,078
8,060
7,425
635
Oakland, Calif.
City corporationSchool districtUtility district-
140,943
140,943
36,847
27,030
9,817
159,015
159,015
3,762,683
662,686
3,099,997
92,113
92,113
344
344
Denver, Colo.
City corporation-School district—-
103,241
102,856
385
73,046
67,161
5,885
45,843
45,843
110,400
110,400
5,307,666
5,277,558
30,108
30,667
30,667
12,041
9,719
2,322
27,471
$150,288
150,288
$1,001,625
1,001,625
$392,270
310,572
81,698
170,724
170,724
1,062,224
985,686
76,538
436,132
302,568
133,564
$181
181
1,137,671
1,137,671
753,592
705,694
47,898
600,045
33,494
300
1,494,673
183,638
857,568
1,220,891
-22,920
10,593
134,604
267,303
442,313
64,943
2,266,582
51,072
325
541
572,866
507,539
18,196
144,369
824,856
14,380
100
966
523,350
226,458
249,523
235,243
14,280
13,837
13,837
975,959
975,959
2,403,800
546,463
1,857,337
112,147
15,498
15,498
708,086
708,086
605,615
551,343
54,272
146,458
26,573
4,191
118,830
1,329,510
7,394
Providence, R. I.
39,909
553,943
29,444
378,675
1,792,504
300,725
San Antonio, Tex.
City corporationSchool district—
18,642
18,642
17,481
14,493
2,988
1,693
1,693
1,164,010
11,857
11,857
Omaha, Nebr.
City corporationSchool district-
43,157
32,943
10,214
116,410
95,286
21,124
2,386
2,386
47,535
47,535
325,714
138,000
187,714
30,229
3,350
26,879
Syracuse, N. Y.
City corporation
County supervisors' fund-
65,316
65,316
9,607
9,607
13,213
13,213
815,584
815,584
2,876,548
2,876,548
239,537
239,537
405
405
Dayton, Ohio
City corporationSchool d i s t r i c t -
69,572
69,572
90,440
89,746
694
21,414
21,414
658,863
658,863
1,809,944
608,182
1,201,762
74,436
5,869
4,435
1,434
Oklahoma City, Okla.City corporationSchool district—
124,667
124,667
198,975
180,520
18,455
761,375
673,134
88,241
1,057,338
358,915
698.423
8,437
8,437
Atlanta, Ga.-
237,635
31,448
7,153
Dallas, Tex.
105,017
87,009
8,048
88,635
558,495
60,115
193,866
131,843
66,170
66,170
St. Paul, Minn.
Birmingham, Ala.
Akron, Ohio
City corporationSchool district—
Memphis, Tenn.
112,147
1,164,010
93,508
93,508
3,466
3,466
74,436
4,267
7,502
5,552
1,950
125,160
263,324
21,592
449,089
130
240,680
149,416
91,264
130
13,072
13,072
162,892
162,892
291,397
198,186
93,211
266,028
266,028
476,138
476,138
276,917
276,917
661,272
497,699
163,573
28,968
28,968
317,353
290,524
26,829
TABLE 3.—SUMMARY OF REVENUES, BY MAJOR SOURCES AND BY D I V I S I O N S OF MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT:
USE OF MONEY AND
PROPERTY
AND DIVISIONS OP MUNICIPAL
GOVERNMENT
Fines, forf e i t s , and
penalties
(Table 8)
1937—Continued
FROM OTHER AGENCIES
Rents and
royalties
Proportionately
shared
State
taxes
(Table 8)
(Table 9)
Pension assessments
(Tables 10
and 11)
Donations
and contributions
Unclaimed
moneys
(Table 12)
(Table 12)
Contribut i o n s from
publicservice
enterprises
Special assessments
for outlays
Charges for
current
services
(Table 12)
(Table 12)
(Table 13)
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 — C o n t i n u e d
$10,949
$106,296
$520
$1,397,945
$1,431,598
$191,426
$28,592
Richmond, Va.
54,580
531,324
3,431
165,615
631,958
23,453
19,439
Youngstoim, OhioCity corporationSchool districtPark district
49,638
49,638
9,806
2,165
7,617
304
304
538,254
538,254
1,590,878
372,637
1,169,321
48,920
76,966
Grand Rapids, M i c h . —
City corporationSchool district—
51,061
51,061
73,016
72,994
785
785
1,337,605
27L,324
1,066,281
23,973
Fort Worth, Tex.
City corporationSchool district-
48,044
48,044
1,600,018
370,376
1,229,642
7,559
7,301
258
Hartford, Conn.
City corporation
Metropolitan districtFlint, Mich.
City corporationSchool district-
W o r c e s t e r , Mass.
38,084
38,084
$84
$38,101
$613,656
11,202
469,865
258,821
258,821
159,411
85,343
46,081
27,987
137,312
137,312
258,875
258,875
540,649
367,858
172,791
148,419
148,419
20,823
20,823
407,923
291,825
116,098
$634,285
10
10
76,966
23,973
86,632
86,542
90
63,970
11,825
52,145
33,637
33,637
25,644
25,644
147,233
147,233
20,177
20,177
177,102
177,102
794,629
578,308
216,321
13,546
13,546
3,078
3,078
919
919
48,987
29,504
19,483
511,529
510,995
534
96,483
96,483
87,675
36,923
50,752
1,828
1,828
31,009
31,009
1,443,979
99,802
1,344,177
28,623
6,048
22,575
6,000
114,470
114,470
348,089
348,089
736,090
673,770
62,320
5,950
5,950
73,138
73,138
9,100
9,100
187,682
187,682
354,254
354,254
115,579
115,579
11,733
11,733
16,419
16,419
264,529
263,921
608
San Diego, Calif.
City corporation-'
School district-
130,868
130,868
66,377
66,377
7,273
7,273
74,395
74,395
2,229,298
534,168
1,695,130
85,506
85,506
303
303
Long Beach, Calif.
City corporationSchool distriot —
112,024
112,024
165,528
15,486
150,042
21,451
1,620
19,831
51,997
51,997
2,283,558
655,453
1,628,105
17,871
17,871
582
582
New Haven, Conn.
City corporation
—
Improvement associatio
890
890
6,000
220,446
191,841
28,605
430
430
419,941
419.941
14,633
14,633
172,890
153,097
19,793
3
Nashville, T e n n . —
44,294
32,866
3,603
60,414
1,094,736
11,533
555
Springfield, Mass.-
15,534
1,839
641
1,115,579
986,130
109,034
21,095
Tulsa, Okla.
City c o r p o r a t i o n — — —
School district-
39,585
39,585
61,996
38,334
23,662
24,320
487
23,833
64,027
64,027
883,400
12,394
186,053
—I
—
Bridgeport, Conn.'
89,304
102,487
64,707
353,467
65,422
41,454
23,968
11,319
1,915
9,404
i,400
5,151
3,038
2,113
38,166
,458
87,887
i,446
; ,430
,016
109,193
8,139
101,054
857, 262
131, 943
725, 319
89,745
16,481
73,264
1,914
1,914
30,206
30,206
193,179
137,165
56,014
1,158
137
1,021
131,188
131,188
41,734
23,841
17,893
1,211
1,211
201,357
201,357
251,620
243,240
8,380
Des Moines, Iowa---—
City corporationSchool district—
37,186
37,186
Scranton, P a . —
City corporationSchool district—
12,804
12,804
23,016
16,117
6,899
420
420
Salt Lake City, UtahCity corporationSchool district—
67,463
67,463
21,993
4,801
17,192
1,890
1,890
Yonkers, N. Y.--
10,263
69,448
497,646
1,663,
258,125
475,353
91,391
Peterson, N. J.-
16,060
77,813
23,155
652,
153,658
2,721
358,038
Jacksonville, Fla.
City corporationSchool district--'
24,583
24,583
12,222
3,205
9,017
991,
28,
963,
33,971
33,971
1,896,935
1,896,935
187,253
187,253
73,854
67,784
6,070
11,958
16,627
192,128
192,128
11,254
11,254
15,518
15,518
959
90
Albany, N. Y.
14,749
65,956
529,040
898,
109,475
105
14,402
371,855
89,404
Norfolk, Va.
83,600
340,663
12,547
120,913
418,
34,494
196
34,216
9,497
261,967
Trenton, N. J.-
19,738
46,229
4,250
16,515
975,
106,289
25,100
50
110,000
Chattanooga, T e n n . —
48,933
21,650
1,627
18,992
1,150,
11,603
4,109
Kansas City, Kans.
City corporation—
School district
Drainage district-
10,232
10,232
67,484
9,603
8,332
2,570
2,570
11,367
11,367
264,
24,
239,
Fort Wayne, Ind.
City corporationSchool d i s t r i c t —
5,929
5,929
7,579
5,644
1,935
84,356
84,356
455,
144,
310,
24,876
9,077
9,077
6,896
6,395
501
278
58,983
278
58,983
49,549
Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
City corporationSchool d i s t r i c t —
17,588
11,161
3,053
295
2,758
118,764
118,764
6,000
6,000
31,720
241,705
241,020
199,072
118,304
91,769
61,604
21,228
38,605
1,771
26,535
7,353
17,523
479
104
375
43,433
43,433
49,916
18,988
30,928
66,704
66,704
51,477
20,736
30,741
91,254
26,190
26,190
TABLE 3.—SUMMARY OF REVENUES, BY MAJOR SOURCES AND BY D I V I S I O N S
OF M U N I C I P A L GOVERNMENT:
USE OF MONEY AND
PROPERTY
CITY, AND DIVISIONS OF MUNICIPAL
GOVERNMENT
Fines, forf e i t s , and
penalties
(Table 8)
(Table 8)
1937—Continued
FROM OTHER AGENCIES
Rents and
royalties
Proportionately
shared
State
taxes
(Table 8)
(Table 9)
(Tables 10
and 11)
Pension assessments
Donations
and contributions
(Table IS)
(Table 12)
Unclaimed
moneys
Contributions from
publicservice
enterprises
(Table 12)
Special a s sessments
for outlays
Charges for
current
services
(Table 12)
(Table 13)
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
Elizabeth, N. J.Wichita, Kans.
City corporation
School district
University district-
33,051
33,051
Spokane, Wash.
City c o r p o r a t i o n School d i s t r i c t Fall River, Mass.
84,982
84,982
Cambridge, Mass.
5,460
5,150
20,945
20,945
New Bedford, Mass.
Reading, Pa.
City corporationSchool d i s t r i c t —
3,868
Knoxville, Tenn.<
Peoria, 111.
City corporationSchool district
Park district
Sanitary districtTown
45,183
45,183
South Bend, m d .
City corporationSchool district—
8,673
8,679
Tacoma, Wash.
City corporationSchool d i s t r i c t Park d i s t r i c t
63,950
63,950
$39,271
$5,001
$15,694
$611,620
$95,519
$525
8,151
3,886
247
21,187
21,187
1,945
1,945
3,112
205
4,265
247
78,829
4,975
37,054
36,800
9,737
6,351
3,386
31,296
99,802
55,125
6,647
5,976
671
40
93,999
93,999
1,346,284
273,891
1,072,393
625,973
589,510
843,716
673,815
25,863
10,871
14,992
52,108
85,335
63,094
59,649
673,815
59,649
40
25,362
902,666
961,696
1,059,970
99,686
99,686
86,922
86,922
209,139
170,388
38,751
3,886
14,135
188,611
150
1,271
184,790
60,783
14,401
92,679
104,756
1,913
135,781
22,412
12,895
9,517
1,275
791
484
170
170
272,823
266,589
117,528
25,400
57,487
32,456
205
1,980
130',931
379,186
21,680
4,822
16,858
398
398
1,169,967
47,343
1,122,624
35,403
18,782
16 ,621
319
125
658,811
1,208,986
428,492
444,038
23,704
96,122
216,630
8,910
8,910
265,648
265,648
89,288
76,668
12,620
5,762
32,555
17,579
14,895
81
692
692
70,222
70,222
1,644
86,131
299,795
101,032
11,851
186,912
105
105
45,576
31,159
14,231
4,778
3,013
1,765
$45,664
349,651
349,651
$2,500
9,004
9,004
129,395
5,762
$35,369
$1,596
1,596
62,956
62;956
408
408
7Qjl80
35 J055
35,125
3,840
3,840
22,926
22,926
9,029
9,029
312,337
231,422
48,007
32,908
Miami, Jla.
City corporationSchool district—
3,021
2,505
516
Gary, Ind.
City corporationSchool district —
6,116
5,164
952
Canton, Ohio
City corporationSchool district-
66,073
39,862
26,211
Wilmington, Del.
95,964
Tampa, H a .
City corporationSchool d i s t r i c t —
71,766
69,544
2,222
SomerviHe, Mass.-
1,190
1,190
813,447
176,272
637,175
12,944
12,944
121,166
121,166
545,773
140,547
405,226
22,345
4,864
17,481
393,790
393,790
873,966
156,482
717,484
43,872
1,361,634
17,663
843,974
91,403
752,571
6,418
6,418
703,365
80,287
10,867
1,651
1,651
9,918
361,003
3,495
53,453
53,453
562,043
247,513
314,530
21,956
31,492
608,820
766,567
14,629
328,704
1,128,292
17,165
17,165
540,530
102,617
437,913
19,424
Evansville, Ind.
City corporationSchool d i s t r i c t -
11,978
9,225
2,753
Lynn, Mass.Utica, N. Y.
4,703
2,122
2,581
856 I
856
164,242 I
164,242
7,890
240,344 I
240,344
1,645
1,645
334,605
334,605
1,993
1,993
701,073
21 Paso, Tex.
2,311
2,311
17,213
503
503
64,812
64,812
63,681
63,681
8,571
8,571
769
769
14,066
Duluth, Minn.
City corporation-'
School d i s t r i c t —
Waterbury, Conn.'
Lowell, Mass.
Honolulu, Hawaii l / ~
148,210
62,206
86,004
24,892
8,771
16,121
178,597
61,456
121,939
61,096
6,734
54,362
22,651
1,350
85,321
3,452
2,500
952
59,900
59,900
14,754
119,141
62,578
62,555
7,167
54,985
5,789
615,300
564,407
44,234
440
7,782
654,591
382,511
205,218
1/ Not included in group or grand t o t a l s .
fc
42
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
TABLE 4
The revenues of the 94 cities in 1937 are reduced to a per capita basis in
table 4, the figures being based upon the absolute amounts shown in table 3.
PER CAPITA REVENUES.—The per capita for total revenues was $71.89, with New
York, Jersey City, and Boston having the highest per capitas of $107.77, $1.07.24,
and $99.77, respectively, while the lowest were Birmingham, El Paso, and Port
Wayne, with per capitas of $22.76, $26.02, and $27.97, respectively.
Taxes yielded $51.49 per capita, and nontaxes $20.40. Within the tax group,
general property taxes and sales and service taxes showed the highest per capita yields, while in the nontax group the highest per capita yield was from
grants.
TREND OF PER CAPITA REVENUES.—Per capita revenues in 1937 for the first time
exceeded the high of ;;69.90 established in 1930, as may be seen from the comparison shown in the accompanying statement.
In normal times a variety of factors controls the
1926
trend of per capita revenues within the individual cit$62.20
1928
68.95
ies, although it follows that significant per capita
1930
69.90
variations in the cost of general government for these
1932
62.50
cities will necessarily introduce similar fluctuations
1934
65.06
1936
in the revenues which must be produced to meet such
69.12
1937
71 ..89
costs. As a population group, hov/ever, the cities in
group I consistently show a combined per capita revenue
which is much higher than for either group II or group
III, although there are individual cities in both latter groups with per capita
revenues substantially higher than most of the cities having a population of
over 500,000.
During the depression period special factors have introduced
sharp variances in per capita revenues of individual cities, such as the fact
that unusually severe welfare and relief problems in some localities may have
temporarily inflated the level of per capita revenues because of Federal and
State grants.
POPULATION BASE USED.—The population on which the per capitas for each city
are computed is the estimated population of the city as at July 1, 1933, no
later estimates having been made, except for Washington, D. C , which is estimated as at January 1, 1937.
TABLE 5
The percentage distribution of revenues by principal classes is shown in
table 5. Some of the data disclosed in this table have already been summarized
in part I and also have been discussed earlier in this section. The percentages
in table 5 are computed upon the basis of the absolute figures presented in
table 3.
PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF REVENUES.—The four major sources of revenue for the
94 cities in 1937 were, in order of their importance, general property taxes,
State and Federal grants, locally-shared State taxes, and charges for current
services. Together these sources of revenue represent approximately 87 percent
of all income reported by the cities considered in this study. Other sources of
revenue, although appearing as a negligible percentage of total revenue for all
cities, nevertheless are of great Importance to certain individual cities. For
example, the 2 percent tax enforced in New York on retail sales produces income
amounting to 6.4 percent of total revenues in that municipality, while a sales
tax on selective items In New Orleans is the source of 6.6 percent of all revenue. Similarly, although revenue from public-service enterprises is only 1.2
percent of total municipal receipts, it Is the source of approximately one-third
of Jacksonville's total income and almost one-seventh of Atlanta's.
PERCENT DISTRIBUTION, TAXES AND NONTAXES.—-Revenues from general property and
other local taxes represented 71.6 percent of total revenue, the balance of
28.4 percent being realized from sources which, so far as current local fiscal
aspects were concerned, were of a nontax character.
Comparable figures for
previous years are not available, since revenues from shared taxes were not
separately reported prior to 1937.
TABLE 4 . — P E R CAPITA REVENUES, BY MAJOR SOURCES:
OTHER LOCAL TAXES
General
property
taxes
Grand t o t a l -
Group I
Group I I —
Group I I I -
$71.89
$46.90
84.19
69.13
48.14
Licenses and
permits
Property
$0.07
Business
Sales
and
service
$1.43
$1.48
53.96
46.70
32.70
1.78
1.86
.55
2.39
.55
.04
$107.77
80.67
56.88
68.46
79.84
68.55
49.85
$64.26
55.29
39.47
49.68
46.69
41.74
34.78
$3.65
1.44
.23
65.78
99.77
81.28
73.10
70.50
75.37
81.23
41.73
70.16
66.11
48.02
35.43
50.01
55.94
^71.33
61.72
75.38
97.03
53.34
58.46
$44.46
40.99
38.81
67.13
39.29
36.15
All
other
$0.06
$0.10
1937
USE OF MONEY
AND PROPERTY
Use
of
street
$0.33
Fines,
forfeits,
and
penalties
Business
Nonbusiness
$0.97
$0.15
Donations
and
contrlbutions
Contributions
from
claimed I p u b money l i c service
enterprises
$0.06
$0.02
$0.84
.04
.17
.03
.03
.01
1.03
.52
(i/)
Interest
Rents
and
royalties
Proportlonately
shared
State
taxes
$1.47
$0.25
$2.59
$10.75
.32
.22
.12
3.33
1.33
1.62
12.71
10.01
7.09
$2.99
1.36
4.69
.09
1.14
.59
.43
$0.06
.25
1.37
.01
.04
.02
.19
$5.49
.09
.90
3.27
3.45
5.29
$16.63
13.02
4.40
8.38
20.65
14.89
2.64
$2.20
1.30
.87
.36
.50
.45
.23
1.90
2.64
.82
1.33
.49
2.72
.17
.08
.44
.11
3.25
.12
.09
.03
3.04
6.87
1.28
2.61
9.99
10.49
6.97
12.36
10.93
8.41
15.96
.91
1.45
1.28
1.30
1.27
.59
1.56
.01
.78
.07
.02
$16.86
6.01
15.69
11.85
5.15
12.31
$1.45
.46
.90
1.46
.03
1.40
$0.08
.10
1.05
.03
.03
(1/)
2.04
1.02
.52
.98
1.16
.85
FROM OTHER AGENCIES
Pension
sessments
$1.00
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.«
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
——
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.'
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$0.09
.04
1.49
.86
.02
.09
.56
4.25
.07
.10
.01
$6.87
$0.02
.06
$0.29
.01
$0.18
1.64
.04
.15
.08
.02
1.02
$0.49
2.51
.20
.31
1.01
.11
1.05
$0.03
.11
.09
.21
.74
.14
.10
.03
.09
(1/)
.08
.75
.14
.03
1.33
2.10
.13
.44
3.75
1.04
.27
.12
.19
.18
.21
.36
.23
.10
$0.22
.34
.19
.48
.73
.34
.20
6.85
4.66
>0.07
$0.01
.02
.01
.01
.01
.11
(V)
u/)
.03
.02
(V)
.01
$1.72
.10
2.53
.76
.17
.11
2.86
(V)
.01
_1 . 0 0
(V)
.04
.42
(V) . 7 4
(i/)
GROUP I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 5 0 0 , 0 0 0
M i n n e a p o l i s , Minn.New O r l e a n s , L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J .
Kansas C i t y , M o . —
S e a t t l e , Wash.
S e e f o o t n o t e s a t end o f
table.
$0.18
$0.07
1.45
.13
7.19
.74
1.90
$0.13
$4.08
(1/)
$0.02
.31
.01
1.09
.01
$1.27
3.47
.17
1.69
1.97
.61
$0.20
.06
.25
.19
.20
.22
$0.27
.32
.52
.30
.13
.71
$1.41
.55
2.77
2.03
.62
.79
$0.02
.11
.25
.18
.01
.07
$0.32
.05
5.58
$0.03
u/)
.03
.01
.01
$0.33
1.95
1.16
TABLE 4 . — P E R CAPITA REVENUES, BY MAJOR S O U R C E S :
OTHER LOCAL TAXES
CITY
Total
City numbe
fH
General
property
taxes
L i c e n s e s and
permits
Property
Business
Sales
and
service
All
Poll
All
other
1937—Continued
USE OF MONEY
AND PROPERTY
Use
of
street
Business
other
Fines,
forfeits,
and
penalties
Interest
Nonbusiness
Rents
and
royalties
FROM OTHER AGENCIES
Proportionately
shared
State
taxes
Grants
Pension
assessments
Donations
and
contributions
Contributions
from
Unclaimed p u b money l i c service
enterprises
Special
assessments
for
outlays
$0.02
$0.13
$0.10
2.71
.06
$1.76
3.95
4.22
2.68
2.44
1.99
$0.50
$3.34
.57
$1.31
3.55
1.48
2.57
3.06
1.59
1.83
.83
2.28
1.01
1.76
.99
Charges
for
current
services
GROUP I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 — C o n t i n u e d
I n d i a n a p o l i s , Ind.R o c h e s t e r , N. Y . ~
J e r s e y C i t y , N. J . '
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
$48.56
96.65
107.24
53.80
43.61
59.02
$36.97
66.35
75.55
38.65
32.48
47.21
$0.05
$0.18
$0.06
"(1/)
.10
.60
.19
.05
.43
.85
$0.16
.15
1.30
.41
1.32
.57
$0.01
.05
1.76
.16
.18
.08
$7.69
15.58
12.04
9.20
3.03
.76
$0.25
1.12
1.70
.10
2.17
.07
$8.98
8.79
12.73
18.10
2.14
4.39
8.16
3.02
9.07
5.08
7.01
4.78
$0.36
.48
.31
.10
.12
.08
.18
.05
.42
.03
1.18
.05
.53
.04
.44
.99
.54
2.87
.06
.42
.38
.87
.52
.45
1.50
13.41
8.76
5.25
7.23
3.42
9.13
7.74
9.46
4.72
8.64
2.18
.14
1.12
.36
.04
.97
$0.13
.36
.94
.54
.82
.47
£0.67
5.69
.18
.07
.77
(1/)
(1/)
.50
.03
.01
.02
(1/)
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0
$47.85
46.78
50.18
68.62
38.22
34.17
47.83
22.76
46.62
35.47
65.26
28.85
$27.71
28.23
32.92
40.65
21.31
24.38
29.56
10.79
27.07
21.91
49.45
21.50
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Worcester, Mass.
40.03
72.46
51.13
37.58
69.21
30.89
49.70
32.98
22.90
48.02
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mieh.Fort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.
43.09
40.16
40.72
70.33
49.91
59.28
27.40
24.98
26.28
57.85
32.28
51.12
C o l u m b u s , Ohio
T o l e d o , Ohio
Oakland, C a l i f . —
Denver, Colo.
A t l a n t a , Ga.
D a l l a s , Tex.
S t . P a u l , Minn.—
B i r m i n g h a m , Ala.—
A k r o n , Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
Providence, R. I.'
San Antonio, Tex.-
$0.59
1.46
.57
1.54
1.06
$3.28
$0.42
$0.27
$1.05
.11
.19.
.06
.61
$0.02
.39
.53
.22
.05
.56
.01
.08
.01
.98
.11
.41
.48
(1/)
.01
.18
.24
1.64
1.45
.03
.31
.03
.03
.05
$0.11
.22
.76
1.17
2.56
.26
1.36
2.08
.10
.82
1.43
.25
1.66
.16
.19
.25
1.31
3.31
.05
.21
.08
$0.71
.85
.38
.32
.71
.25
.56
0.45
.32
.12
.13
.44
.14
.04
.08
.17
.71
$0.05
.03
(V)
.04
(i/)
(V)
(1/)
(V)
(V)
.06
(V)
(V)
.02
(1/)
.03
l±/>
.04
.50
(1/J
(1/)
.01
.02
.04
.07
.01
.42
.06
(V)
.03
.14
.11
5.33
.48
3.43
.79
.88
.01
.68
3.88
.65
.96
2.06
1.91
2.67
.48
.08
.75
1.24
1.34
.14
.19
.06
1.49
1.50
.12
.29
2.08
.10
1.34
2.22
3.20
1.58
3.10
2.54
.92
3.13
2.41
3.04
4.40
1.63
o
CO
_
^
O
9
CO
San Diego, Calif.
Long Beach, Calif.
NaahTille, Tenn.
Springfield, Mass.
Tulsa, Okla.
49.69 1
57.09
34.88
74.50
Bridgeport, Conn.
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
57.39
43.29
36.97
Salt Lake City, Utah
Yonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J.
38.44
95.86
60.89
30.14
34.30
23.38
55.24
29.75
47.92
38.22
26.77
26.70
73.10
45.68
Jacksonville, F l a . Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J".
Chattanooga, Tenn.Kansas City, Kans.Fort Wayne, I n d . —
Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J.
Wichita, Kans.
42.08
63.14
47.22
60.22
34.42
29.70
27.97
65.61
38.39
49.98
39.71
16.65
46.81
31.52
42.78
19.59
24.11
21.60
42.17
33.02
38.85
31.60
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.Cambridge, Mass.—
New Bedford, Mass.
Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, Tenn.—
Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.—
Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
37.26
48.49
75.63
52.77
45.94
41.29
46.67
29.57 I
37.61
67.49 I
37.05
17.86
30.33
56.22
31.94
35.52
30.90
28.14
22.13
18.71
42.64
29.49
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, D e l . Tampa, Fla.
Somerville, Mass.
El Paso, Tex.
Evansvilie, Ind.—
Lynn, Mass.
Utlca, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.—
Lowell, Mass.
40.74
40.18
42.08
57.58
26.02
30.04
61.92
61.06
51.02
57.21
55.12
22.85
23.24
26.14
44.21
17.13
20.82
41.77
43.89
39.54
50.41
39.81
38.84
Honolulu, Hawaii 2 / ~
1/ Less than 1/2 of 1 cent.
2/ Not included in group or grand t o t a l s .
.40
.12
.18
.21
4.08
.08
.03
.54
3.16
(1/)
.41
8.74
.09
2.28
.43
1.55
(1/)
.09
.12
(!/> |
2.45
.31
.03
.31
.31
.06
.07
.01
.13
.05
.34
.66
1.08
.93
I 1.22
.13
.07
| .90
.09
I .96
I
.46 I
.37
.08
.02
.10
.07
.30
.06
.14
1.52
2.09
.09 |
2.8
1.36 I
.31 I .72
.67
.04
.17
.01
1.38
.01
.02
1.35
.61
.01
1.92
.19
.16
.05
.08
.11
.08
.41 I .05 I .46 | 13.92 I .53
(1/) I
.33
.11
14.54
1.06
.14
(±/>
.07
7.01
.21
.02 | .39
<A/>
.14
.71
7.27 J 6.43
.01
.10
(1/)
.43
5.97
.27 I .42
.16
.08
.60 I
3.04
1.26
.08
.20
.01
.75
.55
.04 |
.16
5.94
.08
.62
(1/)
.15
6.24
.11
.01
.49
11.84
3.54
1.84
.23
.56
4.70
.17
1.11
.18
.11
.64
.16
.08
.08
.07
.73
.03
.05
.05
.19
.26
.41
.08
.59
1.79
.09
.29
(i/) 1.01
1.45
1.12
.20
.78
2.51
.12
.10
.03
.32
. 9 3 I 4.10
.07
.01
.01 |
(1/)
.07 |
"U)\
.36
.04
.04
.20
.15
1.32
.09
.10
.06
.07
.12
.16
.02
.57
.06
.18
.08
.09
.11
.28
.21
.06
.09
.51
2.63
.37
.18
.55
.06
.54
.06
.33
.07
.10
.03
.01
.02
(1/)
.15
.03
.04
(1/)
.08
(1/)
.27
.22
.87 I
.49
.06
1.17
.42
.04
.30
.08
.03
.01
.61
.90
.67
.09
.18
.11
.31
.14
1.45
.15
.06
.01
.04
.13
(1/)
(1/)
.24
.02
4.08
.93
.13
.15
.09
.70
.09
1.00
.13
.18
7.14
.24
.84
.27
.86
9.32
2.14
3.79
7.79
2.36
5.19
.67
.09 I
.21
.77
.50
.81
.02
.51
5.92
3.20
.17
1.18
6.14
11.55
5.43
5.16
7.49
6.03
5.96
11.01
4.65
10.81
7.52
5.05
8.13
12.77
7.92
6.65
6.63
5.35
7.45
11.00
5.30
.62
5.63
.22
.45
.75
.56
.53
.30
.20
.20
.33
.08
13.66
.11
.26
2.48
.22
.02
(1/)
(1/)
(1/)
.01
.48
.21
.91
1.40
3.38
.02
.01
.01
.01
u/)
"(I/)
2.67
.24
.42
(1/)
.03
.81
7.83
8.41
9.41
U/>
.01
.01 I
~(l/[
. 0 1 I "(1/)
(1/)
.04
(1/)
.12 j
.01
.02 |
.21
(1/)
.41 I .02 I
.17
.16
(1/)
.06
.76
.03
.21
.01
.60
1.19
.01
.60
.03
.62
.07
.44
1.60
.53
.13
.57
.21
1.52
.61
.32
1.38
1.10
.66
2.30
.44
1.85
1.33
.29
1.74
.65
2.58
1.95
.96
.36
.39
.56
.30
2.97
.53
.69
2.02
1.95
1.61
.50
.42
.69
.44
.39
2.55
2.28
1.79
.03
.13
.63
.02
2.48
1.65
.93
1.35
2.86
.80
.08
2.22
.02
.60
.02
.08
.22
.83
.59
.54
.80
1.23
1.07
.64
2.89
5.33
.69
1.39
.34
1.89
.60
1.16
2.06
1.75
.33
1.52
1.75
1.40
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
TABLE 5.—PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF
(See t e x t
City numba
OTHER LOCAL TAXES
General
property
taxes
CITY
Grand total
Licenses and permits
Property
Business
Sales
and
service
Poll
All
other
and
All other
Use of
street
Fines,
for-
Business
Nonbusiness
alties
65.2
0.1
2.0
2.1
0.1
0.1
0.5
1.3
0.2
0.4
64.1
67.5
67.9
2.1
2.7
1.2
2.8
.8
.1
.2
(1/)
.2
.4
(±/>
(V)
.5
.3
.4
1.2
1.7
1.8
.2
.3
.3
.4
.5
.7
0.2
2.0
.1
.2
0.5
3.1
(1/)
.1
.2
.3
.9
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, Pa.—
D e t r o i t , Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.'
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
59.6
68.5
69.4
72.6
58.5
60.9
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
63.4
70.3
81.3
65.7
50.3
66.4
68.9
3.4
1.8
0.2
.1
0.1
1.1
2.0
6.5
2.3
1.3
"(1/)
.1
.8
6.0
.1
.1
(l/) i
0.3
(1/)
.1
1.1
.2
2.0
2.1
.2
.6
5.3
1.4
.3
.1
.3
.5
.3
1.1
.7
.2
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.
New Orleans, La.
Cincinnati, Ohio
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, Mo.
Seattle, Wash.
62.3
66.4
51.5
69.2
73.7
61.8
Indianapolis, Ind.Rochester, N. Y.
Jersey City, N. J.Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
76.1
68.5
70.4
71.8
74.5
80.0
0.1
2.4
.2
7.4
0.5
2.0
1.8
5.6
.2
1.7
3.7
1.0
0.3
.1
.3
.2
.4
0.4
.5
.7
.3
.3
1.2
0.4
<!/>
1.6
1.0
.1
.8
3.0
1.0
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, OhioToledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.'
Denver, C o l o . —
Atlanta, Ga.
57.9
60.4
65.6
59.2
55.8
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, M i n n . —
Birmingham, Ala.—
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
71.3
61.8
47.4
58.1
61.8
Providence, R. I.'
San Antonio, Tex.'
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y . —
Dayton, Ohio
75.8
74.5
77.2
68.6
64.5
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.
61.1
69.4
60.3
63.6
62.2
See footnotes at end of table.
1.7
3.2
4.7
2.1
4.1
.3
.1
(I/)
(1/)
0.8
1.1
.3
.1
0.2
.5
1.5
1.7
6.7
1.6
.8
2.9
9.2
.2
2.3
(I/)
.4
1.4
2.3
"(I/T
2.2
.9
4.1
.2
.4
1.3
2.8
(±/>
0.4
.2
1.9
6.6
1.5
.7
1.0
.5
2.2
.2
.3
.5
.4
.7
1.3
.1
1.6
.1
.6
47
PART I I : GENERAL G O V E R N M E N T — R E V E N U E S
REVENUES,
BY MAJOR S O U R C E S :
discussion,
p . 42)
1937
USE OF MONEY
AND PROPERTY
Interest
Rents
and
royalties
FROM OTHER AGENCIES
Proportionately
shared
State
taxes
Pension
sessments
Donations
and
contributions
Grand total-
claimed
moneys
Spe| cial |ChargContries for
asbutions sesscurfrom
rent
ments
public- I for
serservice outvices
enterlays
prises
(1/)N
Group I
Group II
Group III
2.4
1.5
1.1
4.0
1.9
3.4
15.1
14.5
14.7
1.6
1.2
1.2
.7
1.2
1.8
2.0
2.8
4.0
3.6
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, Pa.
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.—
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
2.8
1.7
8.3
.1
1.4
.9
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.'
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
2.9
2.6
1.0
1.8
.7
3.6
0.1
.3
2.4
(1/)
5.1
.1
1.6
4.8
4.3
7.7
15.4
16.1
7.7
12.2
25.9
21.7
2.0
1.6
1.5
.5
.6
.7
4.6
6.9
1.6
3.6
15.2
10.5
8.6
16.9
15.5
11.2
19.7
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.8
1.8
(1/)
(1/)
(1/)
0.2
.1
.4
.1
4.4
.2
(1/)
9.1
5.7
(1/)
(1/)
1.6
.1
4.5
1.9
.1
2.6
(i/)
(1/)
(1/)
(1/)
(1/)
(l/) x
1.2
.97
•
1.7
3.6
3.3
3.0
2.5
4.3
2.0
3.6
2.9
3.5
.2
1.5
.9
3.1
2.7
6.1
3.3
3.3
4.8
4.4
.4
.4
1.2
.2 I
(1/)
(1/)
(1/)
1.7
3.1
2.9
6.0
3.8
4.4
7.1
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, M i n n . —
New Orleans, La.
Cincinnati, Ohio-Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, Mo.
——
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.
Rochester, N. Y.
Jersey City, N. J.
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
P o r t l a n d , Oreg.
2.0
.9
3.7
2.1
1.2
1.3
.9
1.0
1.9
(1/)
.1
23.6
9.7
20.8
12.2
9.7
21.1
(1/)
.1
1.6
.3
.4
.1
15.8
16.1
11.2
17.1
7.0
1.3
.2
.3
.2
0.5
.1
(1/)
2.0
.7
1.2
1.5
.1
2.4
0.1
.2
1.4
(V)
(1/)
0.5
2.6
1.2
(1/)
1.2
1.6
lz/1.
(1/)
1.1
.1
7l/)"
(1/)
(1/)
3.6
4.1
3.9
5.0
5.6
3.4
.5
.2
4.0
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0
Columbus, O h i o —
T o l e d o , Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
0.8
1.0
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.
7.0
1.2
(1/)
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, M i n n . —
Birmingham, Ala.Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
Providence, R. I.San Antonio, Tex.Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
0.1
5.7
1.7
2.7
7.6
2.9
3.7
8.0
2.8
4.3
8.4
5.7
1.3
4.7
3.8
3.6
4.9
2.8
1.9
1.7
2.6
2.7
3.4
3.3
3.1
6.3
(1/)^
13.9
1.4
(1/)
(1/)
.3
(V)
.3
1.5
.7
.1
1.4
.3
1.0
'(1/)'
1.2
(l/>
.2
6.8
1.2
2.0
.4
.3
.1
3.4
3.7 I
5.0
2.1
7.8
48
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
TABLE 5.—PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF
(See text
OTHER LOCAL TAXES
CITY
City n
<D
General
property
taxes
Licenses and permits
Property
Business
Sales
and
service
Poll
All
other
All other
Use of
street
Business
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 — C o n t i n u e d
F o r t Worth, T e x . H a r t f o r d , Conn.—
F l i n t , Mich.
New Haven, Conn.San Diego, Califs
64.6
82.3
64.7
86.2
60.7
Long Beach, Califs
Nashville, T e n n . —
Springfield, Mass.'
Tul3a, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.-
60.1
67.0
74.1
76.6
83.5
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J.
88.3
72.4
69.5
76.3
75.0
.9
.3
.5
.2
6.7
Jacksonville, Fla.'
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.-
39.6
74.1
66.8
71.0
56.9
(1/)
1.1
5.3
Kansas City, Kans.Fort Wayne, Ind.--Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J . —
64.3
86.0
77.7
13.3
.2
4.6
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.Carabridge, M a s s . —
New Bedford, Mass.
79.6
47.9
62.5
74.3
60.5
Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, Tenn.
Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.
Tac oma, Wash.
77.3
74.8
60.3
74.8
49.7
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.
Tampa, Fla.
63.2
79.6
56.1
57.8
62.1
Somerville, Mass.
El Paso, Tex.
Evansvilie, Ind.Lynn, Mass.
76.8
65.8
69.3
67.5
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, M i n n . —
Waterbury, Conn.
Lowell, Mass.
71.9
77.5
88.1
72.2
0.4
.3
0.8
.1
.1
1.3
(1/)
2.1
2.7
1.6
2.6
(V)
U/)
.2
(i/)
4.1
(1/)
1.4
(1/)
2.3
.6
2.1
1.8
(1/)
1.1
4.2
5.0
.1
6.1
2.3
2.1
.1
2.7
.2
(1/)
(1/)
(1/)
1.5
U/>
.1
.7
.3
.3
<l/>
Honolulu, Hawaii 2 / ~
1/ Less than 1/20 of 1 percent.
2/ Not included in group or grand totals.
6.5
.5
1.4
(1/)
(1/)
.2
(!/>
.3
1.4
5.2
(1/)
1.4
.7
(1/)
.1
2.0
(i/)
Nonbusiness
Fines,
forfeits,
and
penalties
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—REVENUES
REVENUES, BY MAJOR SOURCES:
49
1937—Continued
discussion, p. 42)
USE OF MONEY
AND PROPERTY
Interest
FROM OTHJSR AGENCIES
ProporRents tionately
and
royal- shared
State
ties
taxes
Pension
sessments
Donations
and
contributions
Unclaimed
moneys
Contributions
from
publicservice
enterprises
Special
assessments
for
outlays
Charges for
current
services
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
Fort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.
San Diego, Calif.
0.9
1.2
Long Beach, Calif.'
Nashville, T e n n . —
Springfield, Mass.'
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.—
1.8
.6
0.5
.2
(V)
.1
.1
(1/)
1.1
.1
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, Utah
Yonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J.
.1
(1/)
.4
.1
(1/)
(1/)
.2
Jacksonville, Fla.
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.
(1/)
Kansas City, K a n s . —
Fort Wayne, Ind.
Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J.
(1/)
.2
.1
.1
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.
Cambridge, Mass. —
New Bedford, Mass.
Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, Tenn.
Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.
Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.
Tampa, Fla.
.2
(1/)
(1/)
1
1
.6
1.2
.9
.1
2.8
.9
.1
.8
(l/>
1
1.5
2.2
1.6
Honolulu, Hawaii 2/-
(V)
.1
.2
3.6
3.7
.2
2.9
.3
.1
11/)
1.7
1.7
.3
(1/)
2.2
(1/)
(1/)
0.1
4.2
.2
1.7
31.0
11.2
6.8
14.2
(i/>
1.9
.9
13.1
14.4
23.6
15.7
28.7
1.2
3.0
9.0
.3
.5
5.2
.3
2.1
11.1
18.0
10.4
1.1
10.2
(i/)
(i/)
(i/>
.6
1.4
4.7
.7
.2
1.6
.5
2.5
3.6
(1/)
(1/)
(1/)
3.5
(1/)
Ii/)
.3
.1
(1/)
.6
1.5
.2
(1/)
3.8
(1/)
1.6
.6
.9
1.0
1.1
11.1
13.6
20.0
31.8
18.8
11.5
25.5
17.8
12.0
<!/>
(1/)
0.2
11/)
.5
2.2
16.1
11.1
17.8
2.7
2.1
(V)
(i/)
(i/)
7.2
13.5
11.9
6.1
10.4
1.7
9.6
(±/>
1.3
16.1
16.2
12.3
7.7
.3
2.5
.1
2.6
.3
.1
.2
(l/>
.2
.2
1.0
6.5
2.0
.2
(1/)
(.1/)
25.5
20.1
8.6
15.4
5.3
17.0
11.0
6.8
13.1
27.1
(1/)
.2
0.1
.1
.3
1.2
(I/)'
.6
1.1
9.8
1.1
2.2
5.9
Somervilie, Mass.
El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.Lynn, Mass.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.
Lowell, Mass.
(1/)
23.2
6.7
17.3
3.7
"(1/)"
(1/)
(1/)
(l/>
(V)
4.5
.7
4.2
3.2"
4.5
.2
1.3
1.1
4.3
3.2
4.7
3.2
1.3
.6
1.7
1.5
1.1
1.1
7.5
6.1
(1/)
<l/>
(1/)
(1/)
(1/)
(1/)
(1/)
"(1/H
1.4
(1/)
(1/)
5.3
1.9
.6
(1/)
(1/)
u/>
(1/)
1.7
2.2
1.8
1.7
3.0
2.3
2.2
7.7
7.9
1.9
3.4
1.4
3.3
(1/)
7.6
2.0
1.4
.5
_(!/)
.3
1.0
4.5
6.9
1.4
1.2
.9
•1
3.0
3.1
2.5
(1/)
1.3
.1
1.9
1.9
3.1
1.1
3.2
(1/)
(1/)
U/>
5.9
4.3
8.8
2.7
2.8
(1/)
(1/)
.1
(I/)1
(1/)
50
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
TABLE 6
Revenues of the 94 cities in 1937 from general property taxes and other
local taxes are shown in greater detail in table 6. General property tax receipts have been considered also in the opening discussion of this section.
GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES. —General property taxes yielded over £1,767,000,000
to the 94 cities in 1937, an increase of approximately £41,000,000 over 1936.
After general property tax yields reached their peak in 1930, such receipts, it
will be observed, remained comparatively stable, the greatest fluctuation being
a decline of $102,000,000 in the 1934 yield as compared with 1930—a decrease
of only 4 percent. Concomitant with this discussion, it may be of interest to
refer to section D, Assessed Valuations and Tax Levies,which shows, in contrast
to the stability of property tax receipts, a sharp decline in the assessed valuations upon which these taxes were levied.
The figures shown in the accompanying statement Indicate the trend of general property tax yields over the twelve-year period, 1926 to 1937, inclusive.
From these data it will be seen that general property tax receipts in 1937 were
higher than in any year except the peak year of 1930.
In contrast to the municipal situation is that
of the State. Whereas the property tax has re1926
$1,490,000,000
mained a stable and substantial source of munici1928
1,708,000,000
pal revenue, it has fallen In the past quarter1930
1,800,000,000
century to a position of small importance as a
1932
1,719,000,000
source of revenue on the State level.6
1934
1,698,000,000
1936
1,726,000,000
CURRENT AND PRIOR YEARS1 LEVIES. —Receipts from
1937
1,767,000,000
general property taxes are classified to show collections on levies for the current year reported,
collections from prior years' levies, and collections from penalties and interest on delinquent taxes. It will be observed that 16 percent of total receipts
from general property taxes were from prior years' levies, reflecting In part
the efficient and aggressive tax collection methods pursued by some local governments and in part the improved economic status of property owners.
OTHER LOCAL TAXES.—The phrase "Other local taxes," as used here, is to be
distinguished from the same phrase as used in tables 3, 4, and 5, for in the
present case it is exclusive of licenses and permits. It includes property
taxes other than on assessed valuations, business taxes (but not business licenses), sales taxes, poll taxes, and other miscellaneous local taxes. Receipts
from these sources in 1937 totaled £118,329,578, or 4.4 percent of the total
city revenues. Each of these classifications is discussed separately below.
PROPERTY TAXES ON OTHER THAN ASSESSED VALUATION.—This classification includes
taxes upon property which differ from the general property tax particularly in
the manner of their levy. Such taxes may be imposed upon the property of corporations levied upon the basis of the amount of corporate stock, corporate indebtedness, or of both corporate stock and indebtedness, or on any basis other
than an assessed valuation applied to all property of the corporation. They
Include taxes levied upon savings banks and kindred corporations in proportion
to a certain specified portion of deposits, as their excess above the value of
specified investments; taxes upon life insurance corporations assessed upon the
basis of the valuations of their policies; and all specific taxes upon property,
such as taxes upon land at a specified amount per acre, taxes upon horses,
mules, and other animals at a specified amount per head, taxes upon vessels at
a specified amount per registered ton, and taxes upon grain at a specified
amount per bushel. From this group of taxes the cities derived £2,485,368 in
revenue in 1937, almost half of which came from taxes on bank deposits and corporate shares in Baltimore.
BUSINESS TAXES.—Business taxes are taxes upon business activity exacted in
proportion to the volume of business and computed through a levy which measures
activity by earnings, premiums, etc. They include the taxes on insurance premiums,
6/ C£. the companion Tolume Financial Statistics of States: 1937.
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—REVENUES
51
on earnings or income of banks and corporations, and those on public utilities
based on gross or net income. Total revenue from these taxes was $53,971,646
in 1937.
SALES TAXES. — A detailed discussion of sales taxes is presented in the introduction to the revenue section. Total revenues in 1937 from sales taxes
were $55,852,014, of which sum New York produced $49,129,460.
POLL TAXES.—A number of cities, particularly in Massachusetts and Connecticut, derived small sums from the poll tax. The total in 1937 was $2,235,027.
ALL OTHER TAXES.—Reported here are lo^al taxes other than those separately
classified, including mortgage and inheritance taxes, stock transfer taxes, and
taxes on legal instruments. Total revenues from such taxes in 1937 were $3,785,523. The largest amount was $3,490,691 In unemployment compensation taxes in
Washington, D. C , the city collecting what in effect Is a State tax.
The
amounts shown here are exclusive of business and nonbusiness licenses and
permits, which are presented in table 7.
TABLE 7
Revenues of the 94 cities from licenses and permits in 1937 are shown in
table 7.
LICENSES AND PERMITS.—The 94 cities reported total revenues of $54,258,633
from licenses and permits in 1937. This group of revenues falls into the three
general classifications of licenses and permits for use of street, business licenses, and nonbusiness licenses and permits. They may have been imposed primarily for regulation, with the revenue aspect incidental to the regulation, or
they may have been imposed chiefly for revenue purposes with regulation only an
incidental aspect.
LICENSES AND PERMITS FOR USE OF STREET.—Revenues from licenses and permits for
use of streets totaled $12,253,182, the largest item being $8,460,829 realized
from licenses and fees imposed locally on motor vehicles.
Chicago accounted
for over 60 percent of the latter amount. A rather interesting source of revenue within this group, because of Its comparative newness, is the $922,271 derived from parking meters. There were 14 cities reporting income from this
source in 1937, the largest amount reported being $188,774 received by Houston,
Texas. It is to be noted that none of the cities with a population of 500,000
or over reported use of the parking meter as a revenue device.
BUSINESS LICENSES.—Revenues from business licenses amounted to $36,455,840,
approximately two-thirds of total receipts from licenses and permits. Licenses
on the wholesalers and retailers of liquor and beer produced revenues of
$17,788,975. During 1937, revenues from this source were reported by 51 of the
94 cities, the largest single item being the amount of $5,669,297 reported by
the city of Chicago. The next largest amount of revenue within the business
license group is derived from certain commercial activities subject to safety
regulation and inspection,such as auto service stations, peddlers,junk dealers,
pawn shops, and dealers in explosives, firearms, and inflammable materials.
NONBUSINESS LICENSES AND PERMITS.—Revenues from nonbusiness licenses and permits, other than for use of streets, totaled $5,549,611, the largest amount being
derived from permits and licenses for building construction and equipment, Including excavation, blasting, wrecking, elevators, plumbing, etc. Other sources
of income within this group are of negligible importance in the municipal revenue structure.
REVISIONS IN LICENSE CLASSIFICATION.—Numerous refinements have been made in
the presentation of statistics on revenues from licenses and permits, details
being set forth in figure 1 on pages 18-21.
TABLE 6.—REVENUES FROM GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES AND OTHER LOCAL TAXES:
1937
GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES
On prior years' levies
bar
On current year's levy
CITY
1
City
Total
Personal
Real property
Tangible
r up
n
TTT
Penalties and
interest
Personal
Real property
Intangible
Tangible
Intangible
$1,766,972,358
$1,369,544,700
$63,680,404
$18,777,646
$275,105,470
$6,638,883
$1,119,450
$32,105,805
1,194,225,008
215,382,832
357,364,518
944,232,384
156,265,941
269,046,375
25,388,487
15,200,902
23,091,015
12,882,736
3,431,550
2,463,360
185,743,115
34,602,903
54,759,452
2,165,011
1,748,378
2,725,494
835,153
215,217
69,080
22,978,122
3,917,941
5,209,742
GROUP I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 AND OVER
New Y o r k , N. Y.
Chicago, 1 1 1 .
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$459,755,607
193,000,947
77,859,128
82,776,320
63,225,838
38,331,015
28,875,803
$409,733,809
125,332,880
60,229,359
57,037,805
49,656,435
25,708,345
23,123,164
34,100,708
55,210,497
44,854,995
31,512,492
22,070,626
29,962,154
32,688,878
24,853,197
41,637,472
33,892,205
25,832,365
15,606,833
21,877,401
29,711,114
11/)
u/>
$7,614,146
3,766,464
1,373,565
3,576,514
613,360
4 707 955
1 592 842
2 143 641
(1/)
$4,144,812
(1/)
310,924
2,254,291
(2/)
$42,032,426
60,582,456
11,599,759
23,826,576
4,626,061
6,172,089
3,769,562
1 ,243 111
3,852,041
12,082,411
8,003,901
691,075
1,812,850
4,058,806
2,633,102
2 138 088
171 456
2 620 054
(1/)
U/)
$526,592
$626,712
323,445
103,344
38,981
96,281
703,614
(1/)
124,941
106,381
(2/)
30,806
370
46,063
$7,989,372
7,085,611
1,358,606
1,911,939
266,619
506,168
575,845
604,620
789,995
70,290
295,703
1,178,692
344,662
GROUP I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 5 0 0 , 0 0 0
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Minneapolis, Minn.
New Orleans, La.-Cincinnati, Ohio-Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.'
Rochester, N. Y . —
$21,236,361
19,306,004
17,854,308
30,007,122
16,210,649
13,523,239
13,758,151
22,126,849
$15,043,697
3 / 11,058,730
13,357,689
17,652,977
13,219,128
9,866,570
10,164,622
20,314,225
$3,121,342
2,197,103
1,570,147
5,654,325
1,292,377
(1/)
(1/)
$731,705
(2/)
2,156,737
(2/)
(2/)
519,909
ifSJ.
3/
4,803,126
521,006
5,071,475
1,510,195
3,229,534
3,000,601
1,445,229
703,691
117,456
702,526
21,715
(2/)""
129,271
(2/)
(2/)
(i/>
(l/>
C.J.V
543 354
925 819
167 234
427 135
73,019
367,395
3
H
Jersey City, N. J.
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Orag.
24,166,983
12,287,690
10,310,934
14,592,542
15,011,046
10,281,143
8,244,116
12,051,998
1,104,881
260,727
(2/)
21,199
(1/)
7,077,375
1,743,604
1,697,446
2,290,840
177,980
$1,211,927
827,194
461,708
176,195
524,088
342,058
856,189
66,940
$276,511
59,786
1,472
238,087
1,277,707
1,398,566
609,161
1,132,678
823,626
768,985
2,155,614
1,311,158
267,617
18,863
2,367,059
423,802
961,865
946,602
498,229
991,570
1,415,533
762,273
130,844
42,010
19,388
100,714
306,906
(2/)
(2/)
(2/)
21,650
(2/)
(2/)
(I/)
795,701
262,943
87,446
249,704
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
29
30
31
32
33
34
Columbus, Ohio
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.
Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.
Birmingham, Ala.
$8,303,891
8,439,193
9,729,728
11,919,287
5,976,471
6,776,539
8,214,891
2,949,595
$5,715,235
6,329,785
9,048,597
7,446,960
5,319,285
4,499,932
6,040,242
2,460,984
$652,102
503,916
181,495
3,980,902
$447,571
690,556
5,156
1,664,469
1,294,284
400,573
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, N e b r . —
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
7,176,005
5,728,699
12,639,956
5,235,070
6,728,710
10,660,049
6,813,473
4,612,948
4,631,869
3,584,206
11,920,591
3,974,868
5,851,513
9,799,260
3,698,013
3,076,455
760,285
687,997
(2/)
(2/)
(2/)
238,527
(2/)
5,997,259
4,713,035
3,278,064
2,475,122
3,511,161
8,507,944
3,824,446
7,437,667
907,569
369,732
439,128
608,154
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.
9,507,996
5,615,076
4,772,540
4,317,188
4,447,054
9,748,162
5,397,821
8,317,073
San Diego, Calif.
Long Beach, Calif.—
Nashville, Tenn.
Springfield, M a s s . —
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
4,825,859
5,384,209
3,652,674
8,473,937
4,402,697
7,059,105
5,553,434
3,866,130
3,788,408
4,222,911
2,341,321
5,501,004
3,476,363
6,284,427
4,985,257
3,139,486
565,325
769,509
571,751
886,122
Salt Lake City, Utah
3,850,136
10,270,299
6,350,165
2,313,021
6,075,424
4,089,093
5,309,321
2,419,619
2,366,390
7,560,930
3,830,285
1,945,456
6,005,540
2,920,656
2,334,332
1,752,727
845,783
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.Fort Worth, Tex.
Yonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.—Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, T e n n . —
See footnotes at end of table.
U/)
(A/)
(1/)
(1/)
Q/>
476,306
113,134
418,926
(2/)
74,095
(2/)
(I/)
(1/)
(1/)
10,432
8,799
(2/)
7i/)~
. ----(i/>
156,216
641,391
235,651
(2/)
(2/)
399,401
330,726
702,872
1,953,281
865,229
601,247
568,177
662,034
(1/)
126,514
12,171
<±/>
$545
19,985
(1/)
(2/)
(1/)
(2/)
(2/)
(2/)
(1/)
(1/)
(1/)
47,404
47,437
(1/)
57,378
39,562
10,519
46,915
(1/)
(1/)
(1/)
17,210
(2/)
507
2,558
(2/)
(1/)
"i/T
$7,971
31,222
77,143
133,098
143,566
24,176
8,927
39,067
110,204
127,524
53,571
91,804
64 764
105 265
61 497
186,596
130,758
248,648
136,192
117,133
4,408
10,144
26,211
86,615
61,105
173,431
64,610
465,357
2,053,948
2,259,219
281,486
166,526
793,635
1,981,796
357,482
81,260
18,324
36,124
(I/)
8,200
(i/)
(2/)
(2/)
6,080
655,421
260,661
77,879
69,884
137,326
333,478
37,635
TABLE 6.—REVENUES FROM GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES AND OTHER LOCAL TAXES: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES
ber
On current year's levy
On prior years' levies
CITY
I
Personal
City
Total
Penalties and
interest
Personal
Real property
Real property
Tangible
Intangible
Tangible
Intangible
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
79
80
81
82
Kansas City, Kans.
Fort Wayne, Ind.—
Camden, N. J . — — •
E r i e , Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J . —
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, M a s s . Cambridge, M a s s . - -
$2,974,905
2,593,731
5,022,192
3,906,251
4,580,156
3,715,616
2,082,053
3,495,933
6,426,386
$2,824,607
1,833,524
2,730,897
2,945,944
3,032,447
2,812,425
1,390,418
2,322,560
4,577,108
New Bedford, Mass.
Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, Tenn.—
Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.—
Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
3,596,090
3,971,101
3,417,243
3,089,570
2,424,923
2,024,790
4,614,100
3,184,598
2,456,679
2,299,526
3,166,987
2,654,025
2,932,868
1,966,309
1,470,133
3,748,872
2,842,002
1,833,260
2,476,973
2,784,196
4,677,416
1,811,993
. 2-, 188,175
4,298,564
4,502,879
4,028,739
5,106,400
3,990,328
2,117,160
1,944,518
2,694,695
1,128,467
1,972,165
2,450,435
3,934,029
3,798,201
3.683,314
2,341,493
Wilmington, D e l . Tampa, Fla.
Somerville, Mass.
El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, I n d . Lynn, Mass.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.Lowell, Mass.
Honolulu, Hawaii 4 / ~
See footnotes at end of table.
4,000,000
$402,481
------
$8,163
72,869
Ji/>
"(1/)""
60,714
415,281
474,399
116,526
585,638
167,640
(8/)
li/)
<±/>
2,351
(1/)
262,035
(1/)
302,646
223,701
312,500
305,283
U/>
76,161
48,801
205,705
(2/)
96,885
463,525
•
~
—
985,364
359,851
(1/)
$142,135
233,583
2,033,794
913,813
1,349,217
826,823
211,924
652,830
1,619,758
619,790
753,847
536,703
156,702
380,102
554,657
458,175
293,795
111,906
359,813
513,911
1,488,679
285,624
119,125
1,287,379
514,382
225,537
351,446
$31,766
$19,508
(1/)
(1/)
63,445
25,116
24,133
6,804
55,511
(1/)
(1/)
1,277
18,254
97,267
47,376
21,303
~(1/T"
24,036
81,145
35,625
50,267
58,875
•3
21
g
o
w
O
U/>
n
"(1/)""
52,383
<±/>
$257,501
46,494
198,492
8,850
985
21,028
08,861
92,635
(1/)
1,8
(2/)
(1/)
(I/)
83,812
84,275
45,243
75,922
54,468
5,001
62,240
35.154
S§
TABLE 6.—REVENUES FROM GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES AND OTHER LOCAL TAXES:
1937—Continued
OTHER LOCAL TAXES
Property on other than assessed valuation
u
CITY
1
Business
Total
Public utility
All other
$118,329,578
$1,046,487
97,582,872
11,361,171
9,385,535
189,544
City
Public
utility
856,943
Sales and
service
Poll
All other
All other
Privately
owned
Publicly
owned
$1,438,881
$41,075,358
$1,072,632
$11,823,656
$55,852,014
$2,235,027
$3,785,523
1,282,624
113,955
42,302
27,858,774
7,621,937
5,594,647
832,821
239,811
11,491,123
115,588
216,945
52,885,764
2,546,517
419,733
235,679
67,707
1,931,641
3,639,364
62,646
83,513
$S,643,888
$49,129,460
GROUP I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 AND OVER
New Y o r k , N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif..
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$75,277,780
5,031,029
680,241
164,385
1,156,565
$17,504,432
5,031,029
460,323
$174,998
1 ,156 565
3,853,998
1,917,434
227,083
81,430
366,111
8,725,395
43,584
57,837
$44,920
103,753
$60,632
1 620 101
1,056,371
536 703
165,831
1,214,900
1,177,526
$227,083
1
58 288
366 111
527 708
1,121,126
43,584
GROUP I I . — CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.
New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
See footnotes at end of table.
$98,172
2,606,030
59,263
3,295,281
928,173
712,494
$35,526
$684,099
$79,025
59,263
3,216,151
303,587
563,772
$1,921,931
$105
624,586
148,722
TABLE 6.—REVENUES FROM GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES AND OTHER LOCAL TAXES:
1937—Continued
OTHER LOCAL TAXES
Property on other than assessed valuation
CITY
|
Total
Sales and
service
Public utility
Public
utility
City
Business
All other
Privately
owned
Publicly
owned
Poll
All other
All other
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000—Continued
Indianapolis, Ind.Rochester, N. Y.
Jersey City, N. J.Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
$87,198
125,213
2,783,387
266,321
135,588
264,051
$34,930
$19,871
125,213
2,748,182
266,321
20,000
264,051
67,327
275
$115,588
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, Ohio
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, C a l i f . —
Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, M i n n . —
Birmingham, A l a . —
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Term.
Providence, R. I.San Antonio, Tex.Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y. •*Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Worcester. Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, OMo
Grand Rapids, Mich.Fort '.'forth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.
$171,547
526,044
159,501
502,473
576,854
885,219
51,599
144,212
$171,547
284,621
159,501
428,714
217,339
$856,543
$124,174
$117,249
$73,759
$286,460
28,676
144,212
360,141
41,668
11,368
123,208
107,968
261,072
360,141
41,668
11,368
115,293
213.584
107,968
47,488
1,630
29,675
316,488
1,630
29,675
40,775
275,713
236,615
$1,170
7,915
235,445
3
e
San Diego, Calif.
Long Beach, Calif.
Nashville, Tenn.
Springfield, Mass.
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J.
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
Jacksonville, Fla.Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.Kansas City, Kans.Fort Wayne, Ind.
Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J.
Wichita, Kans.
130,428
41,156
112,079
85,958
151,852
250,254
57,469
82,119
25,248
29,557
587,956
17,769
3,800
69,927
398,264
300
50,662
59,681
1,069,339
10,526
269,825
50,130
130,428
41,156
112,079
85,958
151,852
250,254
7,747
57,469
16,784
25,248
29,557
567,760
25,773
1,379
181,230
55,844
41,671
54,375
100,428
163,197
13,676
28,384
265,499
51,470
15,224
1,875
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, D e l . —
Tampa, Fla.Somerville, Mass.El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, I n d . —
Lynn, Ma3s.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, C o n n . —
Lowell, Mass.
14,990
138,253
52,120
5,999
30,840
57,386
23,776
13,533
139,630
39,626
Honolulu, Hawaii 4/-
59,681
2,072
$18,033
55,844
41,671
53,880
90,639
9,789
43,721
33,359
14,990
3,500
5,999
10,729
11,801
221,778
18,111
15,224
133,273
1,480
52,120
20,111
57,386
23,776
3,779
139,630
39,626
97,040
2/ Included with tangible personal.
6,724
1,041,494
10,526
268,446
50,130
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.
Cambridge, Mass.
New Bedford, Mass.
Reading, Pa.
Knorville, Tenn.
Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.
Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
1/ Included with real property,
included in group or grand totals.
12,449
11,045
3,800
69,927
392,526
300
50,662
7,978
3/ Includes tax on personal property for New Orleans Levee Board and Parish School Board.
4/ Not
TABLE 7 . — R E V E N U E S FROM L I C E N S E S AND P E R M I T S :
1937
(See t e x t d i s c u s s i o n , p . 51)
OTHER LOCAL TAXES (CONTINUED FROM TABLE 6)
L i c e n s e s and p e r m i t s f o r u s e of
street
O t h e r l i c e n s e s and p e r m i t s
Business
Motor v e hicles
Grand t o t a l —
Other vehicles
Parking
meters
Street privileges
Alcoholic
beverage
licenses
P o l i c e and
protective
$54,258,633
$8,460,829
$90,550
$922,271
$2,779,532
$17,788,975
$3,343,464
$4,355,366
$2,418,571
Group I
Group I I —
Group I I I -
34,040,103
7,121,102
13,097,428
6,724,053
592,705
1,144,071
25,653
17,418
47,479
245,951
676,320
2,257,753
77,640
444,139
11,140,055
3,084,709
3,564,211
2,280,882
281,254
781,328
3,294,622
305,483
755,261
1,397,502
309,289
711,780
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, Pa.
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
$5,004,379
14,864,925
658,783
1,110,226
2,473,063
247,898
1,794,197
$413,195
756,775
124,042
196,351
380,942
40,128
43,968
$1,701,107
622,024
125,276
158,032
255,725
17,540
26,992
$639,341
274,243
62,434
40,091
115,714
15,221
44,311
38,015
41,383
5,408
115,168
53,220
24,741
47,546
54,091
28,522
67,064
219,501
11,506
7,242
1,114
74,293
41,344
25,566
13,782
19,013
31,035
$60,020
2,025
27,33?
35,358
19,252
63,022
6,523
4,369
$80,353
26,750
34,531
34,022
1,652
63,566
8,116
20,710
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
9
10
11
12
13
14
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Minneapolis, Minn.New Orleans, La.
Cincinnati, O h i o —
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.Rochester, N. Y.
1,207,220
1,876,849
213,067
476,129
3,026,565
848,624
238,178
$1,286,226
587,331
70,235
35,961
93,217
18,985
$5,123,918
216,773
$11,468
833,366
35,255
444,799
69,942
$5,669,297
10,594
22,066
70,708
1,166
11,564
24,065
15,878
20,351
1,098
2,493
979,053
1,473,423
1,955,132
496,838
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
$709,642
1,810,251
197,523
837,771
1,343,498
314,716
150,401
101,086
$114,080
391,372
20,861
$7,129
8,919
734
$ i . , OJ.O
21,568
4,514
$383,934
1,074,636
629,003
310,620
$57,177
3,910
1,538
1,071
$46,380
3,076
43,510
34,621
23,459
20,253
Jersey City, N.
Houston, Tex.—
Louisville, Ky.Portland, Oreg.-
469,715
379,998
505,507
300,994
33,222
2,499
7,902
51,357
15,035
388,218
93,439
184,798
14,001
3,805
7,327
60,635
38,188
56,360
19,323
18,288
17,279
•7,190
•9,477
13,478
•9,058
9,915
•5,522
20,097
72,584
9,347
25,615
40,493
15,468
2,234
2,955
8,105
7,575
7,397
42,709
7,043
10,794
5,742
5,905
13,428
2,164
26,640
18,667
10,143
44,715
4,429
7,151
19,569
7,006
14,746
12,718
689
3,892
4,665
5,994
15,336
5,116
108,221
16,330
17,862
4,383
14,972
14,705
4,946
481
10,653
770
10,858
37,490
1,952
16,088
97
4,401
8,329
3,755
4,052
350
1,911
4,929
586
869
2,470
2,532
6,357
5,322
7,003
2,272
5,279
16,070
19,635
14,336
GROUP III.—CITIES HATING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.-
#90,783
212,163
475,915
455,163
741,375
263,379
404,740
614,176
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
28,694
524,364
423,744
183,756
609,895
66,559
68,961
241,306
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Ta.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.Fort Worth, Tex.
New Haven, Conn.
269,335
883,818
50,464
72,999
81,281
43,797
53,064
53,084
San Diego, Calif.Long Beach, Calif.
Nashville, T e n n . —
Springfield, Mass.
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.Des Moines, Iowa-Scranton, Pa.
184,494
276,802
205,709
199,040
43,614
22,564
192,539
29,357
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Ta.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.
Kansas City, Kans.
207,657
68,539
241,229
291,883
21,088
649,018
188,911
133,343
96,920
Columbus, Ohio--'
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif. Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
1/ Includes other business licenses not separately reported.
•2,468
•109,140
•53,540
14,559
9,356
115
19,420
1,388
253,359
2,370
2,400
440
2,234
1,177
119,459
2,281
3,750
707
415
72
18
48,673
486
2,681
2,215
786
348
228,625
37,014
8,468
1,824
1,198
264
1,334
765
21,639
97,888
39,722
40,123
66,177
2,235
26,720
269
43,844
3,018
168,675
103,934
41,050
265,087
38,978
8,624
322,656
29,954
234,436
235,628
35,640
4,447
875
4,586
5,700
8,309
54,780
140,740
10,581
4,940
7,130
1,360
380
1,357
4,437
3,997
305
1,837
23,870
8,530
353
933
19,244
4,407
3,330
35,000
•3,013
8,080
156,978
1,287
11,000
159,918
68,406
67,495
190,268
31,714
34,029
154,910
20,935
15,603
2,399
25,000
16,461
1,214
4,729
7,635
3,487
18,813
2,860
360
1/ 255,797
725
70
TABLE 7 . — REVENUES FROM LICENSES AND PERMITS:
1937—Continued
(See text discussion, p. 51)
OTHER LOCAL TAXES (CONTINUED FROM TABLE 6)
Other licenses and permits
Licenses and permits for use of s t r e e t
Business licenses
Motor vehicles
Other v e hicles
Parking
meters
Street privileges
Police and
protective
Alcoholic
beverage
GROUP III.—-CITIES HAVING- A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
Fort Wayne, I n d . —
Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J.-Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.Cambridge, Mass.-New Bedford, Mass.
$34,602
175,609
4,852
182,856
106,470
45,404
119,321
179,591
130,463
Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, Tenn.Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.-
35,170
120,143
300,874
22,018
40,868
628,189
19,841
22,860
87,007
Tampa, Fla.
Somerville, Mass.'
El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.Lynn, Mass.
Utioa, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.Lowell, M a s s . — —
243,622
102,716
68,056
49,139
143,598
12,303
117,819
27,754
110,761
Honolulu, Hawaii 2/2/ Not included in group or grand t o t a l s .
1,379,532
$576
9,375
$710
331
103
593
$429
1,364
$124,798
3,129
1,991
142,601
22,025
75
293
567
101,875
150,513
110,490
$5,181
27
305
1,500
2,719
5,018
3,458
108,435
1,286
2,029
14,550
377
196
24,953
78,258
7,587
25,000
2,853
5,269
117,425
95,570
2,773
504
8,496
187
3,016
167,399
5,991
13,288
2,106
855
42,039
840
340
2,485
37,352
847
4,008
1,115,048
198,773
56,789
7,600
19,527
1,910
5,844
9,645
1,062
3,124
2,431
15,492
3,988
28,752
$11,550
6,830
6,614
83,509
$430
13,561
437
7,248
4,614
3,156
7,056
7,188
4,171
1,362
72,062
61,915
1,369
11,921
28,538
3,308
2,499
6,500
15,000
9,126
3,347
3,323
2,899
740
5,781
2,380
2,426
TABLE 7.—REVENUES FROM L I C E N S E S AND P E R M I T S :
(See t e x t d i s c u s s i o n , p .
1937—Continued
51)
OTHER LOCAL TAXES (CONTINUED FROM TABLE 6)—Continued
Other licenses and permits—Continued
CITY
City num
e
Nonbusiness .icenses and permits
Business licenses—Continued
Manufacturing
Merchandising
Professional
and occupational
|262,245
•3,207,554
11,948,294
149,041
4,517
108,687
1,866,933
140,606
1,200,015
1,037,607
173,056
737,631
Animal
Marriage
Burial
Building
structure
and
equipment
$3,131,371
•1,241,963
•508,889
•16,054
•3,442,425
•340,280
608,656
1,065,626
1,457,089
739,358
191,403
311,202
381,455
73,929
53,505
9,494
646
5,914
1,966,676
528,239
947,510
160,363
28,631
151,286
All other
All other
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, Pa.
D e t r o i t , Mich.
Los A n g e l e s , C a l i f . C l e v e l a n d , Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
•109,859
4,738
24,682
1,017
7,875
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, W i s .
B u f f a l o , N. Y.
•343,556
915,303
78,554
69,526
298,143
8,167
35,210
•227,951
151,515
7,679
35,851
237,149
9,737
138,137
14,042
12,200
8,832
58,469
24,931
•193,306
273,171
5,965
3,972
58,786
8,005
6,545
53,174
12,326
10,340
64,483
83,025
12 r 051
47,363
4,800
932
•144,618
27,101
82,283
224,103
50,620
8,652
20,724
29,377
34,872
15,600
50,204
28,672
22,532
•169,897
101,508
19,761
14,296
6,370
10,900
•761
•114,818
135,737
229,476
755,226
56,015
61,335
2,724
8,094
79,032
74,589
67,479
99,139
168,141
103,967
21,722
•11,162
5,866
3,425
9,652
8,957
9,181
8,457
4,449
•69,750
16,097
71,513
59,097
36,825
52,224
45,238
13,813
15 619
18,222
14 064
•29,800
20,545
21,760
17,411
3,612
15,332
31,040
4,616
4,994
4,823
6,430
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.New Orleans, La.
Cincinnati, Ohio
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, Mo.
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.Rochester, N. Y.
•878
•523
26,910
5,460
•25,553
9,361
5,555
6,954
27,960
7,985
5,353
•2,756
532,767
3,009
320
473,610
10,800
8,633
•13,528
7,417
40,130
12,705
18,485
22,069
8,542
31,068
•126
93
2,450
18,594
453
5,014
1937—Continued
(See text d i s c u s s i o n , p . 51)
OTHER LOCAL TAXES (CONTINUED FROM TABLE 6)—Continued
Other licenses and permits—Continued
CITY
u
Business licenses—Continued
City nun
<D
Manufacturing
Merchandising
Professional
and occupational
Nonbusiness licenses and permits
All other
Animal
Marriage
Burial
Building
structure
and
equipment
All other
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000—Continued
J e r s e y C i t y , N.
Houston, Tex.
L o u i s v i l l e , Ky.P o r t l a n d , Oreg.-
#5,225
#1,400
1,664
49,065
47,324
#1,356
13,549
45,640
23,790
#17,206
2,820
13,705
#2,696
3,092
1,834
29,837
#6,420
#646
6,360
#12,211
52,211
24,772
74,488
#1,901
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
29
30
31
32
33
34
Columbus, O h i o Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Oa.
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.-
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstonn, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.Fort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
C o n n . —•
#1,250
#7,795
#9,774
7,512
18,206
330
58,684
500
2,975
340
1,059
850
332
11,119
5,629
167,104
9,165
17,787
78,906
4,820
55,570
4,643
51,003
3,836
2,065
28,305
4,221
7,490
12,049
7,387
5,085
3,Q50
2,009
2,100
274,332
4,872
1,464
""
#223,540
1,525
611,474
676
75,872
1,941
120
2,235
1,625
36,803
7,074
4
35,402
13,860
1,884
67,093
1S3
#5,693
26,341
9,059
826
2,557
18,432
11,259
15,640
19,927
5,615
14,082
#3,554
#9,669
5,126
4,426
H3
o
w
©
•*1
4,682
2,180
36,988
14,981
23,155
27,187
11,032
22,201
31,078
H
en
894
7,212
3,247
58,000
3,734
12
1,431
3,920
#717
1,285
47,219
10
32,867
21,401
22,887
962
200
#50,754
26,421
38,931
13,370
CIT
TABLE 7.—REVENUES FROM LICENSES AND PERMITS:
15,380
23,632
6,802
28,990
12,145
13,473
156
80
308
12,304
92 032
San Diego, Calif.Long Beach, Calif.'
Nashville, T e n n . —
Springfield, Mass.
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.Das Moines, I o w a —
Scranton, Pa.
Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, Tenn.Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.Tampa, Fla.
Somerville, Mass.
El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.Lynn, Mass.
Utioa, N. Y.
Honolulu, Hawaii 2 / —
7,370
10,713
1,259
21,517
4 ,995
2,496
5,195
171,577
996
88,321
4,709
30,535
125
1,498
123,590
125
1,262
1,224
5,120
4,835
1,425
2,260
4,991
12,546
20
1,441
19,124
4,632
93
419
68
560
23,067
4,500
747
2,229
13,969
9,005
585
2,287
47,512
825
2,427
14,783
28,000
1,020
898
8,820
1,735
58
637
2,554
4,197
101,627
15
3,368
15,120
14,180
107
2,044
1,539
315
939
836
1,917
84
59,166
51,409
11,809
15,056
7,065
2,682
386
3,311
7,343
6,079
14,440
14,997
7,183
1,876
5,808
10,249
11,276
774
1,846
1,455
2,250
100
720
30
15
1,123
2,092
1,084
2,626
4,735
13,410
10,797
2,240
2,474
2,676
2,109
680
1,300
179
42
57
6,350
4,272
13,779
624
180
12,846
6,187
6,651
5,730
12,548
5,117
2,234
13,726
10,366
34
499
480
366
70
10,177
10,170
6,602
3,311
84,771
10,874
9,399
11,732
6,422
119,796
494
150
311
4,856
15,058
294
13,615
135
8,792
1,324
1,045
2,830
13,917
71
14,142
6,379
22,005
2,556
1,793
4,034
61,492
150
675
Duluth, Minn.——
Waterbury, Conn.Lowell, Mass.
2/ Not included in group or grand totals.
45
169,173
39 600
Salt Lake City, Utah
Tonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.Chattanooga, Tenn.'
Kansas City, Kans.
Fort Wayne, I n d . —
Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J . —
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Ball River, Mass.Cambridge, M a s s . —
New Bedford, Mass.
3,044
555
37,899
395
17,414
3,026
6,360
1,446
69 ,000
1 585
4,141
5,443
3,436
2,306
1,320
697
1,752
7,533
3,957
9,075
6,028
3,365
2,178
6,756
11,809
1,605
516
89
64
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
TABLE 8
Revenues of the 94 cities from fines, forfeits, and penalties, from interest
on deposits and investments, and from rents and royalties are shown in table 8.
During 1937 approximately $76,900,000 was realized from these sources, or about
2.8 percent of total municipal revenue.
FINES, FORFEITS, AND PENALTIES. —Revenues during 1937 from fines, forfeits, and
penalties amounted to $12,103,118, which was derived almost entirely from fines
Imposed for the commission of offenses and for the neglect of official duty.
New York received the largest revenue from this source, closely followed by
Chicago, while New Bedford reported the lowest.
INTEREST.—-Revenue in the amount of $53,373,332 was realized from interest
earned on investments by several types of funds, the most important being the
earnings on assets of sinking funds and public trust funds. The larger part of
such municipal income was reported by the cities in population group I. Revenues from interest on bank deposits totaled $2,057,511,approximately 90 percent
of which represented Interest drawn on general fund deposits.
RENTS AND ROYALTIES.—Revenues in the amount of $9,366,693 were reported for
1937 by 82 of the 94 cities as rents or royalties derived from miscellaneous
real estate, investment properties, and properties held by public trust and investment funds. Philadelphia reported revenues of $2,710,404 from these sources,
the major portion of which is rents received from the lease of extensive proppert ies held in the Girard Trust Fund. Practically all of the revenues reported
by San Francisco under this classification were derived from a lease of the new
airport site to the Exposition Company for the period of the Exposition. The
major portion of Oklahoma City's revenue under this classification, which
amounted to approximately one-tenth of all revenue received by the city in 1937,
was from oil and gas royalties.
TABLE 8.—REVENUES FROM FINES, FORFEITS, AND PENALTIES AND FROM USE OF MONEY AND PROPERTY:
FINES, FORFEITS, AND PENALTIES
1937
USE OF MONEY AND PROPERTY
umbe
Interest
CITY
Total
>>
Fines
Forfeits
Penalties
On i n v e s t m e n t s
On bank d e p o s i t s
Rents and
royalties
Total
o
General
funds
Sinking
funds
Public
trust
funds
All
other
General
funds
. Sinking
funds
Public
trust
funds
All
other
112,103,118
$11,976,508
$123,213
$3,397
$64,797,536
$1,865,994
$167,656
$11,336
$12,525
$356,512
$24,797,256
$25,418,040
$2,801,524
$9,366,693
6,995,351
1,480,218
3,627,549
6,937,590
1,471,752
3,567,166
57,761
8,466
56,986
3,397
52,094,472
5,711,272
6,991,792
1,361,065
137,112
367,817
94,000
36,586
37,070
7,017
1,580
2,739
7,988
338
4,199
337,969
5,404
13,139
18,278,606
2,646,672
3,871,978
22,708,074
1,640,074
1,069,892
2,268,789
239,619
293,116
7,030,964
1,003,887
1,331,842
New York, N. Y .
Chicago, 1 1 1 .
Philadelphia, Pa.—
D e t r o i t , Mich.
Los A n g e l e s , C a l i f .
C l e v e l a n d , Ohio
S t . L o u i s , Mo.
$1,605,559
1,194,341
378,093
794,134
988,902
311,954
167,881
$1,556,786
1,193,576
378,093
793,634
984,369
311,654
167,881
$48,773
765
$93,333
$8,177,744
3,478
6,899,384
33,028
$12,463,362
2,870,155
2,291,321
120,433
837,796
23,521
239,989
$27,018
1,846,842
45,101
3,315
172,747
118,437
11,226
B a l t i m o r e , Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San F r a n c i s c o , C a l i f
Washington, D . C . «
Milwaukee, W i s .
B u f f a l o , N. Y.
45,042
229,438
253,500
155,639
469,375
313,868
87,625
44,160
228,438
253,500
155,639
468,562
313,673
87,625
15,720
1,165,703
49,436
680,831
1,580,497
49,311
796,262
303,261
448,027
3,308
$126,805
149,606
236,952
135,706
55,129
266,561
$126,805
149,606
236,952
129,183
55,129
265,264
$189,072
27,351
698,583
830,741
206,724
9,917
$481,454
161,664
466,677
50,189
10,608
262,896
$985
38,557
99,287
26,944
26,585
9,088
66,802
49,300
34,537
128,608
54,506
175,706
66,802
49,300
34,537
127,962
54,506
175,706
24,451
44,176
224,811
155,696
186,074
49,076
17,236
3,072
52,970
6,543
42,850
83,915
859
31,786
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 AND OVER
500
4,533
300
813
195
$21,802,215
5,631,372
11,971,795
172,047
1,597,269
558,077
507,889
$597,963
40,627
24,095
$1,402
288,587
119,721
45,885
26,923
45
1,619,631
2,421,801
629,892
3,007,978
376,694
1,682,984
114,828
259
19
112,639
76,146
203
10,951
43,970
$280
$1,572
3
248,952
56,184
207
5,235
858,506
495,555
290,636
4,488
2,779
26,256
1,927
200
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.—
New Orleans, La.
Cincinnati, Ohio
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, Mo.
Indianapolis, Ind.—
Rochester, N. Y . — Jersey City, N. J.—
$6,523
1,297
646
$682,378
307,834
1,388,009
989,022
261,642
319,758
$22,985
5,702
251
9,551
11,811
$108
51,950
136,910
862,765
224,500
319,067
167,437
6,696
30,586
18,901
8,776
14,669
7,184
$7,102
3,960
$43
$138
2,555
6,532
1,497
479
1,058
2,906
1,725
3,803
TABLE 8.—REVENUES FROM FINES, FORFEITS, AND PENALTIES AND FROM USE OF MONEY AND PROPERTY: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
USE OF MONEY AND PROPERTY
FINES, FORFEITS, AND PENALTIES
Interest
Total
City n
!
CITY
Fines
Forfeits
Penalties
On bank deposits
On investments
Rents and
royalties
Total
General
funds
Sinking
funds
Public
trust
funds
All
other
General
funds
Sinking
funds
Public
trust
funds
All other
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
Oakland, Calif.
Denver, C o l o . — — —
St. Paul, Minn.
Birmingham, Ala.
Memphis, T e n n . — - — i
37
38
39
40
41
Providence, R. I . - —
San Antonio, T e x . —
42
43
44
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Worcester, Mass.
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.Fort Worth, Tex.
New Haven, C o n n . - —
San Diego, C a l i f . —
Long Beach, Calif.-Nashville, Tenn.
Springfield, M a s s . —
Bridgeport, C o n n . —
Des Moines, Iowa
•212,369
91,436
140,943
103,241
237,635
$212,369
82,713
140,943
103,241
235,035
105,017
88,635
193,866
66,170
146,458
105,017
88,635
189,816
66,170
146,458
39,909
18,642
43,157
65,316
69,572
39,779
18,642
29,590
65,316
69,572
124,667
10,949
54,580
49,638
51,061
124,667
10,949
54,580
49,638
51,061
48,044
25,644
96,483
5,950
130,868
112,024 '
48,044
25,628
96,483
5,950
130,868
112,024
44,294
15,534
39,585
33,748
37,186
44,294
15,534
39,585
33,748
37,186
12,704
12,804 1
$8,723
19
4,050
130
13,567
16
$2,581
•149,364
100,499
36,847
118,889
38,601
•3,235
10,245
36,003
5,885
•4,934
2,681
95,057
618,610
150,039
263,360
30,764
4,226
14,917
583,387
19,174
118,796
22,820
111,854
7,984
8,057
•175
2
$3
2,693
139
2,032
7,921
131
•2,764
50
5,468
9,079
1,127
1,080
960,350
106,816
534,755
10,110
73,801
4,893
6,666
97,607
167,410
89,503
82,238
73,650
186,979
55
3,840
2,935
50
8
76
1,865
2,719
614
8,007
161,270
100
$14,597
4,939
1,791
38,635
4,913
13,041
1,070
39,754
5,637
80,536
8,048
60,115
18,196
834
4,191
4,936
76,465
196,234
145
8,878
478
4,448
29,444
1,693
2,386
13,213
21,414
187,416
9,185
496,610
3,146
68,209
97,111
26,391
4,795
1,660
$22,785
25,517
7,240
24,202
56,179
7,246
23,626
514,223
46,255
231,505
16,748
344,789
9,279
100,687
63,915
124,831
80,740
33,399
524
38
36,469 1
2,480
86,316
23,613
33,736
23,436 1
$214
7,096
844
3,742
•103,421
50,021
10,283
626
2,363
5,127
7,802
4,653
58,291
1,364
2,148
292
507
13,676
39,554
46,750
56
16,333
1,213
1,111
1,185
15,653
13,982
1,377
7,312
45,843
7,153
3,147
761,375
520
3,431
304
785
4,886
667
185
11,096
4,164
33,637
20,177
1,828
9,100
7,273
21,451
8,247
6,250
231
3,543
5,130
1,434
3,603
641
24,320
12,394
5,151
420
Salt Lake City, Utah]
Yonkers, N. Y . —
Paterson, N. J . —
Jacksonville, Fla,
Albany, N. Y.
67,463
10,263
16,060
24,583
14,749
67,463
10,263
16,060
24,583
14,749
23,883
101,710
77,813
12,222
65,956
Norfolk, Va.
•
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.'
Kansas City, Kans.'
Fort Wayne, I n d . —
83,600
19,738
48,933
10,232
5,929
83,600
19,738
48,933
10,232
5,653
353,210
50,479
23,277
70,054
7,666
Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J.
Wichita, Kans.-Spokane, Wash.—
9,777
9,077
8,548
33,051
84,982
9,777
8,537
8,262
33,051
84,982
82,287
9,949
44,272
8,398
9,777
Fall River, Mass.Cambridge, M a s s . —
New Bedford, Mass.'
Reading, Pa.
Knorville, T e n n . —
3,868
5,460
5,150
20,945
29,199
3,868
5,460
5,150
20,945
29,199
56,658
99,802
55,945
6,647
131,039
Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.
Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
45,183
8,679
63,950
193,976
10,065
45,183
8,679
63,950
163,881
10,065
51,338
4,778
41,465
4,211
6,116
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.Tampa, Fla.
Somerville, Mass.
El Paso, Tex.
35,995
71,123
60,777
6,419
19,509
35,995
71,123
60,777
6,419
19,509
Evansville, Ind.
Lynn, Mass.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.
Lowell, Mass.
8,680
9,607
11,123
28,628
21,078
5,725
8,680
9,607
11,123
28,628
21,078
5,725
Honolulu, Hawaii 1/J
92,610
92,610
1/ Not included i n group or grand t o t a l s .
530
286
30,095
3,103
2,626
865
7,843
316
18,072
2,405
1,881
461
76,872
9,377
53,944
340,112
42,796
20,036
49,412
169
29,611
88,890
34,476
5,706
117,692
1,765
3,634
869
1,535
67
14,968
428
66,073
104,066
73,417
9,918
20,153
1,208
914
535
58,516
56,115
71,034
3,132
16,203
16,681
44,726
14,629
173,102
16,956
5,789
4,493
141
2,691
3,052
3,288
1,187
24,279
2,033
501
435
7,009
3,386
3,259
4,943
1,142
1,876
4,982
36,050
9,405
89
2,700
4,187
7,633
148,207
13,332
5,789
17,588
3,053
5,001
247
40
25,362
1,685
10,912
20,649
859
43,413
2,946
6,284
405
3,771
1,890
32,262
12,547
4,250
1,627
2,570
87
3,342
1,298
5,174
59,407
6,115
25,570
3,233
15,295
42,543
941
99
3,708
820
11,003
1,644
2,163
5,762
7,669
1,319
810
8,910
1,190
2,233
197
513
8,102
1,651
4,644
24,614
4,703
13,234
24,892
2,202
68
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
TABLE 9
The revenues of the 94 cities from State-shared taxes, classified by purpose and source, are presented in table 9.
SHARED STATE TAXES. —Shared tax revenues of $97,486,655 were reported by 80
cities located in 26 States, while 13 remaining cities7 situated in the States
of Missouri, Texas, Iowa, Utah, Florida, and Illinois reported no revenues from
this source. * This should not necessarily be interpreted to mean that these
States had no shared taxes,but only that they shared no taxes with their cities
of over 100,000 population and counties over 300,000 population.8
Cities in population groups I and II and those in population group III in
the same State may not agree in the types of shared taxes received, because the
statistics for cities over 300,000 population, comprising the first two groups,
include shared-tax receipts of the county as well as those of the city.9 Other
variations between cities In the same State may be attributed to special laws
which apply to one city but not to the others.
DISTINCTION BETWEEN SHARED TAXES AND GRANTS.—A shared tax is a specific tax collected by the State and distributed to cities and other minor civil divisions
in proportion, or substantially in proportion, to the amount of tax collected
in each division. A tax is regarded as being distributed "substantially in proportion" to the yield when It Is shared on the basis of an approximate measure
of the amount produced. For example, a motor vehicle fuel tax is classified as
shared if its yield is distributed on the basis of motor vehicle registration,
because the number of motor vehicles within a particular area is considered to
be a fairly good index of the motor vehicle fuel tax yield in that area. Where
the amount received by the locality is not substantially proportionate to the
yield, It Is classified as a grant. (See discussion of table 10.)
PURPOSE AND SOURCE.—Nearly three-fourths of the revenues from shared taxes,
amounting to $72,145,310, may be used by the receiving cities for unspecified
or general purposes. The remaining one-quarter consists chiefly of the following: $22,705,591 for highways, comprised mainly of motor vehicle fuel and license taxes, which are customarily earmarked for roads; $2,015,862 for pension
funds, of which the greater portion consists of gross premium business license
taxes on insurance companies designated for firemen's pension and relief funds;
and $584,975 for debt service, from inheritance and estate taxes in Ohio.
In addition to showing the purpose for which the shared taxes must be used
by the cities, table 11 also Indicates the types of taxes shared for each of
the purposes. The classification of sources of shared taxes, or the type of
taxes shared, that is used here conforms so far as possible to the classification of state tax revenues.used by the Bureau of the Census in reporting financial statistics of States.10 Attention is called to the numerous footnotes to
the table; these have been used because some of the sources have been combined
to save space.
The three chief sources of revenues which are shared for unspecified purposes are income taxes, motor vehicle licenses,and alcoholic beverage revenues.
In addition to these, there are a number of others which have been combined in
the column headed "From other specified sources." Table 9-A presents an. analysis of these sources. The item business license taxes, In this table, consists
solely of amounts which >would be classified as "Business license taxes—all
other" in the State classification,and such taxes are subdivided into "Corporation," "Bank stock," and "Other." This further breakdown is a departure from
the State classification occasioned by the relatively large amounts of the
first two items. The column headed "Other" under this heading contains horseracing taxes, pawnbrokers' licenses, motor bus licenses, real estate brokers'
and salesmen's licenses, and other miscellaneous business licenses.
7/ Washington, D. C , because it is not located in any State, is not involved in this discussion.
8/ For a more extended discussion of shared taxes from the point of view of the States, see Financial
Statistics of States: 1937.
9/ See page 6, supra.
10/ See Financial Statistics of States: 1957.
69
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—REVENUES
TABLE 9-A.—SHARED STATE TAXES FOR "GENERAL PURPOSES" FROM "OTHER
SPECIFIED SOURCES": 1937
u
City nu
1
CITY
Total
$19,536,301
1
6
9
13
14
New York, N. Y . ~ 11,487,740
204,866
Cleveland, Ohio
1,074,286
Boston, Mass.
Milwaukee, Wis.
373,916
646,146
Buffalo, N. Y.
15
16
17
18
22
Minneapolis, Minn.
New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J.
Rochester, N. Y . —
65,004
7,332
251,047
30,088
500,246 1
23
27
28
33
34
Jersey City, N. J.
Columbus, Ohio
St. Paul, M i n n . —
Birmingham, A l a . —
7,567
129,213
48,304 1
17,862
4,770 j
Providence, R. I.Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Worcester, M a s s . —
39,571
283,256
207,803
24,820
674,309
44
45
48
50
54
Youngstown, Ohio—
Hartford, Conn.
New Haven, Conn.—
Springfield, Mass.
18,350
30,110
18,515
4,433
374,353
56
60
63
64
67
Bridgeport, Conn.Yonkers, N. Y.
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Kansas City, Kans.
23,400
57,867
152,809
16,491
4,326
72
74
75
76
84
Wichita, Kans.
Fall River, Maaa.Cambridge, M a s s . —
New Bedford, Mass.
11,600
661,306
444,725
808,342
14,078
87
90
91
Somerville, Mass.-
70,461
306,894
67,669
6,493
8,247
357,686
35
37
40
41
43
Special
property
taxes
Inheritance
and
estate
taxes
Tobacco
products
sales
taxes
BUSINESS LICENSE TAXES
All other
Corporation
Bank
stock
Other
$4,772,362 $720,363 $157,374 16,891,116 $5,043,075 $609,850 $1,342,161
144,390
5,675,774
4,740,750
528,938
93,791
57,257
130,712
3,219
1/940,504
1,074,286
97,532
2/276,384
1/23,417
65,004
7,241
204,046
30,088
11,191
92,322
7,567
118,366
35,994
3/91
35,810
10,847
11,335
6,617
1/35,982
365,325
975
17,862
4,770
30,151
9,420
17,226
7,594
283,256
52,735
1/11,189
674,309
143,879
Utica, N. Y.
Waterbury, C o n n . —
94
664
18,515
4,433
374,353
35,415
87,301
24,866
Mortgage t a x .
General property t a x .
Severance t a x .
Poll t a x .
762
53,858
23,400
21,690
331
1/11,650
4/16,160
4,326
11,600
661,306
444,725
808,342
3,941
70,461
306,894
54,484
4,087 j
1/9,098
6,493
8,247
357,686
10,137
1/
2/
3/
4/
4/17,686
5,244
TABLE 9.—REVENUES FROM PROPORTIONATELY-SHARED STATE TAXES, BY PURPOSE AND SOURCE:
FOR GENERAL PURPOSES
From i n d i vidual
income
taxes
Grand t o t a l -
Group I
Group I I —
Group I I I -
From m o t o r
vehicle
licenses
1957
FOR HIGHWAYS
From a l c o h o l i c beverage
revenue
From o t h e r
specified
sources
From m o t o r
vehicle
licenses
$97,486,655
#72,145,310
i/$22,955,722
$24,595,017
$19,536,301
$22,705,591
73,680,158
6,150,173
17,656,324
55,481,520
2,931,252
13,732,538
5/ 18,394,112
401,402
7/ 4,160,208.
18,351,278
1,668,566
4,575,173
13,786,954
861,284
4,888,063
16,740,123
2,748,298
3,217,170
From m o t o r
vehicle
fuel taxes
For p e n s i o n
f u n d s , from
business
license
taxes
(Insurance)
$12,574,204 p/$10,131,387 E/$2,015,862
8,905,966
2,291,929
1,376,309
7,834,157 |3/ 1,314,125
262,365
2/ 456,369
439,372
1,840,861
For debt
service,
from i n heritance
taxes
$619,892
144,390
6/ 203,258
8/ 267,244
CROUP I.—CITIES HAVIXG A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, M o .
9
10
11
12
13
14
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N . Y.
$39,306,397
313,968
1,778,558
5,449,616
4,674,947
4,855,932
$38,906,977
"11,773,003
$11,487,740
1,611,481
921,610
565,807
1,527,634
1,611,481
921,610
565,807
1,322,768
204,866
$399,420
313,968
167,077
$4,528,006
4,109,140
3,133,908
$4,528,006
416,625
2,120,395
$3,692,515
1,063,513
$144,390
2,484,480
2,484,480
5,405,685
870,128
1,712,650
5,405,685
714,675
558,548
4,331,399
4,103,643
2,724,154
3,288,086
1,981,017
5/ 2,914,170
451,485
714,675
558,548
914,257
600,447
680,040
680,040
$1,642,785
$1,138,499
373,916
646,146
600,447
9/ 215,110
10/ 63,097
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 5 0 0 , 0 0 0
15
16
17
18
19
21
22
23
24
25
26
$153,415 1
24,997
2,566,518
115,702
$65,004
7,332
719,887
30,088
349,371
349.371
249,311 j
1,898,830
58,872
5,893
727,264 11
249,311
1,459,603
7,567
43,089 1
$468,840
$65,004
7,332
251,047
30,088
$88,411
17,665
$454,286
$203,846
85,614
349,371
$401,402
249,311
557,955
43,089
500,246
7,567
419,857
419,857
5,893
679,763 1
3,810
679,763
19,370
51,305
11/ 2,083
12/ 4,412
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0
27
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
AV-r n nhl '
M
hi
T
Omaha, Nebr.
— — —
$1,224,977
1,127,309
159,015
110,400
27,471
$378,826
376,406
159,015
64,943
144,369
975,959
118,830
17,862
113,864
326,993
118,830
378,675
378,675
47,535
815,584
658,863
805,239
213,762
47
48
49
50
51
177,102
31,009
187,682
74,395
177,102
31,009
187,682
74,395
52
53
54
55
56
51,997
60,414
1,115,579
64,027
186,053
51,997
60,414
1,115,579
57
58
59
60
61
62
o
Yonkers, N. Y.
63
64
65
66
67
68
See footnotes a t end of t a b l e .
$727,785
714,909
$297,568
287,607
•109,094
14/ $83,114
287,422
35,716
17,862
4,770
39,571
618,815
251,903
$430,217
427,302
$118,366
35,994
242,134
283,256
355,302
188,942
207,803
24,820
723,636
147,265
156,222
38,084
158,587
31,009
183,249
74,395
14/ 48,324
741,226
674,309
18,350
30,110
47,535
427,874
192,958
62,301
62,301
327,059
138,799
41,951
41,951
234,916
17,227
31,207
10,345
24,863
188,260
18,515
4,433
51,997
12,090
374,353
162,653
186,053
13/ 30,505
30,151
366,912
47,081
95,419
47,535
1,397,945
165,615
186,332
38,084
' *
$129,213
48,304
$110,400
27,471
93,508
1,397,945
165,615
538,254
38,084
oungs own,
$249,613
328,102
159,015
22,076
23,400
43,178
192,128
148,950
497,646
23,155
490,117
203,298
228,952
57,867
529,040
120,913
16,515
18,992
11,367
84,356
519,376
120,913
149,916
216,651
104,422
152,809
16,491
148,950
7,529
23,155
9,664
16,515
1
18,992
4,326
18,992
84,356 1
84,356
4,326
7,041
TABLE 9 . — R E V E N U E S FROM PROPORTIONATELY-SHARED S T A T E TAXES,
BY PURPOSE AND S O U R C E :
FOR GENERAL PURPOSES
From i n d i vidual
income
taxes
From motor
vehicle
licenses
1937—Continued
FOR HIGHWAYS
From a l c o holic beverage
revenue
From other
specified
sources
From m o t o r
vehicle
licenses
From motor
vehicle
fuel taxes
*'or pension For debt
funds, from
service,
business
from i n license
heritance
taxes
taxes
(Insurance)
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
69
70
71
72
73
74
Camden, N. J.
Wichita, Kans.
$11,161
118,764
15,694
21,187
93,999
902,666
961,696 1
1,059,970
99,686
39,333
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
86,131 1
86,922
121,166
393,790
11,600
93,999
902,666
961,696
1,059,970
88,775
39,333
$11,161
10,895
15,694
9,537
$107,869
$107,869
$11,600
93,999
241,360
661,306
444,725
808,342
516,971
251,628
14/ 24,406
88,775
14,927
86,131
86,922
86,131
86,922
121,166
134,711
121,166
120,633
10,911
•
14,078
$248,941
$103,222
$145,719
10,867
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
~
Duluth, Minn.
361,003
361,003
53,453
53,453
608,820
328,704
17,165
119,141
615,300
608,820
324,781
6,493
119,141
615,300
$654,591 |
$10,138
10,867
70,461
290,542
53,453
301,926
84,113
306,894
172,999
110,894
257,614
3,923
10,672
67,669
6,493
8,247
357,686
$654,591 1
$654,531
1/ Includes $2,043,252 corporation income t a x e s .
2/ Includes $2,083 general sales t a x e s .
3/ Includes $168,545 corporation income taxes for t e a c h e r s ' retirament and $29,234
alcoholic beverage tax for firemen's pension.
4 / Includes $4,412 alcoholic beverage taxes for general r e l i e f and $30,505 p o l l taxes for schools.
5/ Includes $1,887,408 corporation income taxes.
6/ Includes $4,412 alcoholic beverage taxes for general r e l i e f .
7/ Includes $155,844 corporation income t a x e s .
8/ Includes $30,505 poll taxes for
schools.
9/ Includes $168,545 corporation income taxes for teachers' retirement.
10/ Includes $29,234 alcoholic beverage tax for firemen's pension.
1 1 / General sales t a x .
12/ Alcoholic beverage t a x for general r e l i e f .
1 3 / Poll taxes for schools.
14/ Corporation income t a x e s .
15/ Not included in group or grand t o t a l s .
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—REVENUES
73
TABLE 10
The revenues of the 94 cities from State grants are shown In table 10.
Total revenues from such grants were $336,575,596, all cities reporting receipts—except Washington, D. C , of course. New York City alone accounted for
nearly one-third of this amount. Grants are amounts, other than receipts from
shared taxes,11 received by the city from another civil division—as the Federal
Government, the State, or a county—to aid in the support of a specified function or for purposes in general.
PURPOSE.—Of the total receipts from State grants, $327,292,317, or 97 percent, was for specified purposes. This is in direct contrast to revenues from
shared taxes, which, as previously pointed out, are largely for general purposes.
Schools received the largest amount, $167,063,856, or 50 percent of the total
grants. Charities were second with $131,724,818 or 39 percent, while highv/ays
were third, receiving $22,182,119, or 7 percent. The wide variety of other purposes for which grants are made is indicated In table 10-A, which shows the purposes of the amounts shown in the colums headed "For other specified purposes.11
TABLE 10-A.—GRANTS FOR "OTHER SPECIFIED PURPOSES"
CITY AND PURPOSE
Amount
CITY AND PURPOSE
$5,616,956
a
Oakland, Calif.
W. P. A. construction (not segre-
P f?
New York, N. Y.
d fi
500,000
Providence, R. I.
106,608
Syracuse, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
$109,560
291,388
4,686
900
Philadelphia, Pa.
30,000
Dayton, Ohio
Los Angeles, Calif.
1,530
1,528,967
16,624
Baltimore, Md.
eac. ers
Youngstown, Ohio
48,920
Hartford, Conn.
p n
n
un
11
493,537
17,875
9,804
4,800
San Diego, Calif.
W. P. A. construction of civic
Boston, Mass.
330,937
153,798
.
129,975
San Francisco, Calif.
Long Beach, Calif.
526,185
Buffalo, N. Y.
85,775
Yonkers, N. Y.
1,500
New Orleans, La.
300
Kansas City, Kane.
989,019
Cincinnati, Ohio
4,434
Seattle, Wash.
412
Spokane, Wash.
Firemen's pensions and relief
Cambridge, Mass.
27,527
Rochester, N. Y.
1,300
H
1t 1
Tacoma, Wash.
Houston, Tex.
O
Amount
1
7,513
1,000
316
8,745
*
*
++A
119,302
45,903
Portland, Oreg.
Canton, Ohio
1,600
Utica, N. Y.
purposes
14,703
1,313
200
SOURCE.—In table 10, as in table 9, grants for each of the main purposes
mentioned above have been subdivided Into columns containing the principal
sources. As with shared taxes, the classification of sources of grants used
follows, so far as possible, the classification of State tax revenues used by
the Bureau of the Census. Further, to save space a number of the sources have
been combined and indicated with footnotes. Hence, in order to interpret this
table correctly, these footnotes should be studied.
In the case of both schools and charities, by far the greater portion of
grants comes from unspecified sources, for the former amounting to 90 percent
of the total, and for the latter amounting to 97 percent. The diversity of
11/ For the distinction between State grants
shared taxes), see the discussion of table 9.
2*1 l'.).HJ () - - J 0 -
and State shared taxes (there were no Fede: al or county
74
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
miscellaneous sources of grants for schools is shown in table 10-B, which gives
the sources of the amounts shown in the column headed "Other" under grants "For
schools from other specified sources." As was the case with shared taxes for
highways, grants for that-purpose also come chiefly from motor vehicle fuel
sales taxes and motor vehicle licenses.
TABLE 10-B.—GRANTS FOR SCHOOLS FROM "OTHER SPECIFIED SOURCES"
CITY AND SOURCE OF REVENUE
a
Amount
$10,090,793
CITY AND SOURCE OF REVENUE
Jacksonville, Fla.
1388,306
430,696
Chicago, 111.
Trenton, N. J.
2,814,736
St. Louis, Mo.
Business license taxes (insurance)Milwaukee, Wis.
313,935
Camden, N. J.
205,230
274,951
Elizabeth, N. J.
267,164
Minneapolis, Minn.
11,487
Newark, N. J.
338,362
South Bend, Ind.
Alcoholic beverage sales taxes
Miami, Fla.
2,121,260
Kansas City, Mo.
Business license taxes (insurance)Indianapolis, Ind.
Alcoholic beverage sales taxes
Jersey City, N. J.
Amount
123,108
58,156
1,286,803
co o
p. .
c
P
everage axes
P
y ax
Gary, Ind.
Alcoholic beverage sales taxes
Tampa, Fla.
Oklahoma City, Okla.
20,292
330,129
2,211
20,439
99,783
71,452
8,893
Tulsa, Okla.
53,126
7,009
19,494
272,746
41,453
17,114
76,379
Evansville, Ind.
Alcoholic beverage sales taxes
15,320
Paterson, N. J.
400,759
TOTAL STATE-LOCAL FLOW OF FUNDS. — T h e total of both State-shared taxes and
State grants, derived from tables 9 and 10, is shown in summary form in table
10-C, which presents the whole picture of the flow to the cities of State-local
financial aid, classified by type of aid (i.e., shared taxes or grants), purpose, and source.
Of the total $434,062,251 in grants and shared taxes, nearly four-fifths,
.1352,633,662, was for specified purposes, while the remainder, $81,428,589, was
for unspecified purposes.
Alcoholic beverage sales taxes and other revenues
constitute'the most important shared tax, followed by Income taxes and motor
vehicle licenses. By far the greater portion of grants came from unspecified
sources, but $51,905,748, or 15 percent of the total,was from specified sources,
of which motor vehicle fuel sales taxes of $23,228,687 were easily the most important .
TABLE 1 0 - C —
STATE SHARED TAXES AND STATE GRANTS, BY PURPOSE AND SOURCE: 1937
FOR SPECIFIED PURPOSES
TYPE OF REVENUE AND SOURCE
For unspecified
purposes
Total
$434,062,251
97,486,655
1
Total
Schools
Charities
Highways
$81,428,589
$352,633,662
$167,094,361
$131,729,230
$44,887,710
72,145,310
25,341,345
30,505
4,412
22,705,591
Health and
hospitals y
$704,568
Pension
funds 2/
All other
$3,053,184
$5,164,609
2,015,862
584,975
Property taxes:
G
.
276,384
4,772,362
276,384
4,772,362
2,211,797
20,912,470
1,305,338
64,351
2,043,252
20,912,470
720,363
33,846
Income taxes:
Inheritance and estate t a x e s — —
168,545
168,545
584,975
30,505
584,975
30,505
Sales taxes:
10,129,304
24,628,663
157,374
2,083
y 14,362,124
17,632,474
y 1,031,931
12,544,041
5,058,270
1,031,931
336,575,596
9,283,279
24,595,017
157,374
10,129,304
10,129,304
33,646
29,234
4,412
2,083
2,083
1,818,083
12,574,204
1,818,083
12,574,204
327,292,317
167,063,856
131,724,818
22,182,119
704,568
1,037,322
4,579,634
284,669,848
151,373,774
128,013,231
2,144,571
704,568
493,537
1,940,167
42,622,469
15,690,082
3,711,587
20,037,548
543,785
2,639,467
7,817,821
14,606
7,817,821
14,606
5,231,708
1,725,688
1,983,130
1,725,688
1,983,130
1,725,688
1,983,130
21,548,647
781,504
2,793,032
3,410,665
2,547,376
3,081,900
281,504
1,890,471
504,500
991,181
284,669,848
51,905,748
9,283,279
Property taxes:
2,586,113
14,606
Income taxes:
Sales taxes:
Alcoholic beverage 3 / —
23,228,687
1,507,066
9,664,045
3,410,665
2.547,376
y 6,664
1,680,040
725,562
6,871,013
18,466,747
500,000
53,354
849,207
2,862,380
43,785
1,556,195
6,664
1 / Consists of aid for the functions "Conservation of Health" and "Hospitals," the l a t t e r comprising ohiefly aid to tuberculosis sanatoria.
2 / Consists chiefly of aid to
firemen's pension and r e l i e f funds.
3 / Includes shared alcoholic beverage business l i c e n s e taxes and shared revenues of State alcoholic beverage monopoly systems.
4/Consists
of $1,818,083 taxes on insurance premiums, $6,891,116 corporation taxes, $5,043,075 bank stook taxes, and $609,850 miscellaneous business l i c e n s e s .
5 / Consists of $1,031,840
mortgage taxes and $91 severance t a x e s .
6/ Consists of nonbusiness l i c e n s e s (dog l i c e n s e s ) .
TABLE 10.—REVENUES FROM STATE GRANTS, BY PURPOSE AND SOURCE: 1937
FOR CHARITIES
From s p e c i f i e d
From u n s p e c i fied sources
Grand t o t a l Group I
Group I I - Group I I I - '
$336,575,596
$167,063,856
$151,373,774
235,770,783
39,399,315
61,405,498
107,237,312
18,602,229
41,224,315
103,062,077
13,411,678
34,900,019
sources
From u n s p e c i fied sources
Individual
income t a x e s
General
sales taxes
1/$3,708,818
$1,890,471
$10,090,793
$131,724,818
$128,013,231
815,287
1,075,184
3,287,130
3,600,814
3,202,849
103,324,377
13,871,214
14,529,227
100,903,577
12,853,789
14,255,865
$2,814,736
$53,703,633
23,889,665
18,964
$53,703,633
23,889,665
18,964
4,366,152
4,781,936
4,366,152
2,361,136
3,659,767
4,357,361
1,738,409
1,430,855
3,659,767
4,357,361
1,738,409
1,430,855
1,688,108
3,689,527
1,688,108
3,689,527
$4,715,385
$4,715,385
2,504,035
2,659,213
1,486,610
2,659,213
888,105
2 / 774,450
2,046,263
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 AND OVER
$110,888,274
36,400,998
5,017,079
11,411,953
22,353,239
12,623,946
880,948
$54,992,493
5,668,776
2,830,961
9,946,104
14,252,207
4,922,977
866,342
$54,992,493
2,854,040
2,830,961
9,946,104
14,252,207
4,922,977
661,112
B a l t i m o r e , Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San F r a n c i s c o , C a l i f . '
Washington, D. C.
6,093,813
5,824,140
3,622,144
7,229,023
953,272
1,336,804
1,247,394
4,643,609
953,272
448,699
1,247,394
4,643,609
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
4,742,182
8,683,044
878,225
4,698,148
611,061
4,698,148
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
D e t r o i t , Mich.
Los A n g e l e s , C a l i f , C l e v e l a n d , Ohio
S t . L o u i s , Mo.
8,105
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.
New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
$7,070,532
2,679,618
6,444,516
5,299,020
570,391
4,395,139
$1,705,819
1,690,599
2,151,271
2,309,168
546,892
2,869,022
Rochester, N. Y . —
Jersey City, N. JV
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
2,564,442
4,666,261
2,912,388
1,739,589
752,036
205,383
983,789
2,584,514
1,394,170
1,425,582
752,036
189,367
$919,882
1,690,599
2,151,271
187,908
423,784
2,869,022
3/ $774,450
$11,487
2,121,260
123,108
7,688
$815,287
2,584,514
107,367
1,425,582
752,036
189,367
58,156
1,286,803
938,340
1,938,842
1,107,711
1,938,842
1,107,711
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
$1,985,459
2,026,242
3,663,891
4,613,617
412,813
$1,485,471
1,525,594
3,010,005
30,108
412,813
$1,485,471
1,525,594
3,010,005
30,108
412,813
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, T e n n . —
1,084,830
1,312,932
296,940
2,179,501
112,725
1,060,929
1,136,921
289,372
1,865,617
118,725
1,060,929
484,395
289,372
1,865,617
112,725
Providence, R. I.San Antonio, Tex.Cmaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
1,254,412
1,029,454
128,857
2,876,548
1,596,087
123,352
1,029,454
128,857
1,814,206
1,161,375
123,352
1,029,454
128,857
1,814,206
1,161,375
Oklahoma City, Okla.Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
698,423
1,277,912
492,829
1,590,878
1,075,018
698 ,423
423,959
346,875
1,169,321
1,066,281
539,153
187,181
346,875
1,169,321
1,066,281
749,612
540,904
1,356,536
354,254
2,171,003
749,612
93,036
1,335,987
116,723
1,684,962
749,612
93,036
1,335,987
116,723
1,684,962
1,818,677
162,169
879,115
517,544
409,148
1,409,974
162,169
250,237
517,544
83,594
1,409,974
162,169
72,897
370,560
83,594
45,198
307,524
899,485
1,560,391
561,096
915,393
5,016
307,524
899,485
1,265,545
445,268
915,393
5,016
307,524
899,485
1,265,545
44,509
96,391
824,955
390,624
888,699
23,751
111,349
455,124
662,560
279,083
333,426
18,122
86,519
310,681
662,560
279,083
19,491
18,122
86,519
32,989
Columbus, Ohio—
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.—
Fort 'forth, T e x . —
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.—
San Diego, Calif.Long Beach, Calif. Nashville, Tenn.
Springfield, Mass.Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, C o n n . —
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.Kansas City, Kans.Fort Wayne, Ind.
See footnotes on page 78.
$56,732
$4,295,291
5/ $652,526
152,462
152,462
1,126,124
3/ 69,357
236,778
$9,568
1,019,936
42,300
1,019,936
42,300
754,555
71,081
754,555
71,081
436,179
436,179
$80,345
224,242
3,950
177,340
5/ 86,849
400,759
819,002
313,935
277,692
628,878
628,878
297,172
297,172
287,796
92,620
287,796
92,620
162,395
65,326
555,273
162,395
65,326
555,273
TABLE 10.—REVENUES FROM STATE GRANTS, BY PURPOSE AND SOURCE: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
ber
FOR SCHOOLS
I
Total
City
CITY
FOR CHARITIES
From specified sources
Total
From unspecified sources
Individual
income taxes
General
sales taxes
Total
Other
From unspecified sources
From business
license
taxes
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
Camden, N. J .
E r i e , Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J.—
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.-
$908,839
278,763
466,308
42,029
1,169,366
622,116
$280,447
278,763
389,262
37,054
895,475
125,960
$5,496
278,763
50,900
37,054
895,475
17,762
Cambridge, Mass.
New Bedford, Mass.Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, Tenn.
Peoria, 1 1 1 . —
586,623
808,223
338,972
172,360
534,646
155,043
198,488
338,972
172,360
133,063
21,076
84,068
338,972
172,360
117,389
South Bend, Ind.
Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
441,464
983,934
597,943
477,173
873,966
310,533
950,614
597,943
350,976
717,484
39,039
950,614
190,251
39,434
717,484
Wilmington, D e l . —
Tampa, Fla.
Somerville, Mass.El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.—
1,336,582
745,637
680,327
519,390
399,518
1,336,582
745,546
143,301
512,646
271,030
1,336,582
292,984
28,676
512,646
26,710
Lynn, Mass.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.'
Lowell, Mass.
763,057
1,078,113
346,286
53,141
528,803
152,413
817,547
334,004
53,141
101,550
36,983
817,547
191,498
53,141
7,283
$274,951
$626,517
$626,517
77,046
77,046
430,264
581,502
430,264
581,502
$108,198
133,967
114,420
5/ $216,630
$15,674
252,000
291,250
407,692
20,292
452,562
229,000
115,430
537,026
537,026
610,644
257,628
610,644
257,628
15,320
3/ 142,506
94,267
Honolulu, Hawaii 6/-
1/ Includes $861,299 corporation income taxes and $864,389 income taxes not separately reported.
2/ Includes $273,362 general sales taxes.
3/ Includes corporation income
tsxes not separately reported.
4/ Includes $86,849 corporation income taxes and $864,389 income taxes not separately reported.
5/ General sales taxes.
6/ Not included in
group or grand totals.
7/ Includes $193,121 general sales taxes.
TABLE 1 0 . — R E V E N U E S FROM STATE GRANTS, BY PURPOSE AND SOURCE:
FOR HIGHWAYS
From u n specified
sou roe s
Group I
Group I I - Group I I I -
$22,182,119
$2,144,571
16,165,748
3,737,503
2,278,868
1,511,231
403,027
230,313
From s p e c i f i e d
Motor v e h i c l e
fuel taxes
•18,466,747
14,139,911
2,650,049
1,676,787
sources
Motor v e h i c l e
licenses
1/
1937—Continued
For h e a l t h
and h o s pitals,
from u n specified
sources
$1,570,801
•704,568
U 514,606
358,853
201,212
144,503
684,427
371,768
FOR OTHER SPECIFIED PURPOSES
From u n specified
sources
From p e r s o n a l
property
taxes
$2,433,704
2/ $3,183,252
3,361,075
1,203,501
1,052,380
805,923
1,171,540
456,241
i / 2.555,152
6/ 31,961
7/ 596,139
$500,000
106,608
30,000
$106,608
30,000
1,545,591
16,624
521,216
129,975
521,216
129,975
•5,616,956
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$12,108
$6,735,949
2,097,966
1,434,799
2,096,864
$602,741
758,201
$6,133,208
1,597,966
676,598
2,096,864
$500,000
39,188
31,050
92,425
1,217
9/ $500,000
11/ 14,606
14,606
959,558
636,341
588,153
636,341
588,153
40,221
526,185
1,314,037
287,475
1,314,037
137,186
136,250
6,394
1,500
1,500
$989,019
4,434
$989,019
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.'
New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.
Rochester, N. Y . —
Jersey City, N. J.
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
See footnotes on page 81.
$478,256
321 975
23 499
1,490 902
742 313
121 249
410 507
148,802
$323,936
22,300
18,130
$154,320
321,975
1,120
8,664
i i / 27,527
27,527
1,472,772
618,394
13/ $4,434
$1,199
123,919
38,661
410,507
148,802
1,300
1,300
165,205
165,205
16,016
16,016
TABLE 1 0 . — R E V E N U E S FROM STATE GRANTS, BY PURPOSE AND SOURCE:
FOR HIGHWAYS
From u n specified
sources
From specified
Motor vehicle
fuel taxes
sources
Motor vehicle
licenses
1937—Continued
For h e a l t h
and h o s pitals,
from unspecified
sources
FOR OTHER SPECIFIED PURPOSES
From u n specified
sources
From personal
property
taxes
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, Ohio—
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, C o l o . —
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Mian.Birmingham, Ala.
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.--
$1,120
1,120
$252,938
$252,933
288,218
23,901
23,549
Fort Worth, Tex.Hartford, Conn.—
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.San Diego, Calif.-
900
1,530
900
1,530
$291,388
7,568
1,120
7,848
1,120
57,186
74,342
74,342
42,212
531
1,048
8,737
48,920
4,800
20,549
10,125
1,306
26,750
40,182
13/ 48,!
4,800
20,549
10,125
Long Beach, Calif.
Nashville, T e n n . —
Springfield. Mass.Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, Utah-
$109,560
$23,901
23,549
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y . —
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.—
$400,948
$288,218
26,750
40,182
1,306
484,735
153,798
318,978
85,775
85,775
For u n s p e c i fied p u r poses, from
general
s a l e s taxes
Yonkers, N. Y.
Peterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
65
Trenton, N. J.
66
Chattanooga, Tenn.'
67 I Kansas City, Kans.
Fort Wayne, Ind.-Camden, N. J.
Erie, P a . —
Elizabeth, N. J.Wichita, K a n s . —
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass..
6,750
23,208
46,215
5,629
5,505
144,443
5,629
5,505
18,913
1,875
4,975
266,378
4,975
266,378
14/ 7,513
Cambridge, M a s s . —
New Bedford, Mass.
Reading, Pa.
K n o x v i l l e , Tenn.—
Peoria, 111.
S o u t h Bend, I n d .
Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, F l a .
Gary, I n d .
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, D e l . Tampa, F l a .
Somerville, Mass.
El Paso, Tex.
Evansvilie, Ind.Lynn, Mass.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.
Lowell, Mass.
130,931
24,575
130,931
24,575
126,197
102,977
8,745
il/ 8,745
128,488
12,282
12,282
3,316
Honolulu, Hawaii
1/ Includes $14,606 selective property taxes.
2/ Includes $500,000 alcoholic beverage taxes, $53,354 general sales taxes, and $43,785 business license taxes (insurance).
3/ Includes $1,680,040 motor vehicle fuel taxes, $725,562 alcoholic beverage sales taxes, and $6,664 nonbusiness license taxes.
4/ Includes $500,000 alcoholic beverage taxes.
5/ Includes $1,680,040 motor vehicle fuel taxes and $725,562 alcoholic beverage sales taxes.
6/ Consists of $4,434 general sales taxes and $27,527 business license taxes (insurance).
7/ Includes $48,920 general sales taxes and $16,258 business license taxes (insurance).
8/ Includes $6,664 nonbusiness license taxes.
9/ Alcoholic beverage taxes.
10/ Motor vehicle fuel taxes.
11/ Selective property taxes.
12/ Alcoholic beverage sales taxes.
_13/ General sales taxes.
14/ Business license taxes (insurance).
15/ Nonbusiness license taxes.
82
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
TABLE 11
Revenues of the 94 cities in 1937 from grants by the Federal Government and
by counties and other local units are shown in table 11. These receipts complete the picture of intergovernmental aid received by the cities.
FEDERAL GRANTS.—Federal grants consist almost exclusively of P.W.A. grants
for capital improvements, the single major exception being the contribution of
the Federal Government to the municipal government of Washington, D. C , which
is made annually because of the national character of the Capital City. Seventy-nine cities reported total receipts of $57,055,078 from P.W.A. grants in
1937. Other Federal grants were small amounts for fire protection and to municipal universities for R.O.T.C. uniforms.
GRANTS BY THE COUNTY AND OTHER LOCAL UNITS. — A i d to schools constituted the
chief purpose of county and other local-unit grants received by the 94 cities.
Highway aid ranked second. As indicated by footnotes, the column headed "All
other" contains grants for charities, health, libraries, a civic center, and
unreported purposes. Cities in population groups I and II do not show receipts
of grants from counties for either of two reasons: First, in 18 of these 26
cities, called "county cities" by the Bureau,12 a proportionate share of the
transactions of the county is included in the city report, county-city grants
being shown as transfers; second, in the remaining 8 cities, the city and county
governments are combined.13
TABLE 12
Receipts from private sources,from special assessments for capital outlays,
and from contributions from public-service enterprises are shown in table 12.
Revenues from these sources amounted to $105,389,575 in 1937, or approximately
3.9 percent of total municipal revenue reported by the 94 cities.
PENSION ASSESSMENTS. —During 1937 the reporting cities collected $37,533,946
from city employees on account of policemen's, firemen's, school teachers', or
other pension or retirement funds, the largest assessment being made for school
teachers retirement benefits. Of the 94 cities included in this study, 73 reported assessments for a pension or retirement system for policemen, 69 for
firemen, and 69 for school teachers. Coincident with the growing interest in
social security, it might be pointed out, there has been a constant lncrea.se in
pension assessments collected by the 94 cities in recent years, as is indicated
by the accompanying statement.
The foregoing trend comparison has, of course, a
$2 000 000
1916
definite relation to the liability side of the munici20 000 000
1926
pal balance sheet as well.
With the adoption of a
24 000 000
1928
pension or retirement system, the city incurs an ac30 000 000
1930
31 000 000
1932
crued liability amounting to the difference between
33 000 000
1934
the sum necessary to retire those included under the
36 000 000
1936
system and the amount contributed by the beneficiaries
37 500 000
1937
plus interest earned. If it may be assumed that the
rising level of pension assessments reflects in large
part a widening scope of such retirement or pension systems, it is possible
that the cities will find it necessary to discover supplemental sources of revenue to meet these accrued liabilities.
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR CAPITAL OUTLAYS.—Revenues from special assessments for
capital outlays amounted to $33,361,059 in 1937, as compared with $41,590,664
in 1936.
As previously indicated there has been a gradual decline in this
source of revenue from its peak of $205,000,000 in 1928. To what extent this
reflects the reluctance of local officials to burden property owners with additional assessments in periods of general financial stringency, or reflects the
Increased use of W.P.A. and P.W.A. funds for local improvements, is not readily
ascertainable.
12/ See part I of this report, p. 6, aupra,
13/ The two amounts shown, as receipts in groups I and II are grants to
than the county.
the city by local units other
PART I I : GENERAL GOVERNMEOT—REVENUES
83
CONTRIBUTIONS FROM PUBLIC-SERVICE ENTERPRISES
Public-service enterprises contributed #31,636,434 to general government in 1937. Although the general government of 47 of the 94 cities reported no contributions from public-service
enterprises, and although such receipts constituted only slightly more than one
percent of the total revenue, this source of revenue was of considerable importance to the fiscal structure of some of the reporting cities. This was especially true in the case of Jacksonville, which derived almost one-third of Its
total municipal revenue from its public-service enterprises, most of which came
from the electric light and power system. Approximately one-seventh of Atlanta's
total revenue was in the form of profit derived from its water system. The
larger part of approximately $4,000,000 received by Philadelphia as contributions from public-service enterprises was derived from its gas system, owned
but not operated by the city. New York and Baltimore reported substantial contributions from their water systems—$12,334,614 and $2,186,332, respectively.14
TABLE 13
Revenues of the 94 cities In 1937 from charges for current services are
shown in table 13. These sources of revenue are broken down In such detail as
to require little explanation or comment.
CHARGES FOR CURRENT SERVICES.—During 1937 revenues of $83,997,898 were derived by the 94 cities from charges for current services of a varied nature.
These charges are for services incidental to the performance by the municipalities of general governmental functions. The largest of these revenues Is under
the classification of schools, most of which is tuition of students. Next In
the order of their importance are hospital fees; court costs, fees, and charges;
and fees for the recording of legal documents. Bridge and tunnel tolls, which
amounted to almost $5,000,000, are virtually all distributed within only 3 cities—New York, St. Louis, and Boston.
COMPARISON WITH 1936. —Revenues from charges for current services In 1937
were 10.8 percent greater than the $75,817,000 reported by the 94 cities in
1936 from similar sources. Owing to the fact that in 1937 there was an extensive breakdown of the many sources of such revenues, together with a shift1ng
of revenues from previous classifications to others more appropriate functionally, a detailed comparison with previous years as to individual sources is not
possible in many instances.
14/ See part III for a discussion of public-service enterprises.
84
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
TABLE 11.—REVENUES FROM GRANTS FROM COUNTIES AND OTHER LOCAL UNITS AND FROM THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, BY PURPOSE: 1937
COUNTY AND OTHER LOCAL UNIT GRANTS F O R —
FEDERAL GRANTS FGR-
All
other
Grand total-
Group I
Group I I —
Group III-
$4,688,912
$767,520
14,787
101,594
4,572,531
752,733
$3,386,641 1/^534,751 863,693,017
$57,055,078
45,538,140
6,662,837
11,492,040
38,955,495
6,612,963
11,486,620
14,787
^/101,594
3,386,641 E/433,157
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Califs
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
$14,787
Baltimore, Md.—•Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, P a . —
San Francisco,Calif.|
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.-Buffalo, N. Y . —
§8,074,947
9,059,629
3,670,810
2,548,085
5,604,712
1,032,160
1,307,685
$8,074,947
9,059,629
3,670,810
2,548,085
5,601,993
1,032,160
1,307,685
2,067,528
2,430,964
1,105,403
883,602
6,812,426
295,216
644,973
2,067,528
2,430,964
1,105,403
883,602
232,500
295,216
644,973
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.New Orleans, La.
Cincinnati, Ohio
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, Mo.
Seattle, Wash.
£/$101,594
$101,594
Indianapolis, Ind.Rochester, N. Y . —
Jersey City, N. J.'
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
$984,226
150,583
670,730
$984,226
150,583
620,85i
1,556,102
210,476
1,556,102
210,476
196,739
528,102
940,720
1,183,809
210,441
30,909
196,73S
528,102
940,720
1,183,809
210,441
30,909
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, Ohio
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.
Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.Akron, Ohio
Memphis, T e n n . —
Providence, R. I.San Antonio, Tex.Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y . —
Dayton, Ohio
128,379
527,916
15,376
732,096
$706,112
599,726
89,992
694,049
187,232
136,061
825,271
136,061
825,271
208,923
484,689
207,966
484,689
538,092
132,938
196,857
538,092
132,938
196,857
358,915
103,949
139,129
358,915
103,949
139,129
840,338
253,725
840,333
253,725
$527,916
50,000
580,496
|2/$15,376
E/101,600
1,618
956^/175,000
Oklahoma City, Okla
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.Fort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.
1
San Diego, C a l i f . —
$706,112
601,463
89,992
694,049
187,232
5/9,467
5/9,555
10,068
21,168
See footnotes at end of table.
79,253
8,190
11,000
10,168
85
PART I I : GENERAL GOVERNMENT—REVENUES
TABLE 1 1 . — R E V E N U E S FROM GRANTS FROM COUNTIES AND OTHER LOCAL U N I T S AND FROM THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, BY P U R P O S E : 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
COUNTY AND OTHER LOCAL UNIT GRANTS F O R —
FEDERAL GRANTS F O R —
o
City
CITY
Total
Highways
Schools
All
other
Total
P. W. A.
All other
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 — C o n t i n u e d
Long B e a c h , C a l i f .
N a s h v i l l e , Tenn.—S p r i n g f i e l d , Mass.
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.-
$154,000
614,822
12,768
41,425
$154,000
$614,822
12,768
41,425
Des Moines, IowaScranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, Utah)
Yonkers, N. Y . —
Paterson, N. J.-Jacksonville, Fla.Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.—
1,929
11,002
1,929
fe/$ll,002
807,067
6/60,472
Kansas City, Kans
Fort Wayne, Ind.
1
Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J.Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, ?fash.
Fall River, M a s s . —
Cambridge, Mass.
New Bedford, Mass.—
176,918
3,857
2,887
5,521
Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, Tenn.Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.Tacoma, Wash.
2,887
2,761
5/2,760
172,010
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Wa t e rbury, Conn.Lowell, Mass.
3,358
5,669
$310,881
317,745
94,247
324,431
38,310
34,248
549,738
34,248
549,738
102,886
91,637
102,886
91,637
74,654
62,311
27,963
86,699
259,676
74,654
62,311
27,963
86,699
259,676
153,300
153,300
19,091
19,091
145,312
145,312
36,800
36,800
5/3,857
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.'
Tampa, Fla.
Somerville, Mass.
El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.—
Lynn, Mass.
$310,881
317,745
94,247
324,431
38,310
5/3,358
29,972
29,972
334,843
178,440
674,340
68,653
14,023
334,843
178,440
674,340
68,653
14,023
215,504
68,600
212,778
68,600
25,052
77,025
25,052
77,025
19,680
176,014
162,525
19,680
176,014
162,525
50,179
53,411
9,437
31,650
50,179
53,411
9,437
31,650
5/3,510
140,833
7/37,200
Honolulu, Hawaii Q/A
1/ Includes $42,500 for h e a l t h , $302,972 for
c h a r i t i e s , $50,479 for l i b r a r i e s , $37,200
center, and $101,600 for unreported purpose.
2/ For c h a r i t i e s .
3 / Includes $201,378 for c h a r i t i e s , $42,500 for h e a l t h , $50,479 for l i b r a r i e s , $37,200
center, and $101,600 for unreported purpose.
4/ For unreported purpose.
5/ For l i b r a r y .
6/ Includes $42,500 f o r health and $17,972 for l i b r a r y .
l] For c i v i c c e n t e r .
8/ Not included in group or grand t o t a l s .
for
civic
for
civic
TABLE 12.—REVENUES FROM PRIVATE SOURCES, FROM CONTRIBUTIONS FROM PUBLIC-SERVICE ENTERPRISES, AND FROM SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS: 1937
REVENUE FROM PRIVATE SOURCES
Pension assessments
D o n a t i o n s and
contributions
School
teachers
Grand
total-
Group I
Group I I —
Group I I I -
Unclaimed
moneys
Contributions
from p u b l i c service
enterprises
Special assessments
for capital
outlays
$72,028,516
$4,217,846
$1,922,151
$15,656,205
$15,742,744
$2,097,841
$755,295
$31,636,434
$33,361,059
53,862,175
6,977,830
11,188,511
3,328,800
420,326
468,720
1,108,700
347,209
466,242
11,559,782
1,563,108
2,533,315
13,531,481
1,450,388
760,875
967,262
774,112
356,467
679,552
45,785
29,958
22,686,598
2,376,902
6,572,934
16,946,275
5,780,308
10,634,476
$7,915,204
2,234,221
400,601
33,757
253,835
63,984
$4,506
46,884
34,966
18,598
16,120
5,913
91,812
$534,599
12,624
2,479
47,878
25,128
15,900
6,022
$12,334,614
341,903
4,997,950
$7,761,588
2,456,515
211,040
2,124,070
139,296
1,609,562
686,228
364,163
614,983
418,528
487,040
305,062
10,135
612,047
48,027
13,716
10,227
13,019
41,292
603
6,835
10
26,835
7
632
$37,057
46,693
481,095
14,769
14,232
859
$13,558
1,041
12,082
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 1 1 1 . —
Philadelphia, Pa.
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
9
10
11
12
13
14
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$28,581,805
4,952,672
6,755,415
666,413
1,740,836
592,358
379,719
$1,096,508
705,340
353,362
103,876
251,502
17,517
171,669
3,098,072
1,762,350
1,598,170
1,172,233
798,360
813,168
950,604
93,289
66,515
112,059
126,760
121,022
109,381
$358,486
136,167
$6,696,374
1,253,214
829,890
462,304
168,704
13,298
22,409
317,127
29,280
43,786
58,735
24,896
84,507
79,905
88,527
353,950
391,410
327,047
230,362
271,797
155,006
271,301
440,103
1,025,547
158,619
87,807
2,339
941
679 308
277 325
443 584
227,048
310,699
124,866
14,939
530,668
409,591
340,165
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
553
$290,617
115,135
181,615
283,921
22,318
$18,228
53,351
2,859
80,728
11,912
47,924
48,386
403 284
12,343
17,670
138,599
18,857
19.679
61,869
60,759
178.767
189,609
158 218
154 795
2,519
11,993
1,908
29,894
17,679
196,620
16
17
18
19
20
Minneapolis, Minn.New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o —
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
$743,036
418,774
1,806,683
1,185,978
29,594
526,912
$22,023
47,217
11,841
133,803
21
22
23
24
25
26
Indianapolis, Ind.Rochester, N. Y . —
Jersey City, N. J.Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
150,840
377,345
710,553
40,769
737,518
249,828
$361
219 317
153 221
$155,337
897,874
519,536
3,450
4,141
8,881
3,011
10
1,567
158,778
10,171
1,955
5,397
1,150
165,671
37,247
551,237
$1,213,577
828,772
1,228,345
71,222
326,301
197,094
37,205
904,535
18,003
40,976
914,278
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, Ohio
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.
Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
32
33
37
38
39
40
41
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
$273,160
152,371
92,457
42,889
1,528,637
$1,420
9,842
45,274
14,682
17,404
$46,839
15,985
16,090
$100,494
133,042
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.
Birmingham, Ala.
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
168,117
51,938
15,446
131,111
123,633
8,769
12,032
4,036
14,151
12,020
10,344
2,616
3,879
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
300,725
19,489
30,229
253,014
80,305
37,561
5,006
2,972
13,705
26,395
6,851
Oklahoma City, Okla.Worcester, Mass.Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, M i c h . —
8,437
220,018
677,261
76,976
247,917
1,930
4,709
Fort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.
San Diego, C a l i f . —
156,868
17,543
149,093
127,312
85,809
7,042
2,994
16,060
16,855
6,504
3,054
11,255
16,681
Long Beach, Calif.Nashville, Tenn.
Springfield, Mass.Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, C o n n . —
Des Moines, Iowa
438,824
50,254
7,770
3,799
10,101
4,707
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, Utah—
Yonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.Kansas City, Kans.Fort Wayne, Ind.
Camden, N. J.
26 254
112 147
8,437
3,343
899
122,039
114,730
26,879
107,127
74,436
378
110,602
$14,365
8,060
344
12,041
300
10,593
325
100
15,498
4,267
$150,288
$181
170
1,494,673
134,604
541
966
3,466
110,695
$1,001,625
170,724
1,137,671
183,638
267,303
572,866
523,350
708,086
125,160
21,592
7 502
22,575
85,883
12,511
3,794
102,157
16,729
259,839
153,658
1,931,865
125,614
11,919
21,703
12,789
20,290
6,736
9,786
61,632
1,877
15,683
5,476
13,237
17,523
57,449
10,867
4,345
62,800
101,054
3,428
7,469
17,530
32,139
12,462
6,987
10,835
24,579
12,732
11,561
65,799
15,518
100,880
87,952
52,155
162,892
266,028
276,917
405
5 869
118,199
18,744
76,966
23,973
131,641
11,319
87,887
113,153
68,906
241,439
15,712
6,000
25,355
387,008
$6,593
1,427
28 592
19 439
634,285
86 632
137,312
2,381
51,970
3,078
6,000
11,733
303
3,027
20,956
582
555
21,095
148,419
919
114,470
419,941
38,166
1,512
11,319
13,049
11,254
1,714
8,777
38,772
959
1,632
1,158
1,211
105
196
25,100
4,109
1,896,935
14,402
34,216
110,000
6,000
479
356
20,823
48,987
348,089
16,419
14,633
89,304
64,707
70,361
30,206
2,046
128,880
28,968
38,101
11,202
258,821
258,875
295,398
131,188
201,357
475,353
2,721
187,253
371,855
9,497
31,720
241,020
118,304
43,433
46,239
TABLE 12.—REVENUES FROM PRIVATE SOURCES, FROM CONTRIBUTIONS FROM PUBLIC-SERVICE ENTERPRISES, AND FROM SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS:
bar
REVENUE FROM PRIVATE SOURCES
CITY
Total
Pension assessments
City
I
1937—Continued
Policemen
Firemen
School
teachers
All other
Donations and
contributions
Unclaimed
moneys
Contributions
from publicservice
enterprises
Special assessments
for capital
outlays
$26,190
2,500
$66,704
35,369
349,651
265,648
60,783
14,401
3,886
14,135
70,222
1,913
272,823
62,956
22,926
164,242
408
9,029
240,344
1,645
334,605
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
71
72
73
74
81
82
E r i e , Pa.
E l i z a b e t h , N. J.—
Wichita, Kans.——
Spokane, Wash.
F a l l River, Mass.-
$85,173
98,544
6,653
26,580
237,048
Cambridge, M a s s . —
New Bedford, Mass.Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, T e r m . —
Peoria, 111.
147,389
77,495
68,758
33,518
23,857
9,299
3,596
South Bend, Ind.Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
85,063
62,488
180,353
22,415
45,865
2,113
4,292
7,220
1,852
2,709
14,490
5,724
3,012
Wilmington, Del.Tampa, Fla.
Somerville, Mass..
El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind„-
34,899
71,733
113,763
3,791
22,725
5,595
3,113
2,381
1,463
3,748
3,513
3,305
3,057
2,032
4,142
Lynn, Mass.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.Lowell, Mass.
240,053
123,289
64,548
69,722
44,674
Honolulu, Hawaii l/—
1/ Not included in group or grand totals.
$21,747
4,782
201
10,900
5,071
3,281
$15,937
1,945
6,089
85
29,288
1,663
$50,041
54,705
14,992
40,998
59,264
49,215
46,216
20,952
9,517
$8,942
3,130
10,909
26,071
13,879
13,433
12,566
$1,596
692
1,271
9,004
1,275
16,858
16,621
17,481
41,338
$525
3,112
25
150
2,534
398
319
2,311
70
1,993
29
3.840
17,213
64,812
33,476
55,326
14,066
42,367
47,549
54,362
59,274
44,234
18,720
34,202
85,910
63,681
2,005
296
769
8,571
1,350
3,452
7,167
440
22,651
85,321
59,900
54,985
7,782
2,661
205,218
3
TABLE 1 3 . — R E V E N U E S FROM CHARGES FOR CURRENT S E R V I C E S ,
BY P R I N C I P A L S E R V I C E S :
1937
(Sea t e x t d i s c u s s i o n , p . 83)
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE, LEGISLATIVE,
AND JUDICIAL
i i
All service
charges
Grand
total-
Group I
Group I I —
Group I I I -
Court
costs,
f e e s , and
charges
Recording
of l e g a l
instruments
PUBLIC SAFETY
Police
charges
Fire
protection
services
Protective
inspection
fees
Weights
and
measures
Inspectors'
examinat i o n fees
All
other
$83,997,898
$20,641,625
$9,093,850
$5,022,949
$6,524,826
$4,952,874
$1,480,086
$374,425
$2,089,282
$196,714
$133,482
$82,066
$19,901
$576,918
52,529,838
12,754,395
18,713,665
15,561,321
3,195,909
1,884,395
7,084,536
1,261,083
748,231
4,042,533
730,970
249,446
4,434,252
1,203,856
886,718
3,179,468
855,073
918,333
642,731
517,791
319,564
248,507
44,186
81,732
1,579,084
185,435
324,763
115,852
15,821
65,041
101,470
15,591
16,421
32,704
10,091
39,271
7,837
1,082
10,982
451,283
65,076
60,559
$12,987,388
8,680,002
3,216,412
6,844,398
4,159,427
2,781,169
2,939,612
$4,697,863
3,942,435
1,361,489
478,316
969,577
758,692
804,498
$2,265,816
1,064,113
936,206
250,376
356,582
511,800
464,484
$67,568
$80,695
14,052
1,907
926
$7,154
$1,739
$28,730
109,497
24,744
90,487
76,239
499
600
GROUP I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 AND OVER
New Y o r k , N. Y.
D e t r o i t , Mich.
Los A n g e l e s , C a l i f .
Boston, Mass.—
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San F r a n c i s c o , C a l i f . W a s h i n g t o n , D . C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
B u f f a l o , N. Y.
886,853
2,813,252
1,797,098
1,439,933
1,107,229
1,938,136
938,929
118,695
269,439 I
775,764
430,705
534,193
229,270
190,385
76,301
79,918
454,893
222,796
234,186
140,553
26,512
$1,917,264
393,632
266,379
172,844
375,178
99,452
115,650
$514,783
2,484,690
158,904
55,096
237,817
147,440
224,364
$231,610
1,149,584
247,366
207,574
254,892
118,488
158,103
105,623
80,064
132,117
262,372
64,899
57,059
42,394
83,898
240,807
75,792
37,635
23,818
106,814
18,103
24,648
335,282
220,067
104,729
100,076
8,946
$104,309
13,071
22,838
65,528
51,085
94,417
2,265
$22,034
602
1,821
5,602
9,317
4,152
4,009
$76,537
870,997
183,911
25,807
113,709
17,527
117,980
3,508
200,147
1,635
1,811
78,061
4,056
4,263
2,395
77,043
97,887
1,395
15,812
2,175
11,573
3,905
9,937
113,985
28,191
2,520
2,505
1,552
14,952
3,616
1,893
3,624
2,267
14,840
413
2,880
1,523
686
71,809
936
GROUP I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 5 0 0 , 0 0 0
M i n n e a p o l i s , Minn.
New O r l e a n s , L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J .
Kansas C i t y , Mo.—
S e a t t l e , Wash.
$1,054,469
789,644
2,126,311
1,436,187
728,076
1,053,975
$198,567
342,744
334,934
313,075
284,339
424,610
$92,433
146,931
190,533
208,620
118,973
131,139
Indianapolis, Ind.
R o c h e s t e r , N. Y . - J e r s e y C i t y , N. J . '
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
656,302
1,318,813
1,349,628
852,836
774,217
613,937
182,307
164,480
169,899
443,248
54,400
283,306
19,333
127,851
78,952
46,104
100,214
$87,139
139,794
60,630
73,728
69,028
102,125
$18,995
56,019
83,771
30,727
96,338
191,346
$47,356
154,105
68,015
123,328
45,609
104,764
$35,916
7,223
27,807
118,571
9,032
78,920
$1,915
1,845
10,646
2,726
678
6,873
39,0'30
42,655
40,345
143,277
102,492
1,703
364,296
7,055
107,837
41,540
20,044
63,477
86,957
6,543
93,335
22,624
17,578
62,836
53,709
14,625
80
615
83,575
4,183
1,241
75,255
$514
110,155
27,506
1,500
9,157
6,110
$637
12,643
134
$461
8,805
223
531
2,068
3,353
$913
926
248
13
2,394
$7,500
24,643
1,196
$1,050
1,434
11,118
6,604
3,365
1,819
13
361
3,302
6,543
2,275
TABLE 1 3 . — R E V E N U E S FROM CHARGES FOR CURRENT S E R V I C E S ,
(See t e x t d i s c u s s i o n , p .
<D
CITY
All service
charges
Total
>>
Court
costs,
f e e s , and
charges
Recording
of l e g a l
instruments
All
other
1937—Continued
83)
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE, LEGISLATIVE,
AND JUDICIAL
u
a
BY P R I N C I P A L S E R V I C E S :
PUBLIC SAFETY
Total
Police
charges
Fire
protection
services
Protective
inspection
fees
Weights
and
measures
$3,045
$398
$6,106
Inspectors'
examinat i o n fees
Pounds
Scales
All
other
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0
Columbus, O h i o T o l e d o , Ohio
Oakland, C a l i f .
Denver, C o l o . —
A t l a n t a , Ga.
$1,728
33,718
23,150
197,453
1,851
$19,390
14,193
8,219
51,741
51,806
$1,265
2,780
465
1,897
13,901
$17,727
1,855
68
2,191
312
45,780
36,722
$906
605
6,352
71,251
13,534
457
230
53,133
9,564
20,358
12,979
69,552
21,169
3,532
2,738
255
45,162
815
5,600
25
278
500
9
16,807
12,446
2,913
260
40
23,060
56,912
314
1,697
34,239
234
27,080
865
49,167
12,246
16,460
15,232
43,000
3,566
1,687
2,689
823
4,569
4,257
53,117
8,748
10,727
10,430
50,204
4,459
24,413
4,171
16,908
710
644
13
4,944
1,580
149
4,733
481
2,155
25,534
2,979
72
2,187
4,212
2,397
17,521
78,753
29,706
1,059
5,560
906
1,849
17,236
193
4,229
1,758
4,655
4,664
8,123
2,524
1,788
13,155
1,129
$35,967
53,736
$392,270
1,062,224
436,132
753,592
857,568
$37,695
87,454
24,531
476,166
69,069
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala..
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, T e n n . —
442,313
507,539
226,458
605,615
263,324
87,919
13,534
72,290
230
10,316
Providence, R. I.San Antonio, Tex.Omaha, Nebr.
S y r a c u s e , N. Y . — •
D a y t o n , Ohio
449,089
240,680
291,397
476,138
661,272
86,813
314
13,280
47,578
20,403
6,841
Oklahoma C i t y , O k l a .
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.-.
317,353
613,656
469,865
159,411
540,649
4,257
53,336
55,069
28,224
20,532
Fort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.-.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.
25,534
43,884
8,046
58,774
4.596
Long Beach, Calif.
407,923
511,529
736,090
264,529
220,446
172^890
Nashville, T e n n . —
Springfield, Mass.
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.Des Moines, I o w a —
Scranton, Pa.
102,487
353,467
65,422
271,979
193,179
41,734
1,912
34,598
193
27,653
16,786
5,012
180,852
67,218
$1,381
97,861
71,833
11,583
13,339
20,165
44,253
17,497
10,046
16,063
7,950
33,781
219
2,068
22,806
384
2J397
63
17,362
2,052
15,028
357
21,372
600
75,603
11,037
1,059
1,073
377
867
158
30,860
165
287
561
163
748
14,290
5,087
1,035
$3,094
598
$4,592
369
4,914
565
3,478
3,295
6,792
170
117
9,522
75
3,600
7,170
2,503
683
7,971
16,543
211
10,804
1,040
229
378
3
7,548
3,183
136
833
433
359
31b
3,950
1,808
1,599
1,246
1
403
3
8
740
46,499
2,508
791
,099
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
Peterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.
Albany, N. Y
Norfolk, Va.
251,620 I
91,391
358,038
73,854
89,404
261,967
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.
Kansas City, Kans.
Fort Wayne, Ind.-Caraden, N. J.
241,705
199,072
61,604
49,916
82,676
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J.
Wichita, K a n s . —
Spokane, W a s h . —
Fall River, Mass
51,477
45,664
299,795
209,139
92,679
Cambridge, Mass.
New Bedford, Ma3
Reading, Pa,
Knoxville, Tenn.
Peoria, 111.
188,611
104,756
89,288
135,781
117,528
South Bend, Ind.
Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
70,180
312,337
576,632
74,329
149,507
Wilmington, Del.
Tampa, Fla.
Soraerville, Mass
iil Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.
35,765
201,797
63,503
122,790
216,931
Lynn, Mass.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.'
Lowell, Mass.
179,630
33,990
155,262
176,800
140,027
Honolulu, Hawaii 1/
1/ Not included in group or grand t o t a l s .
9,836 I
14,487 I
49,336
13,385
6,673
30,634
12,395
10,050
20,011
12,186
25,220
9,396
10,693
1,036
3,722
8,647
12,311
10,778
102
738
613
4,231
1,169
8,210
1,614
6,000
3,022
4,106
6,403
1,460
8,387
1,475
29,086
1,744
7
1,723
14,393
3,272
205
303
258
782
75
46
72
8,138
4,006
665
5,408
23,918
1,666
369
509
5,065
2,404
4,247
10,477
11,682
3,228
271
1,107
214
156
5,202
281
90
136
104
59
475
175
59
7,910
300
3,189
150
1,211
65
109
1,052
280
714
810
108
52
149
267
464
111
638
251
5,311
11,521
5,498
6,086
750
39,242
1,773
3,313
4,442
3,704
4,698
402
2,669
3,324
3,650
451
32
37
668
450
54
283
1,636
1,920
3,081
6,652
8,678
2,808
1,064
1,110
762
6,689
2,299
153
1,783
206
22,025
3,855
1,109
14,857
2,982
175
17,000
389
677
42
912
20,599
36,935
780
387
368
254
187
198
231
1,483
179
1,813
1,448
54,654
389
4,657
4,566
5,146
19,353
16,845
23,730
8,044
9,393
1,450
313
743
1,329
266
375
1,302
359
117
310
55
TABLE 13.—REVENUES FROM CHARGES FOR CURRENT SERVICES, BY PRINCIPAL SERVICES:
1937—Continued
(See text d i s c u s s i o n , p . 83)
Street
and
sidewalk
assessments
Grand t o t a l
Group I
Group I I
Group I I I
$8,976,409
6,954,064
1,131,907
890,438
Street
lighting
charges
Bridge
and
tunnel
tolls
Sewage
charges
$651,121 $2,031,858 $4,928,283 $1,365,147 $6,583,227
231,032
345,905
74,184
1,209,349
228,340
594,169
4,903,885
21,018
3,380
609,798
536,644
218,705
2,782,105
481,855
3,319,267
Street
sanitation
charges
Waste collection
and
disposal
charges
$1,351,223 $2,261,156
1,137,961
190,891
1,087,291
443,267
36,401
871,555
776,310
206,844
1,278,002
Vital
statistics
All
other
$554,705 $1,309,673
424,567
47,719
82,419
650,273
163,498
495,902
Health
inspection
fees
Clinic
fees
All
other
$421,706 i $613,814 i$64,133 $210,020
348,574
22,605
50,527
189,017
129,188
295,609
$242,896 |$201,507
38,542
29,806
20,049
3,261
81,374
5,718
60,763
56,181
6,436
5,846
31,265
4,237
$10,979
5,664
15,630
14,044
23
558
4,255
59,320
112,124
7,450
90,446
GROUP I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 AND 0V3R
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.Los Angeles, Calif.
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
[$3,104,598
439,441
4,561
53,438
1,218,595
3,798
1,088,726
$56,907
100,584
810,943
12,689
17,591
7,076
46,413
45,611
96,865
$663 $3,047,028
2,638
238
5,735
1,188,626
34,600
6,021
1,047,918
3,719
2,004
8,010
4,679
17,591
9,417
2,600
$439,441
1,685
53,438
24,234
3,798
187
5,312
24,959
43,011
1,764
12,037
$257,154
470,815
180,358
62,755
529,408
241,120
17,641
90,116
42,962
917
71,321
42,853
759,272
15,413
$121
435,817
$26,143
50,017
69,146
204,457
8,697
1,351
610
22,250
19,132
693
4,557
728,311
4,558
$257,033
$34,998
154,215
11,750
201,853
35,487
8,025
42,862
22,999
50
,313
5
31,589
3,897
6,600
257,058
566
919
25,004
831
224
71,321
6,657
21,751
4,250
13,991
924
123,917
4,289
8,629
8,259
$5,614
24,931
957
6,359
1,991
49,171
22,962
5,062
20,206
3,571
1,280
8,043
10,778
7,167
3,804
7,001
5,225
26,879
$30,410
3,072
1,158
61,612
4,405
590
149
896
3,213
891
714
485
1,495
3,034
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.
New Orleans, L a . - Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J .
Kansas City, M o . ~
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.'
$322
1
162
43
2
163
2
162 $310,275
1,156
156
869
20,670
880
097
67
225
566 \,
$98
$11,789
147,622
15,247
17,176
2,097
163,158
555
$6,034
$1,152
630
10,836
88,930
2,253
8,950
113,346
ip»y£
630
1,322
52,149
1,391
111,355
3,900
11,850
$2,073
2,092
588
298
482
268
Rochester, N. Y.-Jersey City, N. J.
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
399,945
8,528
2,381
6,646
77,728
4,418
315,571
4,110
2,381
195,392
5,148
48,134
4,206
$36,386
140,547
47,197
35
559
937
4,121
2,878
365
5,148
50
2,304
3
10
4
37
3
3,180
7,685
297 II
380
104
414
978
2,221
1,163
3,338
33,380
840
117
270
766
1,813
1,479
GROUP III.—CITIES HAYING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, Ohio—
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.-Providence, R. I.-San Antonio, T e x . —
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okie
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.
Fort Worth, Tex.—
Hartford, Conn.
F l i n t , Mich.
New Haven, C o n n . —
San Diego, Calif.Long Beach, Calif.
Nashville, Term.-Springfield, Mass.
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
Peterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, F l a .
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J .
Chattanooga, Tenn.
Kansas City, Kans.
$3,335
222,823
50,148
14,258
$2,257
1,696
4,068
712
5,507
5,507
10,733
13,436
60,166
5,712
8,495
60,095
1,823
543
7,086
87,116
34,968
86,978
25,127
18,545
223
15,718
17,597
2,873
1,105
16,751
48,641
3,592
686
22,424
12,842
1,541
13,211
1,726
686
15,559
31,925
1,775
137
1,977
9,058
5,308
513
$3,356
71
824
1,731
543
1,861
138
9,841
18,545
223
2,876
16,056
2,873
1,105
16,653
3,505
91
4,517
171
1,680
63,119
923
395
$3,335
3,108
5,465
14,258
$217,458
42,987
171
1,680
1,012
759
5,622
164
395
364
248
137
1,613
5,308
513
$122,813
316,341
20,396
3,355
509,731
84,841
192,618
127
142,696
22,538
$30,109
44,275
$87,129
269,993
1,027
1,230
75,667
2,328
19,484
22,538
122,176
55,740
7,707
2,439
152,482
276,527
195,833
39,676
185,269
767
8,484
10,860
7,012
2,398
1,838
264,957
10,314
146,812
9,279
146,812
534
385
6,716
18,088
71
38,326
10,502
21,319
13,029
859
12,974
3,363
813
5,181
6,568
6,855
11,470
10,541
17,172
6,307
1,603
6,684
1,296
15
$5,401
1,817
20,396
$174
256
508,489
8,545
12
629
190,520
4,886
40,200
595
184,426
12,839
180,688
610
7,403
12,300
1,683
813
8,745
3,786
3,231
10,950
450
2
1,680
2,502
2,153
3,462
3,393
9,356
13,205
363
1,150
1,792
4,441
100
41
4,899
11,570
1,093
659
4,581
157
298
210
398
2,008
$2,344
5,827
65,497
1,194
14,123
16,640
1,957
220
9,969
2,877
5,415
32,783
656
19,483
10,258
15,042
989
755
12,133
1,035
17,684
3,020
5,842
3,954
6,822
5,154
$564
1,243
5,017
1,023
868
1,283
562
2,565
3,633
2,380
656
1,453
560
$1,780
4,284
60,432
$300
48
10,620
15,772
663
220
7,367 $1,988
13,995
1,160
743
145
99
246
1,382
1,033
610
10,652
3
840
17,681
2,180
238
2,587
11
82
215
1,700
30,188
4,035
8,538
15,042
171
3,503
5,604
1,160
5,598
1,492
672
526
348
11,470
245
1,765
5,734
4,892
4,019
5,126
4,019
2,909
1,934
21,350
5,931
8,748
6,050
591
7,598
1,845
2,974
1,241
2,909
1,934
20,506
3,249
841
185
4,079
3
5,746
4,669
6,050
506
306
349
85
7,064
2,390
129
1,496
TABLE 13.—REVENUES FROM CHARGES FOR CURRENT SERVICES, BY PRINCIPAL SERVICES:
1937—Continued
(See text d i s c u s s i o n , p . 83)
City number
HIGHWAYS
CITY
Total
Street
and
sidewalk
assessments
Street
lighting
charges
SANITATION
Bridge
and
tunnel
tolls
All other
Total
Sewage
charge s
Street
sanitation
charges
HEALTH
Waste collection
and
disposal
charges
All
other
Total
Vital
statistics
Health
inspection
fees
Clinic
fees
All
other
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
$2,827
1,177
1,515
494
Cambridge, Mass.
New Bedford, Mass.
27,594
3,524
6,335
5,440
16,931
471
1,927
208
41,181
Wilmington, Del.
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
$70
1,025
269
15,979
1,511
6,144
6,335
1,804
56
1,180
21
56
1,585
5,615
606
6,345
1,594
9,665
1,495
4,398
1/ Not included in group or grand t o t a l s .
$2,757
152
646
13
10,104
3,524
191
5,440
10,596
471
123
208
41,181
97
5,594
606
308
6,388
299
1,917
6,404
388 1
4,398 I
Honolulu, Hawaii 1/
C'600
481
43
299
323
6,404
388
8,170
$954
3,581
8,913
1,612
22,352
86,180
25
18,874
6,738
$954
3,581
8,378
1,612
22,352
28
25
41,343
683
$963
3,365
$42
$86,152
16,470
2,404
1,524
38,091
2,569
5,214
19,566
377
67,136
66,274
3,838
174
16,099
629 1
2,292 1
39,397
$100
2,512
509
3,070
2,232
25
422
327
61
2,578
734
26
165
1,498
67
976
60
$25
7
652
324
468
468
171,630
40,836
2,659
63,244
2,025
$863
$853
$493
171,630
39,432
2,659
54,663
1,408
1,404
8,581
270
1,883
7,825
92
8,553
4,743
3,497
3,838
61,930
62,777
613
1,096
17,949
1,021
6,783
1,166
14,778
1,546
1,085
1,293
1,214
24,051
12,020
500
2,812
30
64
347
1,305
285
463
933
174
2,699
69
366
38,922
475
13,400
560
993
1,793
4,639
43,126
12,020
7,868
17,589
13,969
5,520
16
1,049
4,409
34,291
1,261 1
5^156 1
1,693
13
611
1 .113
669
92
2,742
976
12,331
251
16
798
3,022
30,658
1,221
3,935
4,396
TABLE 13.—REVENUES FROM CHARGES FOR CURRENT SERVICES, BY PRINCIPAL SERVICES:
1937—Continued
(See t e x t d i s c u s s i o n , p . 83)
HOSPITALS
CHARITIES
Grand total-
Group I
Group I I —
Group III-
Institutional
receipts
All
other
Hospital
fees
CORRECTION
General
relief
Institutional
industry
earnings
(net)
All
other
$10,874,768
$10,050,330
$824,438
#3,180,611
$1,029,157
$2,046,304
$105,150
$1,528,232
$175,268
$1,352,964
$10,739,741
$1,139,324
6,194,996
2,334,719
2,345,053
5,455,472
2,305,038
2,289,820
739,524
29,681
55,233
2,209,515
151,873
819,223
714,018
20,489
294,650
1,448,117
127,521
470,666
47,380
3,863
53,907
1,081,631
224,177
222,424
123,446
2,714
49,108
958,185
221,463
173,316
4,337,299
2,490,951
3,911,491
708,296
134,585
296,443
$55,994
343,310
105,172
200,179
42,921
35,719
398
$815,791
732,192
60,106
1,336,837
143,440
118,384
117,706
$4
88,180
13,214
56,327
204,382
71,349
22,817
9,732
6,789
18,467
90,459
6,610
16,333
26,102
70,319
350,539
150,992
56,395
124,203
229,790
30,605
91,931
25,045
42,414
20,072
24,115
29,973
18,473
$31,048
1,500
100,581
8,059
584
12,323
$99,422
11,158
1,063,709
78,711
210,155
99,486
115,450
104,024
$22,607
5,878
19,618
20,148
9,075
15,914
12,020
11,443
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angelas, Calif.
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$880,575
36,561
989,872
1,787,453
237,646
594,652
416,928
$851,237
36,561
977,203
1,138,748
231,817
590,228
415,991
56,676
365,867
206,499
24,733
134,805
209,922
252,807
56,676
357,474
206,499
2v,733
134,277
182,735
251,293
$29,338
12,669
648,705
5,829
4,424
937
$223,936
768,647
20,039
426,429
65,430
138,820
2,503
$3,245
5,318
19,909
374,579
45,169
126,567
110
528
27,187
1,514
1,654
248,236
77,903
16,724
14,757
81,229
123,208
1,654
26,387
77,839
16,724
661
8,395
7,461
$220,691
751,317
130
48,913
18,048
87
37
$12,012
2,937
2,213
12,166
2,356
7,562
7,785
72,328
114,494
6,311
506
1,253
$55,994
391,921
105,172
237,571
42,921
35,719
398
9,732
6,789
33,420
90,459
6,610
35,519
29,406
$48,611
37,392
19,186
3,304
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.
New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.
Rochester, N. Y . —
$72,669
$69,992
217,243
600,469
8,426
99,080
67,546
114,094
217,243
600,469
97,064
67,059
114,094
$2,677
8,426
2,016
487
$3,041
300
3,940
1,182
$2,916
3,500
$440
81
14,782
81,654
81
3,847
1,576
10,935
78,209
$125
300
$31,048
1,500
100,581
8,059
584
12,323
35,729
$2,714
33,015
TABLE 13.—REVENUES FROM CHARGES FOR CURRENT SERVICES, BY PRINCIPAL SERVICES:
1937—Continued
(See text discussion, p . 83)
CHARITIES
HOSPITALS
CORRECTION
u
I
CITY
Total
Hospital
fees
All
other
Total
o
Institutional
receipts
General
relief
All
other
Total
Institutional
industry
earnings
(net)
Schools
Libraries
All other
GROUP II.—CITLdS HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000—Continued
Jersey City, N. J .
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
$1,040,174
77,236
23,552
14,230
$1,040,174
77,236
17,713
3,994
$387
$387
765
$5,839
10,236
7,804
37,937
$765
7,804
37,937
$3,630
148
9,936
20,639
$3,630
148
9,936
20,639
$39,029
64,825
553,451
51,531
$3,478
8,092
6,312
$43,781
13,207
$43,781
13,207
8,348
8,348
4,758
4
4,758
4
$81,698
282,758
133,564
47,898
14,996
142,015
16,187
51,075
$1,503
14,947
13,021
16,819
12,820
277,669
3,272
94,449
7,647
8,504
91,264
185,339
18,506
153,513
7,250
5,552
5,990
10,060
2,698
GROUP I I I . — CITLiS HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, Ohio—'
Toledo, Ohio—
Oakland, C a l i f . Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
S t . Paul, Minn.Binaingham, Ala.Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.Fort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
F l i n t , Mich.
New Haven, Conn.
San Diego, C a l i f . —
$1,828
$1,828
13,000
76,654
15,168
11,595
8,100
75,531
10,012
11,595
$14,444
254
$4,900
1,123
5,156
$14,444
254
$3,070
14,170
$6,034
14,170
49,108
57,278
67 ,806
55,318
53,797
556
24,163
556
24,163
251,479
245,995
1,960
14,009
329
30,051
16,201
$49,108
26,829
30,902
1,333
148,077
1,333
148,077
19,751
550,041
19,751
548,733
5,484
15,612
11.496
1,520
11.496
305
275,984
126,995
148,989
18,659
54,517
1,080
132,127
50,081
46,035
172,791
116,098
6,941
58,350
41,607
28,605
5,723
13,377
6,123
3,826
4,383
3,255
1,382
3,970
7,743
8,624
3
0
Long Beach, Calif.
Nashville, Tenn.
Springfield, Mass.
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, Utah
Yonkers, N. Y.
Peterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.
Kansas City, Kans.
Fort Wayne, Ind.
Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J.
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, M a s s . —
Cambridge, Mass.
New Bedford, Mass.Reading, Pa.
Knorville, Tenn.
Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.
Tacama, W a s h . —
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.
Tampa, Fla.
ScBierville, Mass.
SI Paso. Tex.
Evansville, Ind.Lynn, Mass.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.Jowell, Mass.
35,371
23,074
35,371
21,061
64
356
74,794
14,198
14,198
85,604
68,210
153
153
2,206
10,398
2,206
10,398
,321
14,321
581
26,694
26,346
68,519
132,774
26,694
25,538
68,519
132,774
1,601
1,601
388
388
1,962
2,433
242
1,763
2,433
242
30,366
75,647
14
581
— —
—
— •
30,597
75,881
87,037
2,549
12,368
34,651
13 ,874
8,063
8,063
1,818
686
3,388
231
234
3,800
3,195
4,610
1,822
2,597
1,978
548
2,834
214
29,009
29,009
11,953
11,939
Honolulu, Hawaii 1/-
1/ Not included in group or grand t o t a l s .
357
357
,255
582
_
337,336
149,941
3,901
109
8,183
809
69,457
2,549
149,941
3,901
109
1,183
64
356
47,141
5,322
18,008
3,119
1,670
8,088
68,919
1,190
590
384
62,564
806
3,119
50
568
686
3,388
19,793
2,507
122,111
23,968
55,589
56,014
17,536
8,380
7,818
2,555
899
11,787
5,544
1,742
4,087
5,347
285,116
6,070
9,089
3,281
98,591
2,303
37,156
3,364
3,412
2,220
1,449
23,781
2,342
24,077
11,673
177 ,563
36,617
20,025
16,937
41,070
7,147
808
2,638
7,340
5,076
2,958
1,723
848
777
12,620
7,147
57,487
32,455
48,007
32,143
23,543
15,237
4,536
1,617
1,704
5,250
2,670
4,507
215
13,510
1,541
1,824
20,381
27,038
78,669
40,321
6,818
36,161
37,853
48,598
1,723
1,975
1,303
2,485
4,302
1,822
2,527
2,719
642
2,219
2,917
1,386
TABLE 13.—REVENUES FROM CHARGES FOR CURRENT SERVICES, BY PRINCIPAL SERVICES: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
(See text discussion, p . 83)
MISCELLANEOUS
Auditorium
and
stadium
fees
Grand
total
Group I
Group I I
Group I I I
Other admission and
use fees
Concessions
Refectories
(net)
All
Cemeteries
and
crematories
other
$8,051,613
$2,380,119
$1,433,674
$3,156,940
$486,414
$123,086
$471,380
$6,019,801
$2,599,079
$886,265
$2,534,457
4,730,066
987,907
2,333,640
1,018,356
441,606
920,157
690,527
239,944
503,203
2,356,930
173,289
626,721
290,759
71,034
124,621
96,570
14,222
12,294
276,924
47,812
146,644
4,140,804
601,941
1,277,056
1,628,186
465,461
505,432
203,141
85,835
597,289
2,309,477
50,645
174,335
$11,411
60,866
36,859
13,517
12,705
29,558
$740,785
64,433
31,479
1,756,131
11,872
360,223
101,393
$737,596
4,825
29,610
128,633
9,074
8,180
889
6,855
50,932
13,397
22,681
189,904
576,003
68,160
2,578
48,899
68,607
120,337
159,288
82,583
68,159
$3,164
16,521
499
3,903
2,215
141
680
11,123
$17,311
95,432
48,387
112,019
55,919
25,438
40,307
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
D e t r o i t , Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.'
Cleveland, Ohio
S t . Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.—
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
•
$1,736,182
557,251
182,707
360,193
420,501
333,488
177,634
$213,686
155,488
38,224
96,113
101,028
61,561
30,837
$24,839
51,360
63,943
$1,343,523
222,695
80,540
159,527
171,706
38,628
7,296
$142,723
66,842
130,200
78,790
92,134
365,371
60,700
139,436
95,479
44,434
14,906
52,294
104,256
6,745
2,165
119,360
58,600
55,573
31,022
127,564
11,347
131
5,764
64,543
40,986
1,313
12,204
49,190
11,066
112,375
206,727
89,496
5,027
21,875
13,867
$62,667
4,873
15,574
7,336
9,768
10,993
8,542
142,050
100,831
40,598
14,651
119,362
$425
139,027
$3,189
59,608
1,869
1,627,498
11,447
79,146
562
30,616
429,731
1
2,578
8,301
53,956
975
GROUP II.—CITItiS HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.'
New Orleans, La.—
Cincinnati, Ohio—
Newark, N. J .
Kansas City, Mo.—
S e a t t l e , Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.Rochester, N. Y . ~
$237,061
127,570
73,21?
41,324
89,413
96,533
65,158
63,050
23,116
36,371
21,294
21,319
49,274
49,689
28,829
$70,320
26,339
61,767
26,618
1,308
4,963
$45,??2
29^403
27,813
13,410
1,517
11,574
10,069
9,900
$1,014
32,191
8,534
2,595
8,926
3,412
8,235
$11,505
125,661
$10,763
92,961
45,974
112,019
48,250
17,565
40,244
42,506
$6,548
2,'413
7,669
7,864
Jersey City, N. J .
Houston, Tex.—.
Louisville, K y . —
Portland, Oreg.
5,498
60,455
57,481
71,147
37,285
30,343
38,750
639
11,665
7,872
28,453
3,723
3,202
16,956
99
2,300
3,728
1,136
3,204
1,312
10,528
10,706
56,491
13,118
11,858
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, Ohio--'
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, C a l i f . Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
S t . Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.-
$22,158
59,194
120,756
61,182
93,786
119,130
$8,056
22,205
24,911
45,182
34,700
32,534
128,746
70,502
26,614
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
15,146
84,639
39,906
45,429
22,889
29,926
64,206
17,363
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.Fort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.
35,456
4,994
39,414
74,256
48,986
47,724
32,892
49,883
San Diego, Calif.Long Beach, Calif.
Nashville, Tenn.—
Springfield, Mass.
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.Des Moines, I o w a —
Scranton, Pa.
79,449
96,179
28,074
48,904
19,680
42,171
35,820
5,880
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
Peterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.
65,379
2,786
1,496
31,897
21,958
17,814
851
32,104
Albany. N*Y.
Norfolk** Va.
Trenton, N. J .
Chattanooga, Tenn.
12,132
20,078
21,705
22,792
12,184
4,136
41,730
6,729
28,217
17,297
15,617
29,294
22,542
26,656
31,640
48,908
12,297
38,786
3,193
22,688
13,730
14,669
13,56C
13,222
$15,540
37,987
12,795
658
375
102,964
29,091
23 5 6 8
3 008
8 511
22 156
21,077
4,239
53,859
8,357
11,028
$310
1,538
1,408
2,954
5,857
4,464
900
3,434
4,192
236
1,365
3,638
24,882
335
1,323
17,942
0,660
14,324
1,230
1,736
17,921
12,388
1,691
5,608
900
5,180
816
1,500
1,356
3,560
17,443
5,663
125
148
398'
3,199
1,415
402
968
7,535
353
1,266
149
$13,725
19,911
52,258
15
51,206
78,119
115
8,963
2,951
12,354
18,430
142
15,323
$67
1,222
172
453
3,404
14,466
3,793
2,210
60
2,867
6,634
30,068
1,474
1,341
675
2,171
246
3,275
16,874
12,226
4,449
11,449
8,065
22,090
2,259
2,834
541
7,055
494
3,899
30,939
2,786
1,271
10,805
3,055
937
8 533
25 130
4 934
4 784
12,000
225
2,524
8,378
851
171
$43,109
43,398
$42,167
15,865
30,418
5,757
152
20,673
1,975
7,053
8,377
40,006
54,525
4,433
34,084
39,278
$26,078
1,718
152
16,830
23,849
17,320
6,465
2,521
26,497
57,770
40,703
195
271
193
86
95,164
12,437
8,702
4,088
4,039
3,642
1,975
5,241
41,232
4,433
33,722
38,922
12,711
7,053
3,136
1,084
582
362
39,278
5,127
58,151
93,114
11,566
95,274
16,004
23,320
7,812
$942
1,455
5,127
16,229
58,151
44,606
36,363
54,888
11,679
7,132
11,641
680
21,143
17,320
20,116
55,701
10,600
8,702
32,279
11,566
4,023
16,004
14,174
519
2,656
2,187
293
6,465
2,228
26,497
1,065
36,589
38,313
195
271
193
86
1,150
1,837
TABLE 1 3 . — R E V E N U E S FROM CHARGES FOR CURRENT S E R V I C E S ,
(See t e x t d i s c u s s i o n ,
BY P R I N C I P A L S E R V I C E S :
1937—Continued
p . 83)
R3CREATI0N
MISCELLANEOUS
City numbe
u
CITY
Total
Golf
fees
Auditorium
and
stadium
fees
Other a d m i s s i o n and
use fees
Concessions
Refectories
(net)
All
other
Total
Market s
Cemeteries
and
crematories
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 — C o n t i n u e d
$12,449
Kansas C i t y , Kans.
F o r t Wayne, I n d . —
Camden, N. J .
Erie, Pa.
E l i z a b e t h , N. J . —
Wichita, Kans.
S p o k a n e , Wash.
$16,507
11,947
10,629
3,615
5,068
76,442
22,283
Fall River, Mass.Cambridge, Mass.—
New B e d f o r d , M a s s .
Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, Tenn.—
Peoria, 111.
South Bend, I n d . —
8,737
2,300
1,736
11,627
33,406
22,413
Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.Tampa, Fla.
Somerville, Mass.'
32,908
36,441
20,796
6,508
10,172
7,754
448
El Paso, Tex.
Eransville, Ind.'
Lynn, Mass.
Utica. N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury. Conn.'
Lowell, Mass.
18,049
10,231
18,650
3,145
55,493
34,752
12,566
9,132
7,144
18,380
3,090
Honolulu, Hawaii 1/—
11,558
4,157
1 / Not i n c l u d e d i n g r o u p o r g r a n d t o t a l s .
$9,251
9,823
2,657
7,744
21,626
33,049
148
$4,043
2,135
306
5,068
25,574
$15
337
6,857
271
$224
500
$390
1,102
15,384
3,218
238
11,181
9,835
3,836
6
396
1,800
10,744
19,140
14,071
21,174
7,940
9^102
833
884
8,894
5,659
4,005
11,481
5,453
10,620
7,723
1,957
619
26,283
6,148
4,176
2,503
9,240
3,558
448
264
225
i,616
8,752
1,250
165
1,837
10.152
l',785
5,799
5,906
19,846
41,082
35,826
115
16,342
2,222
4,262
$390
$1,000
1,785
11,237
11,181
9,835
19,621
41,082
35,826
12,696
2,017
3,726
1,580
932
3,074
270
55
789
852
1,304
12,528
1,356
11,209
6,754
1,210
500
46,004
49,116
3,471
31
9,957
20,888
7,735
654
10,142
4,642
405
7,607
3,267
38,391
48,716
All
other
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—COST PAIMENTS
SECTION B.
101
COST PAYMENTS (Tattles 14 to 21, Inclusive)
For the 94 cities cost payments for general government1 In 1937 were approximately $87,700,000 less than the total revenues reported in the preceding
section. These cost payments were, however, $238,000,000 higher than similar
expenditures in 1936.
Cost payments comprise expenditures for services employed, properties constructed, purchased, or rented, public Improvements constructed or otherwise
acquired, materials utilized, and Interest on borrowed money, which are incurred
in performing those services and activities for which these local governments
have authority. Like the revenue classification, the cost payment classification has been revised for purposes of compiling and presenting the financial
data for 1937. In order to facilitate the use of this volume, figure 2 Is presented on the following pages to show the changes that have been made in the
1937 cost payment classification as compared with that for 1936.
DEFINITIONS.—At the close of this volume (see pages 323-327) may be found
definitions of the terms used in the report.
Cost payments are separable into three principal classes—operation and
maintenance of general government, interest charges on account of general municipal debt obligations, and outlays for permanent acquisitions or improvements
of general government.2 During 1937, expenditures of $2,025,052,436 were made
for operation and maintenance, $222,582,157 for Interest, and $372,922,543 for
capital outlays. The total cost payments were $2,620,557,136.
TABLE 14
The cost of general government in the 94 cities during 1937 is summarized
in table 14 by the three major classifications. Expenditures for operation and
maintenance accounted for 77.3 percent of the total; outlays for 14.2 percent;
and Interest, 8.5 percent.
1926
$1,389,000,000
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—The cost of operat1928
1,575,000,000
ing and maintaining general government in the 94
1930
1,737,000,000
1932
1,806,000,000
cities during 1937 was the highest on record, as
1
9
3
4
1,745,000,000
may be seen from the statement on the right.
1936
1,848,000,000
The most conspicuous factor in this increase
1937
2,025,000,000
has been the growth of expenditures for charities
and associated welfare and relief activities, which rose in 1937 to a level
higher than the combined cost of general government for administrative, legislative, and judicial purposes and for highway construction purposes. The tremendous increase since the pre-depression period in the expenditures of these
cities for charities and relief Is indicated by the accompanying statement.
From the foregoing it may be seen that 92 per$43 507 000
1926
cent of the $288,000,000 increase in all operation
55 788 000
1928
and maintenance costs of general government In the
67 524 000
1930
94 cities during 1937 as compared with 1930 is ac176 693 000
1932
287 972 000
1934
counted for by an increase of $265,000,000 in ex281 242 000
1936
penditures for charities and associated welfare and
332 083 000
1937
relief activities.
INTEREST.—Interest payments of the 94 cities in 1937 totaled $222,582,157,
all—except Washington, D. C , which lacks statutory authority to Incur indebtedness—reporting expenditures under this classification. Owing to the fact
that prior to 1936 Interest payments on bonded indebtedness were not reported
separately for general government purposes and public-service enterprises, It
is not possible to present a trend comparison. Interest payments for general
governmental purposes in 1937 were approximately $12,000,000 less than the
amount reported for 1936, but it is difficult to determine what proportion of
this reduction reflects a decrease in outstanding Indebtedness of certain
reporting cities or how much could be attributed to the fact that some of the
cities were successful In refunding high interest-bearing indebtedness during
a period of comparatively low Interest rates.
1/ For public-service enterprises see part III.
2/ Payments of the principal of debt are ordinarily considered by a city as an expenditure. Outlay
payments, made from the funds received when the debt was incurred, are also considered by the city as an
expenditure. Only one of these payments, however, is a cost. The Bureau includes as such the payment
for the outlay at the time it is made rather than the payment to retire the principal of the debt.
102
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
FIGURE 2 . — C H A R T COMPARING COST PAYMENT CLASSIFICATIONS FOR 1937 AND FOR 1936
NOTE: Numbers following names of functions and activities show corresponding classification in the other year.
Cost Payments 1957
1 General administrative, legislative, and
judicial 1,24, 264, 72,82, 92,94, 95
11 Control 11, 121, 1241, 13
111 Legislative 11
1111 Municipal council or
commission 11
1112 Legislative committees
and special bodies
11
1113 Clerk of council 11
1114 Ordinances and proceedings 11
112 Executive 121, 1241
1121 Mayor 1211
1122 Manager 1241
1123 Boards and commissions
1212
113 Judicial 13
1131 Criminal courts 13
11311 Felonies 132
11312 Misdemeanors
131
113121 Traffic 131
113122 All
other 131
1132 Civil courts 131, 132
11321 Chancery 132
11322 Probate 132
11323 Law 131, 132
113231 Major
claims 132
113232 Small
claims 131,
132
1133 Domestic relations
courts 132
11331 Juvenile 132
11332 All other 132
1134 Medical and social
service 132
1135 Undistributed and all
other 132
12 Staff agencies 122, 123, 1242-1246,
13, 14, 15, 24, 264, 72, 82,
92, 94, 95
121 Elections 14
1211 Supervision 14
1212 Registration 14
1213 Primary elections 14
1214 General elections 14
1215 Special elections 14
122 Finance 122, 92
1221 Supervision6
1222 Accounting and internal auditing 1221
1223 Independent accounting
and auditing 1222
1224 Budgeting 1226
1225 Assessment and levy of
taxes 1224
1226 Collection, custody,
and disbursement of
funds 1223
1227 Licensing 1223, 1224
1228 Purchasing and custody
of supplies 1225
Governmental-Cost Payments 1956
1 General government 11, 121, 122, 1231,
1232, 1234, 1241, 1243, 1244, 125,
126, 1271, 128, 129, 129B
11 Legislative 111
12 Executive 112, 122, 1231, 1241,
1243, 1244, 125, 126, 1271,
128, 129B
121 Chief executive i:.21, 1123
1211 Mayor 1121
1212 Executive boards and
commissions 1123
122 Finance 122, 1282
1221 Auditor or comptroller
1222
1222 Special accounting and
auditing 1223
1223 Treasurer and collector of revenue
1226, 1227, 1229
1224 Assessment and levy of
revenue 1225, 1227
1225 Purchasing officer
1228
1226 All other 1224, 1229,
1282
123 Law 1231
124 General executive 1122, 1241,
1243, 1244, 125, 126,
1271, 128, 129B
1241 City manager 1122
1242 City clerk 1241, 1243,
1244
1243 City engineer and public works and service 1251
1244 Civil service 1271
1245 City planning 126
1246 All other 1252, 129B,
128
13 Judicial 113, 1232, 1234
131 General municipal courts
11312, 113232, 1232, 1234
132 All other 11311, 1132-1155,
246, 1232, 1234
14 Elections 121
15 General government buildings 129
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—COST PAYMENTS
103
FIGURE 2.—CHART COMPARING COST PAYMENT CLASSIFICATIONS FOR 1937 AND
FOR 1936—Continued
(See note at head of figure)
1 General a d m i n i s t r a t i v e , l e g i s l a t i v e , and
j u d i c i a l 1, 24, 264, 72, 82, 92, 94,
95—Continued
12 Staff agencies 122, 123, 1242-1246,
13, 14, 15, 24, 264, 72, 82, 92,
94, 95—Continued.
122 Finance 122, 92—Continued
1229 Debt administration
1223, 1226
1229A Administration of
special funds and
investments 92
123 Law 123, 13
1231 Counsel and l e g a l
advice 123
1232 Criminal prosecution
13
1233 Special civil counselb
1234 Special criminal
prosecution 13
124 Recording and reporting 1242,
24, 95
1241 Municipal clerk 1242
1242 Recording deeds and
mortgages 24
1243 General public reports
1242, 95b
1244 All other 1242, 95
125 Administrative offices and
boards 1243, 1246
1251 City engineer and public works 1243
1252 All other 1246
126 Planning and zoning 1245
1261 Planning 1245
1262 Zoning 1245
127 Personnel administration
1244, 92
1271 Personnel selection
and administration
1244
1272 Pension administration
92
128 Research and investigation
1226, 1246, 264, 72, 94
1281 Research bureaus 1246,
72
1282 Special research
projects 1226, 1246,
264, 94 b
1283 Public officers' associations 1246b
129 General administrative buildings 15
1291 Supervision 15
1292 Office buildings 15
1293 All other 15
129A Community promotion 82, 94
129A1 Advertising 94
129A2 Expositions 82, 94
129A3 All other 94
129B All other 1246
2 Public safety 132, 21-23, 25, 26, 312°
21 Police department 21, 253, 264, 312
211 Supervision 21
212 Police training 21
213 General and criminal records
21
214 Identification records 21
215 Communication system 21
216 Detention and custody of
prisoners 21
2 Protection to person and property 1242,
1282, 21, 22, 23, 241, 242, 244,245,
247, 248, 7323
21 Police department 211-216, 218-219A6
22 Fire department 22
221 General expenditures 221-224,
226-228
222 Water service 225
23 Militia and armories 241
24 Register of deeds and mortgages 1242
104
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
FIGURE 2.—CHART COMPARING COST PAYMENT CLASSIFICATIONS FOR 1937 AND
FOR 1936—Continued
(See note at head of figure)
2 Public safety 132, 21-23, 25, 26,
312 c —Continued
21 Police department 21, 253, 264,
312—Continued
217 Motor vehicle inspection 253
218 Criminal investigation 21
219 Uniformed patrol 21
219A1 Vice and moral
control 21, 264
219A2 Crime prevention,
juvenile 21
219A3 Traffic control 21,
312
219A4 Special detail services 21
219A5 All other 21
219A6 Undistributed 21
22 Fire department 22, 253, 264
221 Supervision 221
222 Training schools 221
223 Communication system 221
224 Fire prevention 221, 253, 264
225 Hydrant and water service 222
226 Fire-fighting force 221
2261 Engine service 221
2262 Truck service 221
2263 Fireboat service 221
2264 Salvage service 221
2265 Volunteer service 221
2266 Rescue squads 221
227 All other 221
228 Undistributed 221
23 Protective inspection 25
231 Supervision6
232 Building inspection 251
233 Plumbing inspection 251
234 Electrical inspection 251
235 Gas inspection 253
236 Boiler inspection 253
237 Elevator inspection 253
238 Weights and measures 252
239 All other 253
24 Other protection 132, 23, 26 c
241 Militia and armories 23
242 Examination of engineers and
plumbers 262
243 Scales*
244 Protection to animals 261, 263
245 Morgue 264
246 Investigation of causes of
death 132
247 Flood control 264
248 All other 264
3 Highways 3 C
31 Supervisiona
32 Roadways 31, 32
321 Paved streets 311
322 Unpaved streets 311
323 Alleys 311
324 Sidewalks and crosswalks 311
325 Culverts 311
326 Snow and ice removal 32
327 Undistributed 31
33 Street lighting 33
34 Bridges and viaducts, and grade
separations 31le
35 Tunnels 311e
36 Waterways 34
37 All other 312
2 Protection to person and property 1242,
1282, 21, 22, 23, 241, 242, 244,245,
247, 248, 7323—Continued
25 Inspection service 217, 224, 23
251 Building, plumbing, wiring,
and boiler 232-234, 236
252 Weights and measures 238
253 All other 235, 237, 239, 224,
217
26 Other protection to person and
property 1282, 224, 7323, 242,
244, 245, 247, 248
261 Pounds 244
262 Examining engineers, and
plumbers 242
263 Humane societies 244
264 All other 245, 247, £48,1282,
224, 7323
3 Highways 3, 219A3
31 Roadways 321-325, 327, 34, 35, 37,
219A3
311 Streets 321-325, 37, 34, 35,
327
312 All other 327, 37, 219A3
32 Snow and ice removal 326
33 Street lighting 33
34 Waterways 36
PART I I : GENERAL GOVERNMENT—COST PAYMENTS
105
FIGURE 2.—CHART COMPARING COST PAYMENT CLASSIFICATIONS FOR 1937 AND
FOR 1936—Continued
(See note at head of figure)
4 Sanitation and waste removal 4 C
41 Supervision*
42 Sewers and sewage disposal 41e
421 Sewer system 41 e
422 Sewage treatment and disposal 41 e
43 Street sanitation 42, 45
431 Street cleaning 42
432 All other 45
44 Waste collection 43
441 Garbage 43
442 Ashes 43
443 Other waste 43
45 Waste disposal 43
451 Garbage 43
452 Ashes 43
453 Other waste 43
46 Comfort stations 44
47 Smoke regulation 45
48 All other 45
5 Conservation of health 51, 52, 5312,
5322, 54, 55, 56, 62212
51 Supervision 51
52 Vital statistics 52
53 Regulation and inspection 55, 56
531 Milk and dairy products 55
532 Other food and drugs 55
533 Sanitary inspection 45, 56
534 All other 56
54 Control of communicable diseases
5312, 5322
541 Tuberculosis 5312
542 Venereal diseases 5322
543 All other 5322
55 Child-health services 54
551 Pre-school and prenatal 542
552 School 541
553 All other 542
56 Adult-health services 56, 62212
57 Laboratory 51
58 Health centers and general clinics
5322
59 All other 51, 56, 62212
6 Hospitals 5311, 5321, 61, 63
61 Supervision 61
62 General municipal hospitals 6311
63 Special municipal hospitals 5311,
5321, 632
631 Communicable diseases 5311,
5321
6311 Tuberculosis 5311
6312 Veneral diseases 5321
6313 All other 5322
632 Mental diseases 632
633 All other 632
64 Patients in other hospitals 5311,
5321, 632
641 Communicable diseases 5311,
5321
6411 Tuberculosis 5311
6412 Venereal diseases 5321
6413 All other 5321
642 Mental 632
643 All other 6312, 632
65 All other 6312, 632
7 Charities 264, 61, 62, 94
71 Supervision 61
72 Municipal institutional care 6222,
6242, 6243, 623
721 Adult dependents 6222, 6242,
6243
4 Sanitation, or promotion of cleanliness 4
41 Sewers and sewage disposal 42
42 Street cleaning 431
43 Other refuse collection and disposal 44, 45
44 Public convenience stations 46
45 Other sanitation 432, 47, 48, 533
5 Conservation of health 5, 631, 641
51 Supervision 51, 57, 59
52 Vital statistics 52
53 Prevention and treatment of communicable diseases 541, 58, 6311,6411
531 Tuberculosis 541
5311 Hospitals 6311, 6411
5312 All other 541
532 Other than tuberculosis 542,
543,6312, 6313,6412, 6413
5321 Hospitals 6312, 6313,
6412, 6413
5322 All other 542, 543, 58
54 Conservation of child life 55
541 Medical work for school
children 552
542 All other 551, 553
55 Food regulation and inspection 531,
532
56 Other conservation of health 533,
534, 56, 59
6 Charities, hospitals, and corrections 56,
59, 61, 62, 632, 633, 642, 643, 71,
721, 722, 731, 7321,, 7322, 7324, 74
61 Supervision 61, 71,' 81
62 Charities 56, 59, 721, 722, 731,
7321, 7322, 7324, 74
622 Care of poor 56, 59, 721,
7311-7313, 7317, 7324
6221 Outdoor 56, 59, 73117313, 7317, 7324
62211 Old-age assistance 7313
62212 All other 7312,
7324, 7317,
56, 59
6222 In institutions 721
623 Care of children 722, 7321
624 Other charities 721, 73147317, 7322, 7324, 74
6241 Mothers' aid 7314
6242 Veterans' relief 721,
7316
6243 All other 721, 7315,
7317, 7322, 7324, 74
63 Hospitals 62, 632, 633, 642, 643
631 General 62
6311 City 62
6312 All other 643
106
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
FIGURE 2.—CHART COMPARING COST PAYMENT CLASSIFICATIONS FOR 1937 ANID
FOR 1936—Continued
(See note at head of figure)
7 Charities 264, 61, 62, 94—Continued
72 Municipal institutional care 6222,
6242, 6243, 623—Continued
722 Dependent and neglected
children 623
73 Other institutional and noninstitutional care 264, 6221, 623,
624, 94
731 Public assistance 6221, 623,
624, 94
7311 Administration 6221
7312 General r e l i e f 62212
7313 Old-age a s s i s t a n c e
6 Charities, hospitals, and corrections
56, 59, 61, 62, 632, 633, 642, 643,
71, 721, 722, 731, 7321, 7322,7324,
74—Continued
63 Hospitals 62, 632, 633, 642., 6 4 3 —
Continued
632 Special 632, 633, 642,, 643
64 Corrections 82-85
641 Adults 821, 83, 841
642 For minors 822, 842
643 Probation boards and
officers 85
62211
7314 Aid to dependent
children 6241, 623
7315 Aid to blind 6243
7316 Veterans' aid 6242
7317 All other 62212,
6243, 94
732 Welfare service 264, 62212,
623, 6243
7321 Regulation of foster
or boarding homes
623
7322 Legal aid 6243
7323 Employment agencies
264
7324 All other 62212, 6243
74 All other 6243, 94
8 Correction 61, 64
81 Supervision 61 f
82 Municipal correction institutions
64
821 Adults 641
8211 Men 641
8212 Women 641
822 Minors 642
83 Institutional industry activities
(net) 641
84 Delinquents in other i n s t i t u t i o n s
64
841 Adults 641
8411 Men 641
8412 Women 641
842 Minors 642
85 Probation and parole 643
9 Schools 71
10 Libraries 72
101 Supervision 72
102 Accessions 72
103 Library services 72
10A Recreation 712, 8, 94 c
10A1 Supervision 81, 82, 83
10A2 Cultural-scientific recreation 81, 82
10A21 Art galleries 81
10A22 Museums 81
10A23 Zoos, aquariums, and
botanical gardens 81
10A24 Community music, drama,
and celebrations 82
10A25 All other 81, 82
10A3 Organized recreation 712, 82
10A31 Administration 82
10A32 Outdoor play areas and
activities 712, 82
10A321 Playgrounds
712, 82
10A322 Golf 82
10A323 All other 82
7 Education 9, 10, 10A321, 10A33, 1281
71 Schools 9
711 Instruction 9
712 All other 9, 10A321, 10A33
72 Libraries 10, 1281
8 Recreation 10A1-10A4,10A54, 10A55, 129A2
81 Educational 10A1, 10A21-10A23,10A25
82 General 10A1, 10A24, 10A25, 10A3,
10A54, 10A55, 129A2
83 Parks and trees 10A4, 10A54, 10A55
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—COST PAIMENTS
107
FIGURE 2.—CHART COMPARING COST PAYMENT CLASSIFICATIONS FOR 1937 AND
FOR 1936—Continued
(See note at head of figure)
10A Recreation 712, 8, 94 c —Continued
10A3 Organized recreation 712, 82—Con.
10A33 Recreation buildings and
indoor activities 712,
82
10A34 All other 82
10A4 Municipal parks 83
10A41 Administration 83
10A42 Park areas 83
10A43 Parkways and boulevards
83
10A44 Nurseries and forestry
83
10A45 Street trees and other
plantings 83
10A46 Park policing 83
10A47 Park lighting 83
10A48 All other 83
10A5 Special recreation facilities
82, 83, 9 4 c
10A51 Auditoriums and
stadiums4
10A52 Auto and trailer camps
94
10A53 Recreation piers and
yacht harbors 82
10A54 Refectories (net) 82, 83
10A55 All other 82, 83
10B Miscellaneous 91, 93, 94, 95 c
10B1 Judgments and losses—not
allocated 93
10B2 Pensions and gratuities on
account of service 91
10B21 Policemen 911
10B22 Firemen 912
10B23 School teachers 913
10B24 All other 914
10B3 Compensation for employee injury
95
10B31 Noninsurance compensation—not allocated 95
10B32 Compensation insurance
premiums—not allocated 95
10B4 Municipal service enterprises—
not allocated 95
10B5 Markets and warehouses4
10B6 Cemeteries and crematories4
10B7 Contributions to public-service
enterprises8
10B8 All other 94, 95
9 Miscellaneous 10B1-10B4, 10B8, 1243,
1244, 1272, 1282, 129A, 7317, 74
91 Pensions and gratuities to former
employees 10B2
911 Policemen 10B21
912 Firemen 10B22
913 School teachers 10B23
914 All other 10B24
92 Administration of public trust
funds and investments 1229A.1272
93 Judgments and losses 10B1
94 Unclassified 10B8, 1382, 129A,
7317, 74
95 Undistributed 10B3, 10B4, 10B8
1243, 1244
10 Cost payments of p u b l i c - s e r v i c e
prises8
enter-
a/ Distributed throughout the items of the corresponding group in 1936.
b/ Distributed to participating departments in 1936.
c/ Includes items classified in 1936 as public-service enterprises. These items are indicated by a
footnote.
d/ Classified as a public-service enterprise in 1936.
e/ Part of this item was included under public-service enterprises in 1936.
f/ Also distributed among items 641 and 643 in 1936.
g/ In 1937 the transactions of public-service enterprises are reported separately from general government transactions. Item 10B8 consists of cash contributions by the c i t y , plus certain balancing items.
In 1936, item 10 included a l l cost payments of public-service enterprises.
108
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
OUTLAYS.—Expenditures of the 94 cities for capital Improvements In 1937 totaled $372,922,543, m 0 re
1926
$666 000 000
1928
754 000 000
than half of which was for highways and schools.
1930
748 000 000
The accompanying comparisons are presented to show
1932
557 000 000
the sharp fluctuations in capital outlays for gen1934
250 000 000
eral government in recent years.
The figures are
1936
300 000 000
1937
373 000 000
not strictly comparable because of obstacles encountered in eliminating all outlays for public-service
enterprises from the totals.
Although the volume of capital outlays for general governmental purposes
shows an increasing trend, it has not, despite the stimulation afforded by Federal loans and grants for public works and Improvements, approached its predepression level.
An important part of the Federal public works program has
embraced public-service enterprises, and the costs of these enterprises are
eliminated from the foregoing figures so far as possible.
The figures include for each independent, overlapping governmental unit a
percent of its transactions. The reason for this inclusion has been given In
part I above.
For the percent used In each case, see the second column of
table 3.
TABLE 15
Per capita cost payments of the 94 cities in 1937 for operation and maintenance and for interest are shown in table 15. The percent distribution of
expenditures under the three major classifications of operation and maintenance,
interest, and outlays is also shown. Per capita figures for outlays are omitted as affording no useful comparisons, since they are a nonrecurring cost.
PER CAPITA COST PAYMENTS.—Per capita cost payments for operation and maintenance and for interest averaged $59.66 for the 94 cities included In this study,
the highest average being reported for the cities in group I. Individual averages ranged from $91.37 for New York to $21.83 for El Paso. Generally speaking,
cities of larger population show comparatively higher per capita cost payments,
although striking variations may be introduced because of special factors other
than population influencing the level of local expenditures.
Per capita costs for interest appear to have no close relation to the population factor, as they do in the case of the cost for operation and maintenance.
The cities in group II had an average Interest cost higher than those In group
I. The highest per capita cost for interest was that of $15.03 reported for
Miami, while the lowest was $1.13 reported for Fort Wayne.
PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF COST PAYMENTS.—As previously Indicated, expenditures
for operation and maintenance accounted for 77.3 percent of cost payments for
general government in 1937, followed by 14.2 percent for capital improvements
and 8.5 percent for Interest. Operation and maintenance constituted 93.5 percent of total general governmental expenditures for Lowell, Mass., as compared
with the lowest of 54.9 percent reported by Fort Worth.
The expenditures for capital improvements also present striking variations
from the over-all average reported for the 94 cities. For example, Fort Worth
reported capital outlays amounting to 32.8 percent of the total cost of general
government, the larger part of which was for an extensive school building program. In contrast, the city of Flint reported only 0.6 of 1 percent of total
general governmental costs as capital outlays.
Interest payments accounted for more than one-fifth of total general governmental costs in the following cities: Knoxville,22 percent; Miami, 21.9 percent; and Norfolk, 21.5 percent.
Cities reporting a considerably lower than
average ratio of interest payments to total general costs were, In percentages,
Worcester, 2.1 percent; Somerville, 2.9 percent; and Lowell, 3.3 percent.
109
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—COST PAYMENTS
TABLE 14.—SUMMARY OF COST PAYMENTS, BY CHARACTER AND BY DIVISIONS OF
MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT: 1937
(For number of funds reported and for percent of independent divisions included, see f i r s t two columns of
table 3)
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AND INTEREST
Total cost
payments
Grand total-
Group I
Group I I —
Group III—
Operation and
maintenance
Interest
(Table 16)
(Table 19)
$2,620,557,136
$2,247,634,593
$2,025,052,436
$222,582,157
1,824,329,236
302,135,300
494,092,600
1,546,174,367
264,449,949
437,010,277
1,402,929,107
232,169,946
389,953,383
143,245,260
32,280,003
47,056,894
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
City corporation
Bridge, parking and
tunnel districts-
$781,323,581
760,444,845
$653,674,727
650,743,531
$610,260,559
608,978,724
$43,414,168
41,764,807
20,878,736
2,931,196
1,281,835
1,649,361
Chicago, 111.
City corporation—
County
School district
Park district
Sanitary districtForest preserve
district
238,618,002
116,481,256
22,524,470
55,854,350
21,768,980
20,423,456
200,596,317
108,382,201
17,190,459
52,070,743
14,244,937
7,485,731
172,960,618
99,270,636
15,096,015
45,731,760
9,407,881
2,658,496
27,635,699
9,111,565
2,094,444
6,338,983
4,837,056
4,827,235
1,565,490
1,222,246
795,830
426,416
Philadelphia, Pa.
City corporationSchool district—
Poor district
113,952,968
70,014,036
43,647,797
291,135
99,435,671
67,223,666
31,920,870
291,135
82,190,756
52,490,526
29,410,439
289,791
17,244,915
14,733,140
2,510,431
1,344
Detroit, Mich.
City corporationCounty
109,938,936
92,803,455
17,135,481
98,284,871
83,141,526
15,143,345
84,127,761
69,329,215
14,798,546
14,157,110
13,812,311
344,799
Los Angeles, Calif.—
City corporationCounty
School d i s t r i c t —
112,850,030
34,690,409
32,979,518
45,180,103
87,333,266
30,213,971
27,160,308 I
29,958,987
81,329,374
28,387,675
25,979,586
26,962,113
6,003,892
1,826,296
1,180,722
2,996,874
Cleveland, Ohio
City corporationCounty
School d i s t r i c t Park district
60,290,323
29,747,439
12,036,953
18,244,806
261,125
53,990,696
24,310,881
11,697,439
17,779,793
202,583
48,267,544
20,692,340
10,332,144
17,040,477
202,583
5,723,152
3,618,541
1,365,295
739,316
St. Louis, Mo.
City corporationSchool district--
46,819,311
35,032,216
11,787,095
37,830,241
26,888,421
10,941,820
34,619,539
23,808,129
10,811,410
3,210,702
3,080,292
130,410
43,708,876
Baltimore, Md.
5,412,347
Boston, Mass.
73,869,173
68,384,828
63,972,224
4,412,604
Pittsburgh, Pa.
City corporationCounty
School district —
54,498,829
21,397,872
16,348,045
16,752,912
44,489,718
17,538,140
12,879,483
14,072,095
38,623,016
15,413,473
10,009,202
13,200,341
5,866,702
2,124,667
2,870,281
871,754
2,491,794
San Francisco, Calif.
43,977,234
38,691,981
36,200,187
Washington, D. C.
43,567,773
36,642,265
36,642,265
Milwaukee, Wis.
City corporation—
County
Sewerage district-
41,229,439
27,254,212
11,862,236
2,112,991
38,017,229
24,607,334
11,641,692
1,768,203
35,553,829
23,290,568
11,288,095
975,166
2,463,400
1,316,766
353,597
793,037
Buffalo, N. Y.
City corporationCounty
Sewer district
54,572,974
39,912,967
8,594,111
6,065,896
45,093,681
37,253,672
7,582,223
257,786 J
39,884,906
33,249,090
6,635,816
5,208,775
4,004,582
946,407
257,786
111
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—COST PAYMENTS
TABLE 1 4 . — S U M M A R Y OF COST PAYMENTS, BY CHARACTER AND BY D I V I S I O N S OF
MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
(See n o t e a t head o f t a b l e )
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AND INTEREST
Total cost
payments
O p e r a t i o n and
maintenance
(Table 16)
( T a b l e 19)
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
Oakland, Calif.
City corporationSchool districtUtility district-
$13,994,973
6,549,598
6,796,812
648,563
$12,946,356
5,991,989
6,305,804
648,563
$12,314,947
5,861,391
5,804,993
648,563
$631,409
130,598
500,811
Denver, Colo.
City corporationSchool district—
19,498,849
14,228,381
5,270,468
17,181,154
11,942,462
5,238,692
16,322,545
11,443,799
4,878,746
858,609
498,663
359,946
Atlanta, Ga.
10,476,648
8,753,518
8,194,668
558,850
Dallas, Tex.
9,535,382
7,844,507
6,589,735
1,254,772
12,838,741
10,306,640
8,611,224
1,695,416
6,590,708
6,379,884
5,286,402
1,093,482
11,564,313
6,816,913
4,747,400
9,677,804
5,088,179
4,589,625
7,966,573
3,718,843
4,247,730
1,711,231
1,369,336
341,895
St. Paul, Minn.
Birmingham, Ala.
Akron, Ohio
City corporationSchool d i s t r i c t Memphis, Tenn.
Providence, R. I.
7,406,793
6,367,737
5,400,904
966,833
17,993,555
14,677,924
13,031,341
1,646,583
San Antonio, Tex.
City corporationSchool district-
7,458,528
3,592,506
3,866,022
6,464,920
3,246,702
3,218,218
5,348,156
2,485,532
2,862,624
1,116,764
761,170
355,594
Omaha, Nebr.
City corporationSchool district-
7,481,514
4,236,192
3,245,322
6,885,785
3,776,316
3,109,469
5,786,067
3,080,394
2,705,673
1,099,718
695,922
403,796
14,812,092
14,565,361
14,191,456
13,944,725
12,964,709
12,717,978
1,226,747
1,226,747
Syracuse, N. Y.
City corporation
County supervisors'
fund
246,731
246,7*31
Dayton, Ohio
City corporationSchool district-
8,499,475
4,951,811
3,547,664
7,305,833
3,857,014
3,448,819
6,554,668
3,431,301
3,123,367
751,165
425,713
325,452
Oklahoma City, Qkla..
City corporationSchool district-
7,767,794
4,618,758
3,149,036
5,568,480
2,783,931
2,784,549
4,911,943
2,36.7,163
2,544,780
656,537
416,768
239,769
277,382
12,636,986
12,359,604
Richmond, Va.
9,319,059
8,243,100
6,826,164
Youngstown, Ohio
City corporationSchool district—
Park district
6,290,414
2,929,480
3,211,360
149,574
6,059,085
2,762,616
3,185,601
110,868
5,581,886
2,410,012
3,061,006
110,868
477,199
352,604
124,595
Grand Rapids, Mich.City corporationSchool district—
5,899,585
3,372,963
2,526,622
5,387,869
2,868,236
2,519,633
4,845,276
2,477,164
2,368,112
542,593
391,072
151,521
Fort Worth, Tex.
City corporationSchool district —
8,224,626
4,000,058
4,224,568
5,527,719
3,051,685
2,476,034
4,511,942
2,343,427
2,168,515
1,015,777
708,258
307,51S
11,457,939
10,299,798
1,158,141
10,237,567
10,086,131
151,436
9,447,011
9,347,423
99,588
790,556
738,708
51,848
Flint, Mich.
City corporationSchool district—
6,186,197
3,134,142
3,052,055
6,149,945
3,097,890
3,052,055
5,363,213
2,653,906
2,709,307
786,732
443,984
342,748
New Haven, Conn.
City corporation
Improvement association
8,587,996
8,552,690
8,078,139
8,042,833
7,502,913
7,467,607
575,226
575,226
Worcester, Mass.
Hartford, Conn.
City corporationMetropolitan districts)
110
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
TABLE 1 4 . — S U M M A R Y OF COST PAYMENTS, BY CHARACTER AND BY D I V I S I O N S OF
M U N I C I P A L GOVERNMENT: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
(See n o t e a t head o f t a b l e )
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AND INTEREST
Total cost
payments
O p e r a t i o n and
maintenance
(Table 16)
Interest
(Table 19)
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, M i n n . —
City corporationCounty
$35,997,907
30,369,941
5,627,966
$30,817,552
25,247,222
5,570,330
$28,310,821
22,856,319
5,454,502
$2,506,731
2,390,903
115,828
New Orleans, La.
City corporationSchool d i s t r i c t Levee district
22,509,390
15,074,630
4,248,436
3,186,324
18,801,979
12,589,802
4,200,376
2,011,801
15,128,484
10,236,126
3,884,127
1,008,231
3,673,495
2,353,676
316,249
1,003,570
Cincinnati, Ohio
City corporationCounty
School district —
Park district
31,347,712
17,372,467
7,203,695
6,725,338
46,212
27,332,465
14,217,488
6,505,670
6,582,355
26,952
23,951,966
11,939,764
5,971,718
6,013,532
26,952
3,380,499
2,277,724
533,952
568,823
Newark, N. J .
City c o r p o r a t i o n County
42,664,300
35,877,576
6,786,724
40,703,185
34,968,029
5,735,156
35,161,513
30,420,980
4,740,533
5,541,672
4,547,049
994,623
Kansas City, Mo.
City corporationCounty
School district-
24,116,677
13,167,219
3,735,850
7,213,608
18,416,324
8,196,020
3,648,590
6,571,714
15,634,623
7,200,568
2,775,145
5,658,910
2,781,701
995,452
873,445
912,804
Seattle, Wash.
City corporationCounty
School district —
20,138,602
9,323,351
4,582,249
6,233,002
18,763,962
8,454,546
4,123,970
6,185,446
17,100,749
7,673,198
3,698,676
5,728,875
1,663,213
781,348
425,294
456,571
Indianapolis, I n d . —
City corporationCounty
School d i s t r i c t -
17,112,479
7,380,089
3,474,031
6,258,359
16,049,167
6,842,652
3,446,644
5,759,871
14,723,559
6,200,275
3,205,188
5,318,096
1,325,608
642,377
241,456
441,775
Rochester, N. Y.
City corporationCounty
31,137,162
25,662,491
5,474,671
28,024,644
23,472,868
4,551,776
25,365,216
21,252,356
4,112,860
2,659,428
2,220,512
438,916
Jersey City, N. J . —
City corporationCounty
29,909,729
23,741,022
6,168,707
26,147,940
20,695,881
5,452,059
22,793,859
17,972,122
4,821,737
3,354,081
2,723,759
630,322
Houston, Tex.
City corporation
County
School district
Navigation districtDrainage d i s t r i c t —
17,652,873
8,494,812
2,999,920
5,543,770
599,274
15,097
12,726,033
5,666,532
1,942,090
4,503,040
599,274
15,097
10,651,697
4,487,231
1,573,291
3,989,404
599,274
2,497
2,074,336
1,179,301
368,799
513,636
Louisville, Ky.
City corporationCounty
14,631,743
13,112,565
1,519,178
12,371,827
11,081,353
1,290,474
10,728,020
9,438,340
1,289,680
1,643,807
1,643,013
794
Portland, Oreg.
City corporationCounty
School districtPort district
14,916,726
6,797,450
3,490,533
4,235,649
393,094
14,294,871
6,371,631
3,297,700
4,232,446
393,094
12,619,439
5,581,005
2,735,768
3,909,572
393,094
1,675,432
790,626
561,932
322,874
12,600
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, Ohio
City corporationSchool d i s t r i c t -
$11,417,260
7,288,587
4,128,673
Toledo, Ohio
City corporationSchool district—
12,780,534
6,872,853
5,907,681
$9,428 925
5 311 226
4 117 699
11 234 502
6 216 194
5 0 1 8 308 11
$7,953,936
4,263,063
3,690,873
$1,474,989
1,048,163
426,826
9,539,825
5,130,799
4,409,026
1,694,677
1,085,395
609,282
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
112
TABLE 1 4 . — SUMMARY OF COST PAYMENTS, BY CHARACTER AND BY DIVISIONS OF
MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
(See note at head of table)
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AND INTEREST
Total cost
payments
Operation and
maintenance
Interest
(Table 16)
(Table 19)
GROTJP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
San Diego, Calif.
City corporationSchool district—
$7,035,442
3,688,549
3,346,893
$6,561,719
3,344,667
3,217,052
$6,252,806
3,233,227
3,019,579
$308,913
111,440
197,473
Long Beach, C a l i f . —
City corporationSchool districts-
9,223,943
4,607,677
4,616,266
5,503,953
7,103,870
3,938,031
3,165,839
6,523,438
3,757,201
2,766,237
580,432
180,830
399,602
10,708,055
4,436,355
9,619,662
3,871,211
9,268,627
565,144
Springfield, M a s s . — •
Tulsa, Okla.
City corporation-'
School d i s t r i c t -
4,910,636
2,177,910
2,732,726
4,210,971
2,024,932
2,186,039
3,515,740
1,551,690
1,964,050
695,231
473,242
221,989
Nashville, Tenn.
351,035
Bridgeport, Conn.'
7,527,555
7,309,575
6,652,374
657,201
Des Moines, Iowa
City corporationSchool district—
5,747,228
3,022,230
2,724,998 |
5,054,421
2,376,825
2,677,596
4,498,399
2,135,235
2,363,164
556,022
241,590
314,432
Scranton, Pa.
City corporationSchool district—
3,914,796
2,520,546
3,394,250
4,470,281
2,086,199 i
2,384,082
4,090,968
1,961,499
2,129,469
379,313
124,700
254,613
Salt Lake City, UtahCity corporationSchool district
5,011,645
2,464,568
2,547,077
4,797,153
2,361,120
2,436,033
4,440,773
2,181,510
2,259,263
356,380
179,610
176,770
1
12,793,076
12,192,633
10,794,576
1,398,057
Paterson, N. J.
6,681,699
6,002,453
5,170,691
831,762
Jacksonville, Fla.
City c o r p o r a t i o n School district
5,701,783
3,796,274
1,905,509
5,368,067
3,614,050
1,754,017
4,867,122
3,298,946
1,568,176
500,945
315,104
185,841
Yonkers, N. Y.
Albany, N. Y.
7,893,727
7,312,098
6,601,310
710,788
Norfolk, Va.
5,561,474
5,129,283
3,935,512
1,193,771
Trenton, N. J.
6,098,608
5,865,893
4,993,511
872,382
Chattanooga, Tenn.-
4,330,455
3,576,582
2,840,629
735,953
Kansas City, Kans.
City corporation
School district
Drainage districts-
4,296,880
1,959,205
2,234,170
103,505
3,008,810
1,382,469
1,522,836
103,505
2,675,821
1,205,294
1,433,085
37,442
332,989
177,175
89,751
66,063
Fort Wayne, Ind.
City corporationSchool district—
2,979,362
1,246,452
1,732,910
2,769,086
1,162,886
1,606,200
2,633,650
1,135,270
1,498,380
135,436
27,616
107,820
Camden, N. J.
6,030,329
5,767,986
4,620,338
1,147,648
Erie, Pa.
City corporationSchool district-
4,337,182
1,969,286
2,367,896
4,121,092
1,786,782
2,334,310
3,613,265
1,512,184
2,101,081
507,827
274,598
233,229
Elizabeth, N. J.-
5,646,409
5,009,551
4,444,012
565,539
Wichita, Kans.
City corporation
School district
3,813,994
1,624,631
1,745,608
443,755
3,475,537
1,396,130
1,742,736
336,671
3,132,366
1,177,666
1,638,436
316,264
343,171
218,464
104,300
20,407
Spokane, Wash..
City corporationSchool district-
4,205,530
2,395,075
1,810.455
3,654,841
1,864,491
1,790,350
3,501,240
1,749,118
1,752,122
153,601
115,373
38,228
Fall River, Mass.
4,975,714 1
4,885,569 1
4,609,242
276,327
University
district-
113
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—COST PAYMENTS
TABLE 14.—SUMMARY OF COST PAYMENTS, BY CHARACTER AND BY D I V I S I O N S
MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
(Sea n o t e a t head of
OF
table)
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AND INTEREST
Total c o s t
payments
O p e r a t i o n and
maintenance
(Table 16)
Interest
(Table 19)
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
$402,133
Cambridge, M a s s . —
$7,783,250
$6,892,560
$6,490,427
New Bedford, Mass.
5,543,513
5,336,523
5,057,609
278,914
Reading, Pa.
City corporationSchool district—
4,905,152
1,630,143
3,275,009
3,799,349
1,485,397
2,313,952
3,323,383
1,303,679
2,019,704
475,966
181,718
294,248
Knoxrille, Tenn.
4,410,799
4,036,584
3,064,707
971,877
Peoria, 111.
City corporationSchool d i s t r i c t —
Park district
Sanitary districtTown
4,530,063
1,935,781
1,696,396
239,303
353,923
304,660
3,708,669
1,726,227
1,323,416
182,963
171,403
304,660
3,523,628
1,579,300
1,299,890
182,556
157,222
304,660
185,041
146,927
23,526
407
14,181
South Bend, Ind.
City corporationSchool district—
3,196,928
1,315,832
1,881,096
2,822,813
1,252,806
1,570,007
2,603,965
1,156,648
1,447,317
218,848
96,158
122,690
Tacoma, Wash.
City corporationSchool district—
Park district
3,743,860
1,885,605
1,709,829
148,426
3,493,563
1,699,678
1,680,136
113,749
3,299,948
1,583,982
1,603,742
112,224
193,615
115,696
76,394
1,525
Miami, H a .
City corporationSchool district—
7,440,803
5,659,096
1,781,707
6,575,385
5,029,114
1,546,271
4,949,371
3,712,851
1,236,520
1,626,014
1,316,263
309,751
Gary, Ind.
City corporationSchool district—
3,558,447
1,584,357
1,974,090
3,291,359
1,4°5,074
1,796,285
3,031,640
1,383,719
1,647,921
259,719
111,355
148,364
Canton, Ohio-—
City corporationSchool district—
3,598,896
1,631,600
1,967,296
3,470,729
1,542,920
1,927,809
2,958,970
1,296,108
1,662,862
511,759
246,812
264,947
Wilmington, Del.-
3,746,225
3,529,068
3,240,462
Tampa, Fla.
City corporation—
School district—
4,039,418
2,635,505
1,403,913
3,579,899
2,230,678
1,349,221
2,870,598
1,695,932
1,174,666
709,301
534,746
174,555
Somerrille, Mass.
6,336,476
6,071,368
5,890,061
181,307
El Paso, Tez.
2,657,303
2,309,910
1,981,974
327,936
Eransville, Ind.
City corporationSchool district-
3,541,975
1,906,766
1,635,209
2,901,450
1,525,874
1,375,576
2,707,299
1,423,341
1,283,958
194,151
102,533
Lynn, M a s s . — —
6,308,335
5,552,400
5,291,275
91,618
261,125
Utlca, N. Y.
5,820,438
5,403,249
4,948,722
Duluth, Minn.
City corporationSchool district—
4,394,429
2,389,650
2,004,779
3,925,229
1,940,894
1,984,335
3,567,030
1,733,111
1,833,919
358,199
207,783
150,416
454,527
Waterbury, Conn.<
6,757,568
5,939,978
5,432,083
507,895
Lowell, Mass.
5,300,861
5,130,869
4,956,958
173,911
Honolulu, Hawaii l / ~
6,468,444
4,908,901
4,605,676
303,225
1/ Not included in group or grand t o t a l s .
1,559,543
115
PART I I : GENERAL GOVERNMENT—COST PAYMENTS
TABLE 1 5 . — P E R
CAPITA AND PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF COST PAYMENTS,
BY CHARACTER: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
(See t e x t d i s c u s s i o n , p . 1 0 8 )
PER CAPITA COST PAYMENTS
Operation
and
maintenance,
and i n terest
cm
City
1
Operation
and
maintenance
Interest
PERCENT DISTRIBUTION
OF COST PAYMENTS
Operation
and
maintenance
Interest
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 —Continued
$36.78
4S.65
40.99
45.25
28.40
62.71
$32.08
46.12
39.06
41.55
24.78
60.42
$4.71
3.54
1.93
3.70
3.62
2.29
28.45
49.62
34.79
30.96
33.27
23.75
45.16
30.96
28.33
30.80
4.70
4.46
3.83
2.63
2.47
71.6
88.4
78.3
69.2
14.2
8.7
9.7
6.4
7.1
86.78
43.18
38.65
56.33
39.54
76.83
37.20
35.04
50.86
30.34
9.95
5.98
3.61
5.48
9.20
84.4
77.4
85.4
83.6
70.8
10.9
12.4
8.8
9.0
21.5
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.—
Kansas City, Kans.—
Fort Wayne, Ind.
Camden, N. J.
47.27
28.96
24.38
23.06
48.43
40.24
23.00
21.68
21.93
38.79
7.03
5.96
2.70
1.13
9.64
81.9
65.6
62.3
88.4
76.6
14.3
17.0
7.7
4.5
19.0
Erie, Pa.Elizabeth, N. J.Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.
34.84
42.49
29.55
31.35
42.38
30.54
37.69
26.64
30.03
39.99
4.29
4.80
2.92
1.32
2.40
83.3
78.7
82.1
83.3
92.6
11.7
10.0
9.0
3.7
5.6
Cambridge, M a s s . —
New Bedford, Mass.Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, Tenn.
Peoria, 111.
60.30
47.39
33.98
36.50
33.78
56.78
44.92
29.73
27.71
32.09
3.52
2.48
4.26
8.79
1.69
83.4
91.2
67.8
69.5
77.8
5.2
5.0
9.7
22.0
4.1
South Bend, Ind.Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
25.76
32.29
60.77
30.48
32.29
23.76
30.50
45.74
28.07
27.53
2.00
1.79
15.03
2.40
4.76
81.5
88.1
66.5
85.2
82.2
6.8
5.2
21.9
7.3
14.2
Wilmington, Del.Tampa, Fla.
Somerville, Mass.
El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.-
33.11
33.61
57.39
21.83
27.61
30.40
26.95
55.67
18.73
25.76
2.71
6.66
1.71
3.10
1.85
86.5
71.1
93.0
74.6
76.4
7.7
17.6
2.9
12.3
5.5
53.96
52.66
38.52
58.64
51.19
51.42
48.23
35.01
53.62
49.45
2.54
4.43
3.52
5.01
1.74
83.9
85.0
81.2
80.4
93.5
4.1
7.8
8.2
7.5
3.3
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, C o n n . —
San Diego, Calif.Long Beach, Calif.'
Nashville, T e n n . —
Springfield, Mass.Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, Utah
Yonkers, N. Y.
Peterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Lynn, Mass.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.
Lowell, Mass.
—
—
Honolulu, Hawaii l/-
1/ Not included in group or grand totals.
87.4
88.9
70.7
70.3
86.6
12.7
6.7
4.4
6.3
10.3
3.3
Outlays
Comparison
with
revenues
(cost
payments*
100)
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
114
TABLE 1 5 . — P E R
CAPITA AND PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF COST PAYMENTS,
BY CHARACTER: 1 9 3 7
(See t e x t d i s c u s s i o n , p . 1 0 8 )
PER CAPITA COST PAYMENTS
Grand total-
Group I
Group I I —
Group I I I -
Operation
and
maintenance,
and interest
Operation
and
maintenance
Interest
$59.66
$53.75
#5.91
69.86
57.33
39.98
63.39
50.33
35.68
6.47
7.00
4.31
PERCENT DISTRIBUTION
OF COST PAYMENTS
Comparison
with
revenues
(cost
payments*
100)
Operation
and
maintenance
Interest
Outlays
76.9
76.8
78.9
7.9
10.7
9.5
15.2
12.5
11.6
102.1
105.5
134.9
5.6
11.6
15.1
12.9
5.3
9.5
6.9
16.3
15.9
12.7
10.6
22.6
10.4
19.2
98.7
118.0
98.5
103.8
95.8
104.4
11.1
6.0
10.8
5.7
10.5
7.4
18.4
110.1
106.3
101.2
109.1
100.8
109.5
87.0
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chioago, 111.
Philadelphia, Pa.
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
10
11
12
13
14
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, W i s .
B u f f a l o , N. Y.
:
$91.37
57.47
50.41
58.99
64.50
58.79
45.56
$85.30
49.55
41.66
50.49
60.06
52.56
41.70
$6.07
7.92
8.74
8.50
4.43
6.23
3.87
53.49
86.90
65.57
58.96
58.82
63.46
77.16
46.87
81.30
56.92
55.17
58.82
59.35
68.25
6.62
5.61
8.65
3.80
4.11
8.91
78.1
72.5
72.1
76.5
72.1
80.1
73.9
78.4
86.6
70.9
82.3
34.1
86.2
73.1
:.2.o
15.9
6.0
9.5
7.8
17.4
88.4
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
15
16
17
18
19
20
Minneapolis, Minn.New Orleans; La.-—
Cincinnati, O h i o —
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
| Seattle, Wash.
$64.51
39.92
59.41
91.06
44.63
50.16
$59.26
32.12
52.06
78.66
37.89
45.71
$5.25
7.80
7.35
12.40
6.74
4.45
78.6
67.2
76.4
82.4
64.8
84.9
7.0
16.3
10.8
13.0
11.5
8.3
14.4
16.5
12.8
4.6
23.6
6.8
94.7
129.2
110.6
101.7
91.3
108.6
21
22
23
24
I Indianapolis, Ind.
Rochester, N. Y.
Jersey City, N. J.
| Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
43.13
84.03
81.74
40.03
38.97
46.25
39.57
76.06
71.25
33.51
33.79
40.83
3.56
7.97
10.48
6.53
5.18
5.42
86.0
81.5
76.2
60.3
73.3
84.6
7.7
8.5
11.2
11.8
11.2
11.2
6.2
10.0
12.6
27.9
15.4
4.2
105.6
103.5
114.7
96.9
94.6
122.3
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S HAVLNG A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0
27
28
29
30
31
Columbus, O h i o —
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, C o l o . —
Atlanta, Ga.
$31.46
37.59
43.80
58.60
31.22
$26.54
31.92
41.66
55.67
29.22
$4.92
5.67
2.14
2.93
1.99
69.7
74.6
88.0
83.7
78.2
12.9
13.3
4.5
4.4
5.3
17.4
12.1 1
7.5
11.9
16.4
125.6
109.4
106.0
103.2
102.3
32
33
34
35
36
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.'
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, T e n n . —
28.22
37.09
23.34
36.51
24.35
23.70
30.99
19.34
30.05
20.65
4.51
6.10
4.00
6.46
3.70
69.1
67.1
80.2
68.9
72.9
13.2
13.2
16.6
14.8
13.1
17.7
19.7
3.2
16.3
14.0
99.6
103.5
94.4
106.9
125.2
39
40
41
42
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla..
57.43
26.55
31.62
66.16
35.36
27.65
50.98
21.96
26.57
60.44
31.73
24.39
6.44
4.59
5.05
5.72
3.64
3.26
72.4
71.7
77.3
87.5
77.1
63.2
9.2
15.0
14.7
8.3
8.8
8.5
18.4
13.3
8.0
4.2
14.0
28.3
92.7
94.2
116.5
104.9
124.3
97.4
43
44
45
46
47
48
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.Fort Worth, Tex.
H a r t f o r d , Conn.
63.82
44.58
34.78
31.18
32.67
60.76
62.42
36.92
32.04
28.04
26.67
56.07
1.40
7.66
2.74
3.14
6.00
4.69
91.8
73.2
88.7
82.1
54.9
82.4
2.1
15.2
7.6
9.2
12.4
6.9
6.2
11.5
3.7
8.7
32.8
10.7
101.8
99.9
119.3
117.6
83.8
103.4
116
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
TABLE 16
Cost payments of the 94 cities for operation and maintenance of general
government are shown in table 16. The payments are grouped under twelve major
functions.
These functions, and the individual classifications under each
function, are presented in sufficient detail in the table to be largely selfexplanatory. Reference may be made to the definitions, found at the close of
this volume, of terms used in the report. The twelve major functional classifications of cost payments are as follows:
I. General administrative,
legislative, and judicial.
II. Public safety.
III. Highways.
IV. Sanitation and waste removal.
V. Conservation of health.
VI. Hospitals.
VII.
VIII.
ix.
x.
XI.
XII.
Charities,
Correction.
Schools.
Libraries.
Recreation.
Miscellaneous.
The Bureau classifies cost payments according to a functional and activity
basis, regardless of the departmental organization within the city conducting
the function or activity.3 Frequently one governmental activity may be found
to be conducted by more than one governmental department, and in such cases the
Bureau combines the several activity costs into a total. Further, classification by function and activity may result in a total different from that shown
by the report of a municipal department or agency conducting a single function.
It is also emphasized that the accounts maintained by several municipalities
did not always adapt themselves to the detailed Bureau classifications, with
the result that it was sometimes necessary to show large residue payments under
"Undistributed."
During 1937 the unit of government administering certain local services and
maintaining the records of expenditures thereof, such as welfare and relief,
varied among the cities.
If administered by Federal or State agencies, the
figures are not included in this report, which is limited to the official records of cities and over-lapping independent local units. The differing practice
results in a wide variation in the statistics of payments among the cities,
which should be recognized in using the figures for comparisons. An example is
found in the case of the function called "Charities," in which there is shown a
wide range in payments for care of outdoor poor, owing to the varying degree of
responsibility among the governmental units for this type of relief.
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS OF GENERAL GOVERNMENT.-As previously indicated,
the cost of operating and maintaining the general governments of the 94 cities
in 1937 was the highest ever recorded—$2,025,052,436. Expenditures for schools
accounted for $596,000,000, or 29.4 percent of the total. In second place, and
a cost item that is almost entirely responsible for the rising level of general
government costs in recent years, is an expenditure of over $332,000,000 for
charities.
Next in the order of their fiscal magnitude were public safety,
$330,107,033; general administrative, legislative, and judicial, $159,557,414;
and highways, $106,242,397. A further analysis of these cost payments by main
functions is made on a per capita basis in table 17, and by percentage distribution in table 18.
A discussion of the operation and maintenance cost payments for general
government of the 94 cities in 1937 is presented below by the twelve major
functions, in the order of their appearance In table 17.
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE, LEGISLATIVE, AND JUDICIAL.—Cost payments of $159,557,414
were reported by the 94 cities under this functional heading, which consist of
the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of local government and, in
addition, such auxiliary agencies as those established to deal with finances,
law, elections, and general administrative buildings. The longer description of
this functional group supersedes and is synonomous with the term "general government" used in the Bureau's previous reports.
3/ This explains the desirability of abandoning the old term "general departments," because the cost
payment classification is not based on departments or organization units. See p. 17 , sup:ra.
PART I I : GENERAL GOVERNMENT—COST PAYMENTS
117
This major functional group of expenditures is segregated into cost payments
for those municipal activities described as "Control" and those termed "Staff."
All expenditures by courts and those divisions of government which determine
policies and provide general administration for the entire municipality are included under "Control"; expenditures for auxiliary staff agencies which perform
general services for the control agencies as well as for the various services
or "line" departments are included under "Staff." The classification under
each subdivision is self-explanatory and is in harmony with the standard classification sponsored by the National Committee on Municipal Accounting.
It was previously disclosed that the total cost of general government in
1937 was 3288,000,000, or 16.6 percent higher than in 1930.
In this connection it is interesting to note that, despite the sharp Increase In specific
services rendered by municipalities during this period and the unprecedented
administrative problems introduced by the depression, there was only a negligible Increase in the cost of administrative, legislative, and judicial overhead.
Such cost payments in 1937 were less than 1 percent higher than in 1930, as may
be seen from the accompanying comparative figures.
Under the heading of "Control" expenditures,
1926
$123,687,000
judicial costs were by far the highest, while ex141,929,000
1928
penditures under the various classifications of "Fi158,374,000
•1930
nance" were the largest among the auxiliary staff
149,909,000
1932
agencies. It should be noted that the judicial or1934
135,766,000
ganization in some cities and the classifications
1936
150,635,000
159,557,000
1937
used in reporting such costs in others were not
wholly adaptable to the Bureaufs classification.
PUBLIC SAFETY.—Expenditures for public safety totaled $320,107,033 in 1937,
the third largest item in the cost of operating and maintaining general government in the 94 cities during the year. These expenditures are for municipal
activities which serve primarily to protect persons and property and consist of
police, fire, protective regulation and inspection, flood control, and such
miscellaneous activities as travelers' aid, game and fish wardens, and bounties
on animals.
Expenditures for police totaled $192,711,789, or 60.2 percent of all public
safety costs. It may be of Interest to note that previously the Bureau has reported police costs of the 94 cities under the single heading "Police" whereas
in 1937 these expenditures are shown under 15 subdivisions.
Unfortunately,
many of the cities, especially some of the larger ones, Included in this study,
do not have a breakdown of police expenditures itemized in sufficient detail to
lend Itself to the Bureau's classification, with the result that a large amount
of such cost payments Is necessarily shown under "Undistributed." It may be
necessary to abandon some of these subdivisions in subsequent years, but it is
hoped, because of the wide public interest in the detailed expenditures, that
the future basis of accounting and reporting pursued by the various cities will
permit wider and more useful comparisons.
Similar difficulties were encountered in presenting detailed classifications
of cost payments for fire protection, but the results, even though scattered in
some subdivisions, more than justify the effort. Previous to 1937 such expenditures were shown only under the two headings "General expenditures" and "Water
service," whereas 13 classifications of payments are presented in this report.
The total of all expenditures for fire protection was $122,064,413.
Since expenditures for police and fire protection comprise over 95 percent
of the cost payments for public safety, the following comparison of the trend
of such expenditures since 1926 may be of interest:
Year
Police
Fire
1926
1928
1930
1932
1934
1936
1937
$150,482,000
168,844,000
191,763,000
186,194,000
170,236,000
182,120,000
192,712,000
$105,925,000
115,479,000
125,875,000
117,342,000
107,273,000
114,461,000
122,064,000
118
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
Although the combined costs of police and fire protection have grown somewhat in the 94 cities since 1926, they were actually less in 1937 than in 1930.
This Is especially significant when the influence of Increasing population is
considered In connection with per capita costs of rendering these services, because the indication Is that more persons are being served at less cost.
HIGHWAYS.—Expenditures for highways totaled $106,242,397. This major functional group includes, not only activities normally associated with streets and
other roadways, but also waterways and structures and improvements necessary
for the use of roadways, such as bridges, tunnels, viaducts, and grace separations, and also services that are appurtenant to streets, such as street lighting and snow and ice removal. Cost payments within this functional group are
indicated under 13 detailed classifications In the 1937 report, as compared with
only five general classifications in reports for previous years.
The cost of operation and maintenance of general government for highways
has experienced a declining trend in recent years, as is evident from the accompanying comparisons, such expenditures in 1937 being 23.7 percent less than
in 1930.
Expenditures for roadways proper constituted
1926
$122 619 000
the largest cost Incurred in the operation and main1928
128 694 000
tenance of highways during 1937; under the roadways
1930
139 323 000
caption the most significant item is the maintenance
1932
123 101 000
1934
108 066 000
and repair of paved streets, as might be expected,
1936
109 382 000
since the scope of the present study Involves only
1937
106 242 000
the larger American cities.
Aside from roadways,
expenditures for street lighting constituted the
largest cost incurred in the operation and maintenance of highways in 1937.
SANITATION AND WASTE REMOVAL*—Activities relative to sanitation and to the
removal and disposal of waste are now classified into eight general headings,
whereas prior to 1937 these expenditures were presented under only four headings.
It will be noted that difficulties were encountered in some of the subheadings,
particularly in segregating cost items on the collection and disposal of waste.
Expenditures for sanitation and waste removal
totaled £99,947,445 in 1937, the largest of which
$107,575,000
1926
was for street cleaning. Next in importance were
121,693,000
1928
expenditures for garbage collections arid for the
128,340,000
1930
operation and maintenance of sewer systems.
117,965,000
1932
91,821,000
1934
The trend in the cost of operating and maintain97,547,000
1936
ing sanitary and waste removal facilities in 94 cit99,947,000
1937
ies is shown in the accompanying statement., From this
statement it appears that expenditures for sanitation and waste removal were 22.1 percent less in 1937 than in 1930, although
since 1934, which was the low year, such costs have been increasing.
CONSERVATION OF HEALTH.—Municipal activities for the conservation and improvement of public health constitute this major function. The institutional
function, which also affects the health of the community, but which Is distinct
in purpose, operation, and administration, is separately considered under the
major functional group designated "Hospitals," which also includes the cost of
medical aid given free by hospitals in connection with public welfare activities.
Cost payments for the conservation of health amounted to $27,686,660 in
1937, the largest item being expenditures for child health services pertaining
to schools. The next largest item was $2,545,232, expended for preschool and
prenatal services.
Owing to numerous changes In classification of these cost payments, it is
not possible to present a trend comparison of such expenditures over a period
of years.
HOSPITALS.—Both the cost of municipally-conducted hospitals, and the cost
to municipalities of placing patients in the care of hospitals not municipallyowned, are Included under this major functional classification.
These two
classes of expenditure are further subdivided according to the specific activities engaged in by the municipal hospitals, and the nature of services rendered
PART I I : GENERAL GOVERNMENT—COST PAYMENTS
119
to the municipalities by other hospitals. In the case of municlpally-owned
hospitals certain expenses which cannot be classified in detail, such as maternity hospitals, cancer hospitals, and expenses for ambulance service, are shown
under "All other'1 special municipal hospitals. In the case of expenses for patients in hospitals other than those municipally-owned, the somewhat substantial "All other" classification Includes such items as appropriations made to
general hospitals (New York) and expenditures for the care of sick in private
and State hospitals (Detroit).
All but 10 of the 94 cities reported cost payments for hospitals in 1937,
the aggregate being $98,059,013. The largest item was the expenditure of
$49,061,995 for general municipal hospitals—approximately half of the costs
Incurred under this major functional classification. The next largest expenditure was for the hospitalization of tuberculous patients In special municipal
hospitals.
In the reports for previous years, expenses for hospitals were grouped with
two other functions under the major heading "Charities, Hospitals, and Corrections."
CHARITIES.—The major functional classification called "Charities" includes
all relief or public assistance to dependents and to persons otherwise handicapped. It consists of all forms of aid given: pensions, food, clothing, shelter, fuel, hospital care, legal aid, utility services, burial expense, etc. The
expense of case work and of other investigations of relief clients is also Included. Cost payments for charities are shown in this report in much more detail than in previous reports In this series.
Expenditures for the operation and maintenance of general government under
the functional heading of charities totaled $332,082,953 in 1937, the second
largest cost Item of general government. The growth of this expenditure, and
its relation to the rising cost level of general government in the 94 cities,
has been discussed in the Introductory part of this section on cost payments.
As might be expected,the largest single item in cost payments for charities
was an expenditure of $215,276,898 for general relief, followed by $45,301,877
for old-age assistance and $38,015,199 expended in aid to dependent children.
CORRECTION. —Under the major functional heading of "Correction" are grouped
the costs to the municipalities of dealing with law offenders by confinement or
probation. It includes expenditures for maintaining prisoners in Institutions
of other civil divisions. The amount shown under institutional Industry activities is the net expense of such activities, that is, the excess of manufacturing costs over any revenues realized from the Industries. Cost payments
shown for the confinement of delinquents in correctional institutions of other
civil divisions (municipal, county, or State), or private institutions, include
expenditures by the municipalities for transporting these delinquents to or
from such institutions.
Cost payments of $21,329,855 were reported by the 94 cities in 1937 under
the major functional heading of "Correction." The largest expenditure was
$12,049,311 for the confinement of male delinquents in municipal correctional
institutions, the next largest being $3,164,239 expended by the municipalities
incident to probation and parole activities.
Expenditures in 1937 for correction are presented In considerably more detail than in the 1936 report, when such cost Items were included under the major
functional heading of "Charities, Hospitals, and Corrections." Of especial note
is the new breakdown to show the expenditures of confining delinquents in municipal correctional institutions as distinguished from the costs incurred in
confining delinquents In other public or private Institutions.
SCHOOLS.—Expenditures for schools constitute the largest item under the
major character classification of operation and maintenance of general government. During 1937 such expenditures totaled $596,128,836 for the 94 cities.
Detailed data are compiled by the U. S. Office of Education, Federal Security
Agency.
120
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
The expense of operating and maintaining schools
1926
$494 493 000
has been increasing in 94 cities in recent years,
1928
561 255 000
although such costs have not as yet reached the
1930
599 973 000
highest level of $631,784,000 reported In 1931.
1932
607 090 000
Shown herewith is a comparison for certain years
1934
526 864 000
1936
571
922 000
since 1926.
596 129 000
1937
In previous years, school expenditures were presented, along with cost payments for libraries,under the general functional classification of "Education." Only such libraries
as are connected with public schools for the exclusive use of pupils or teachers
appear under the cost payments for schools, other expenses for libraries having
a separate functional heading.
LIBRARIES.—Under "Libraries" are grouped the costs of libraries administered by municipalities, either as a regular department or as an independent
agency governed by a library board or commission. These cost payments do not
Include expenditures for libraries attached to and primarily serving schools,
which appear under the heading "Schools," or expenditures for general municipal
reference libraries, which appear under "General Administrative, Legislative,
and Judicial—Staff Agencies."
Expenditures for libraries are presented under three general headings. "Accessions" includes the cost of all books, pamphlets, periodicals, and other
reading material, and expenditures for finishing, binding, rebinding, and repairing books and periodicals. Expenditures for books to stock a new or branch
library, hov/ever, would be classified as capital outlays rather than operation
and maintenance. The other two classifications are self-explanatory.
The 94 cities considered in this study reported total expenditures of
$24,101,002 for operation and maintenance of municipal libraries during 1937.
The largest portion of the expenditures was under the caption "Library services," as distinguished from the payments for supervision and accessions.
RECREATION. —This major function of "Recreation" includes the various municipal activities intended to provide pleasurable diversion. Municipal services to re-create the body and mind by play and other activities cover a wide
range, and, although related, are not always organized Into a single department.
Even though the primary responsibility for one or more activities is assumed by
another department, as of outdoor play by the school department, the expenses
involved should be and are appropriately classified as recreation.
The basis of reporting recreational expenditures has been greatly broadened
in the 1937 report. In previous years these expenditures were reported under
only three general items, whereas in the present report they are presented under
five general classifications of "Supervision," "Cultural-scientific recreation,"
"Organized recreation," '•Municipal parks," and "Special recreation facilities."
These are in turn broken down into 24 supporting activities. Numerous difficulties were encountered in adapting the individual city reports to the new
classifications of the Bureau, but more representative results are anticipated
in future reports. Even so, it is to be noted that the largest unclassifiable
"All other" amount was $1,073,865, appearing under the "Municipal parks" heading, which amount represented only about 3 percent of total expenditures under
that particular group.
Total expenditures of $58,181,752 were reported by the 94 cities for operation and maintenance of recreational facilities. The largest single Item of
expense was $21,476,126 for park areas, while the operation and maintenance of
municipal parks in general accounted for approximately 53 percent of all recreational expenditures.
MISCELLANEOUS OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—This group of expenditures is presented under seven general classifications. • Most of these headings are selfexplanatory, although it may be explained that "Judgments and losses, not allocated," include expenditures in settlement of claims against the municipalities
for injury to persons other than city employees. It also includes all losses
to the cities through defalcation of city officials, insolvency of banks, and
kindred causes, provided such losses have been recognized through appropriate
adjustments of the municipal accounts. Expenditures for "Municipal service
PART I I : GENERAL GOVERNMENT—COST PAYMENTS
121
enterprises, not allocated," Include undistributed payments for incidental operating plants classified as municipal service enterprises, such as electric
light plants, heating plants, and garages.4 Cost payments for "All other" include expenditures of incidental operating plants not classified as municipal
service enterprises, and such other expenditures as blanket insurance on all
municipal properties and blanket printing and advertising bills that cannot be
segregated. It also Includes postage, mailing, and similar expenditures that
cannot be distributed.
Cost payments classified as "Miscellaneous" aggregated $171,678,076, the
largest portion of which was for pensions and associated gratuities in the
amount of $90,311,769. In connection with the latter amount, reference may be
made to the $37,500,000 received by the 94 cities as pension assessments from
employees in 1937.
The next largest expenditure was $61,383,253 transferred to public-service
enterprises. This amount should, of course, be considered with the $31,636,434
contributed by public-service enterprises to general government in 1937, Indicating a net contribution of approximately $30,000,000 to such enterprises.
4/ Municipal service enterprises are not to be confused with public-service enterprises. The latter
serve the public in general; the former serve mainly, if not exclusively, the city government itself.
201032 0 - 4 0
:>
TABLE 16.—COST PAYlyffiNTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL:
1937
I.—GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE, LEGISLATIVE, AND JUDICIAL—CONTROL
All major
functions
Grand total-
Group I
Group I I —
Group III-
Municipal
council or
commission
Legislative committees
and
special
bodies
Clerk of
council
Ordinances
and proceedings
Criminal courts
Boards and
commis—
sions
Misdemeanors
$2,025,052,436
$159,557,414
$2,385,115
$276,030
$529,489
$408,233
$1,948,798
$287,397
$1,905,090
$5,230,268
1,402,929,107
232,169,946
389,953,383
116,446,134
21,040,268
22,071,012
1,580,468
293,329
511,318
251,919
341
23,770
366,452
38,983
124,054
332,405
22,650
53,178
1,432,034
69,547
447,217
64,919
222,478
553,006
777,346
574,738
4,245,824
924,958
59,486
$2,614,164
:, 001,803
360,099
252,262
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, Pa.-Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$58,108
27,369
80,783
9,649
15,389
64,889
17,396
$610,260,559
172,960,618
82,190,756
84,127,761
81,329,374
48,267,544
34,619,539
$45,106,855
17,846,015
8,806,972
6,377,821
7,874,269
3,818,254
3,583,335
$475,051
258,947
120,214
51,065
116,656
62,485
52,950
38,296,529
63,972,224
38,623,016
36,200,187
36,642,265
35,553,829
39,884,906
2,301,073
4,473,780
5,374,420
3,484,064
2,158,117
2,358,262
2,882,897
63,191
57,139
81,809
43,072
2,200
14,029
27,080
42,342
91,501
106,388
7,218
$230,614
16,154
8,013
$912,494
48,723
69,764
28,381
32,945
28,545
26,911
8,637
12,679
25,364
37,976
68,784
76,051
38,885
55,741
$90,881
84,401
35,222
29,232
$131,505
36,509
75,489
43,517
$1,673,245
567,268
149,828
352,470
9,245
23,380
106,862
$1,220,665
204,650
171,640
137,663
28,877
36,581
72,693
51,774
41,903
99,616
21,971
22,839
408,182
557,039
97,802
137,266
116,548
46,689
47,291
31,584
64,753
28,274
29,825
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, m±nn.
New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o —
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.
Rochester, N. Y.-Jersey City, N. J.
§28.310.821
15,128,484
23,951.966
35,161,513
15,634,623
17,100,749
14,723,559
25,365,216
22,793,859
$1,674,681
2,343,677
2,127,240
2,845,726
2,040,748
1,757,793
950,152
1,746,705
2,533,915
$7,499
§76,141
43,960
30,047
38,689
5,400
85,033
12,978
2,600
10,619
702
$341
1,800
3,071
$12,539
$28,304
14,638
14,407
11,962
$19,570
147,028
25,824
212.016
24,152
17,487
8,603
21,977
175,653
$243,948
282,286
41,469
5,419
24,784
79,572
177,352
$55,878
149,abb
20,000
26,323
10,965
Houston, T e x . - Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.-
10,651,697
10,728,020
12,619,439
1,037,368
789,976
1,192,287
Columbus, O h i o Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, C a l i f . Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.xiirmingham, Ala.Akron, Ohio
$566,103
488,796
517,230
1,197,967
399,132
307,335
444,343
287,185
406,512
278,691
$7,029
35,648
20,286
14,004
10,545
9,987
Memphis, T e n n . —
$7,953,936
9,539,825
12,314,947
16,322,545
8,194,668
6,589,735
8,611,224
5,286,402
7,966,573
5,400,904
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.Worcester, Mass.
Ridhmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.—
Fort Worth, Tex.
13,031,341
5,348,156
5,786,067
12,964,709
6,554,668
4,911,943
12,359,604
6,826,164
5,581,886
4,845,276
4,511,942
898,961
338,452
287,160
624,233
315,153
231,658
462,764
590,682
269,716
229,503
225,195
26,802
9,447,011
5,363,213
7,502,913
6,252,806
6,523,438
3,871,211
9,268,627
3,515,740
6,652,374
4,498,399
4,090,968
567,022
197,920
380,502
470,263
423,750
258,713
381,657
175,778
350,802
252,095
247,593
4,440,773
10,794,576
5,170,691
4,867,122
6,601,310
3,935,512
4,993,511
2,840,629
2,675,821
2,633,650
4,620,338
315,748
754,216
256,329
323,314
404,199
443,476
213,885
117,979
159,683
81,892
367,358
58,567
11,221
77,225
14,705
15,934
2,338
14,059
14,879
7,750
47,499
23,882
21,652
52,134
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, C o n n . —
San Diego, Calif. Long Beach, Calif.Nashville, Tenn.-—
Springfield, Mass.Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.—
Des Moines, Iowa—
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
Patersoh, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.
Kansas City, Kans.
Fort Wayne, Ind.
Camden, N. J.
$6,076
10,622
4,415
180
5,580
$8,871
$3,909
8,998
5,201
3,900
3,925
14,101
5,720
$15,387
23,050
$552
2,700
10,870
13,200
$3,055
37,656
47,773
10,724
9,181
5,030
17,400
8,499
20,126
42,578
24,785
11,655
8,614
5,170
5,151
10,528
4,757
1,550
5,295
904
15,450
8,088
13,600
21,558
1,100
246
$406
195
10,573
3,125
6,163
1,158
2.B29
4,361
1,932
1,235
4,751
25,830
10,164
11,960
$18,008
9,221
14,153
1,000
1,660
16,526
16,054
21,695
7,850
18,211
12,139
11,673
1,014
1,920
3,000
4,600
3,973
1,831
125
17,332
16,674
13,564
8,600
13,625
14,125
27,546
8,911
2,077
32,862
5,577
14,426
10,013
45,034
32,984
5,679
13,083
18,344
12,527
14,644
22,092
9,059
13,706
15,272
1,250
3,291
3,230
20,037
14,295
20,239
2,106
27,631
16,223
3,600
44,557
4,263
6,291
5,171
2,370
3,586
11,142
5,400
55,445
6,882
TABLE 1 6 . — C O S T PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, B Y FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL:
1937—Continued
I.—GENERAL ADIVUNISTRATIVE, LEGISLATIVE, AND JUDICIAL—CONTROL
bar
CITY
All major
functions
Total
City
s
Legislative comMunicipal
mittees
council or
and
commission
special
bodies
Judicial
Executive
Legislative
Criminal courts
Clerk of
council
Ordinances
and proceedings
Mayor
Manager
Boards and
commis—
sions
Misdemeanors
Felonies
Traffic
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 — C o n t i n u e d
$3,613,265
4,444,012
3,132,366
3,501,240
4,609,242
6,490,427
5,057,609
3,323,383
$284,106
211,111
90,896
175,767
190,548
323,331
220,151
241,063
Knoxville, Term.'
Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.
Tacaaa, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary. Ia<i.
Canton, Ohio
WiLnington, Del.'
3,064,707
3,523,628
2,603,965
3,299,948
4,949,371
3,031,640
2,958,970
3,240,462
163,115
209,865
75,735
207,480
636,718
104,119
142,100
218,516
Tampa, Fla.
Somerville, Mass.
El Paso, Tex.
Evaasville, Ind,Lynn, Mass.
Utice, N. Y
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.-
2,870,598
5,890,061
1,981,974
2,707,299
5,291,275
4,948,722
3,567,030
5,432,083
4,956,958
170,367
258,198
93,673
79,550
233,787
267,301
328,703
399,008
234,859
Erie, Pa.Elizabeth, N. J.—
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wa.sh.
Fall River,' Mass.Cambridge, M a s s . —
New Bedford, Mas3.
Reading, Pa.
Honolulu, Hawaii l/-
1/ Not included in group or grand t o t a l s .
$36,074
$3,235
2,322
3,888
8,817
3,450
$4,562
$523
6,944
600
6,948
450
11,441
4,500
1,200
1,545
15,966
4,550
6,829
14,490
5,469
1,000
3,507
7,374
10,708
4,500
6,294
16,855
2,050
5,845
1,017
1,534
500
1,000
2,150
7,561
3,853
352
$10,380
1,079
391
4,800
10,314
7,565
5,870
8,063
6,887
6,498
576
654
28,855
15,802
6,673
16,183
11,770
ll,JoO
7,963
20,208
13,809
7,502
9,284
9,399
8,456
23,190
45,880
19,343
13,228
8,951
All other
TABLE 16.—COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL:
1937—Continued
I.—GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE, LEGISLATIVE,
AND JUDICIAL—STAFF AGENCIES
I.—GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE, LEGISLATIVE, AND JUDICIAL—CONTROL—Continued
Judicial—Continued
Domestic relations
courts
Civil courts
Grand totalGroup I
Group I I —
Group III-
Major
claims
Small
claims
All
other
Medical
and
social
service
Undistributed and
other
$1,505,941
$3,132,827
$10,279,071
$5,374,415
$937,576
$999,592
$440,920
$6,019,858
1,029,269
385,994
90,678
,585,929
439,403
107,495
9,451,638
558,629
268,804
4,467,653
436,617
470,145
657,119
169,803
110,654
824,963
148,450
26,179
367,431
49,201
24,288
,357,799
536,974
125,085
Supervision
Registration
Primary
elections
General
elections
Special
elections
$1,974,479
$881,912
$7,561,816
$131,86?
254,965
47,054
50,396
1,361,721
400,940
211,818
657,024
89,360
135,528
5,642,362
1,136,243
783,211
98,388
11,882
21,597
$55,541
33,904
65,077
$287,675
415,925
126,171
$273,366
163,698
32,574
19,916
11,264
342,586
19,562
128,234
GROUP I.—CITIES KAVIU3 A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif..
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
•
Boston, Mass.—
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$73,493
378,034
107,873
73,617
240,866
24,136
$1,267,005
205,318
221,933
220,022
$5,007,049
1,419,336
172,934
89,343
'14,684
30,273
117,265
52,579
98,804
51,389
44,180
59,511
1,093,868
376,698
190,448
165,776
$504,657
297,850
^2,141,897
1,218,823
53,000
227,169
$24,713
63,800
194,161
289,272
412,892
295,797
123,949
36,541
13,919
93,712
150,602
86,429
550
65,725
38,674
18,692
72,109
82,627
70,865
7,612
33,406
138,938
23,250
156,400
$40,200
98,838
89,746
44,507
3,339
11,242
$2,204,723
76,669
991,341
1,189,835
135,088
168,754
151,394
67,447
67,440
128,076
16,283
4,825
155,924
38,580
12,174
11,290
10,135
7,380
19,523
28,430
$2,719,223
199,779
239,828
206,226
1,081,108
249,063
93,718
121,818
11,584
60,400
236,636
259,054
154,474
7,642
37,056
39,359
103,494
$11,317
13,453
$58,955
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.
New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.
Rochester, N. Y , —
Jersey City, N. J,
$19,302
280,806
77,421
$47,533
97,949
61,581
34,158
33,312
43,871
14,085
36,711
54,551
$13,306
$116,743
77,421
129,383
84,829
26,134
$68,213
14,056
56,716
35,140
19,802
57,937
78,972
$11,479
$31,158
15,489
19,284
4,904
21,250
14,798
46,586
19,284
49,032
4,543
17,868
$219,724
25,992
12,782
15,866
47,954
38,491
29,208
$10,254
168,728
$18,371
9,272
6,664
14,158
51,109
106,983
20,717
16,554
32,993
214,160
128,718
239,409
31,556
32,415
400,074
City number
TABLE 16.—COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL:
1937—Continued
I.—GENERAL ADLUNISTHATTVS, LEGISLATIVE, AND JUDICIAL—CONTROL—Continued
I.—GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE, LEGISLATIVE,
AND JUDICIAL—STAFF AGENCIES
Judicial—Continued
Elections
Domestic relations
courts
Civil courts
CITY
Law
Chancery
Probate
Major
claims
Small
claims
Juvenile
All
other
Medical
and
social
service
Undistributed and
other
Supervision
Registration
$8,126
2,848
$20,463
8,065
Primary
elections
General
elections
Special
elec-
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000—Continued
Houston, T e x . - L o u i s v i l l e , Ky.'
Portland, Oreg.-
$8,465
$3,563
12,089
$12,698
111,421
$16,765
47,320
41,696
$15,133
1,050
19,830
$146,957
$2,783
$14,042
3,237
$5,335
25,621
$8,497
3,385
S
S
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, O h i o —
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.
$45,114
$36,000
$155,217
20,987
$6,900
260
$25,017
$20,957
105,582
28,200
$14,461
6,998
7,200
5,366
38,992
72,521
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Term.
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla..
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.
Fort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.
San Diego, Calif.—
$4,469
$95,088
$5,352
46,022
14,213
17,294
14,173
36,694
32,476
30!674
ly,121
11,993
2,799
3,411
2,000
20,121
1,870
10,877
35,026
6,593
15,515
3,803
15,515
4,121
2,582
23 ,'?92
23,929
3,857
17,192
11,906
17,361
6,600
15,227
19,192
5,244
8,091
2,183
6,700
17,734
57,410
30,488
5,065
5,043
1,841
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
16,106
10,377
4,056
2,347
4,183
2,143
10,800
60
61
62
63
64
26,065
7,798
24,034
1,950
3,662
9,780
27,555
23,290
29,839
15,161
18,352
2,249
20,020
11,496
5
19,627
2,963
4,914
66
67
475
4,500
28,403
4,028
7,101
20,195
6,495
7,131
3,759
2,448
2,957
292
6,282
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
5,459
18,395
4,635
4,471
8,314
1,112
12,684
2,723
10
22,501
333
2,600
1,234
3,370
10,775
6,797
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
5,915
25,805
5,838
2,840
9,030
6,791
25,087
12,464
3,664
19,857
15,224
5,435
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
4,694
10,015
2,657
4,604
2,648
596
2,800
4,750
20,084
22,008
6,677
8,775
24,134
2,200
1,500
43,331
660
1,050
3,446
3,857
31,809
3,697
39,428
1/ Not included in group or grand totals.
1,775
TABLE 16.—COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL: 1937—Continued
I.—GENERAL ADIvtENISTRATIVE, LEGISLATIVE, AND JUDICIAL—STAFF AGENCIES—Continued
Grand total-
Group I
Group I I —
Group III-
Independent a c - Budgetcounting
ing
and
auditing
Assessment
and levy
of taras
Collection,
custody,
and disbursement
of funds
Purchasing
and
custody of
supplies
8,135,074
$777,041
$539,205
$10,201,629
$16,058,733 |1,833,728
$3,380,207 B3,142,624
5,536,285
1,070,570
1,528,219
288,643
186,117
302,281
489,474
17,861
31,870
6,671,767
1,767,866
1,761,996
Supervision
Accounting
and
internal
auditing
$676,266
441,116
92,289
142,861
10,746,820
2,190,156
3,121,757
,157,442
280,355
395,931
2,599,725
381,230
399,252
Debt administration
2,143,487
542,848
456,289
Administration
of
special
funds
and i n vestments
Counsel
and legal
advice
Criminal
prosecution
Special
civil
counsel
Special
criminal
prosecution
$398,688
$828,083
6,138,397
$4,270,589
521,354
124,019
182,710
3,948,130
796,722
1,393,545
3,561,228
533,944
175,417
329,157
24,082
273,592
$195,894
40,687
203,794
837
1,592
7,121
$1,422,060
739,835
242,171
140,135
213,960
64,639
65,248
$1,984,722
92,586
294,111
168,352
449,851
131,354
84,260
$218,629
23,668
2,480
27,280
3,485
19,845
2,308
17,190
15,243
25,999
6
10,644
39
145,293
147,231
268,293
86,934
89,009
105,422
217,900
107,699
124,676
12,640
4,000
56,480
$20
43,530
33,459
8,120
4,748
7,777
1,314
5,398
$52,995
42,972
57.959
324,765
73,148
775
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$2,072,297
931,542
145,727
470,748
571,772
13,321
203,570
43,009
92,490
$175,046
95,065
21,361
49,432
27,582
10,000
188,187
103,583
167,767
206,645
102,612
128,401
150,944
$353
$36,614
14,069
43,845
48,590
88,712
3,075
27,898
7,216
9,057
5,100
1,488
2,879
060
48 812
48 696
8 052
12 620
4,976
13,258
$1,091,700
1,437,258
436,103
484,724
725,219
298,553
256,496
$2,652,432
3,208,410
696,221
1,153,679
616,716
237,128
252,406
$203,879
402,380
11,800
51,045
36,315
24,356
150,271
$1,354,996
235,319
119,942
98,091
170,271
39,192
47,078
183,303
330,586
569,319
229,212
228,787
180,609
219,898
241,650
256,664
632,261
231,220
72,716
305,413
189,904
52,704
54,469
30,020
65,367
118,249
165,810
56,552
31,615
67,223
24,597
88,708
1,380
55,538
$123,001
187,692
L,207,840
89,600
939
35,166
17,769
5,103
441,106
1,666
20,216
13,389
$278,345
50,497
18,770
15,000
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
New Orleans, La
Cincinnati, OhioNewark, N. J.
Kansas City, Mo
Seattle, Wash
Indianapolis, Ind
Rochester, N. Y.
*16S 042
* 68^369
123,846
64,712
93,757
88,841
92,062
70,155
$1,776
15 ,'816
37 194
19',673
23,023
12,757
27,547
7,717
300
946
$109,267
108,133
189,608
292,443
199,760
148,168
129,905
85,576
$99,879
301j481
113,945
259,331
295,484
234,910
115,329
213,093
$34,318
41 j 943
4,840
25,873
72,683
34,524
1,500
7,892
$23,291
18',234
37 .521
7 6,'103
18,224
42,084
15,564
52,873
$462,826
7.541
13,579
15,476
1,754
15,550
116,329
68,491
110,347
32,687
79,901
$72,598
45,777
80.849
48,389
46,622
32,835
58,733
39,540
$2,119
10,918
Jersey City, N.
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.Portland, Oreg.-
27,455
11,668
53,346
80,848
68,293
100,299
14,947
1,819
4,256
19,592
$37,442
18,131
61,318
39,399
45,776
24,084
38,413
18,881
39,006
20,896
$19,360
16,521
23,971
39,094
20,551
37,153
25,135
26,286
26,979
26,994
9,839
16,130
1,000
900
426
260
5,734
5,110
12,196
17,428
16,980
15,443
16,594
50,329
60,971
59,595
29,255
27,628
23,843
15,575
4,220
407
2,372
1,025
4,110
2,465
4,105
224,162
136,836
48,123
95,885
169,868
159,277
94,053
133,506
16,897
38,879
128,719
29,866
39,872
36,584
60,263
13,481
14,842
8,750
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, Ohio—
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.'
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.--
$4,913
3,420
26,112
6,500
4,169
Providenoe, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.Fort Worth, T e x . - Hartford, Conn.
F l i n t , Mich.
New Haven, C o n n . —
San Diego, Calif.Long Beach, Calif.
Nashville, T e n n . —
Springfield, Mass.
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.
Des Moines, Iowa—
6,734
4,950
1
1
Scranton, Pa.
S a l t Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
P a t e r s o n , N. J .
Jacksonville, F l a . —
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J .
Chattanooga, Tenn.—Kansas C i t y , Kans.—
Fort Wayne, Ind.
3,025
19,092
21,382
47,711
13,795
27,411
31,035
22,747
15,419
8,611
11,018
8,207
11,033
2,995
2,010
3,454
7,773
10,720
7,390
2,198
#43,617
9,154
|7,699
11,149
33,209
26,978
76,998
58,829
3,850
2,950
3,000
2,100
5,899
1,920
72,017
2,171
4,573
52,758
48,719
25,083
21,764
35,068
63,575
38,347
32,380
3,082
48,107
16,728
65,383
1,946
10,000
388
4,541
5,020
8,495
4,469
116,520
58,006
44,552
40,395
5,780
1,561
1,244
25,600
46,483
19,961
19,656
39,126
47,827
32,403
4,176
500
$61,580
9,318
33,441
221,809
103,273
42,933
25,693
23,569
37,708
36,023
$2,444
2,739
24,982
51,998
6,894
80,233
36,942
78,477
88,235
20,184
25,320
96,043
55,121
30,626
29,106
16,951
7,596
2,048
8,585
2,198
7,459
8,274
22,128
64,202
70,398
35,768
43,796
42,235
35,416
15,482
73,913
18,983
38,578
17,234
79,461
50,892
186,991
37,298
71,122
52,584
74,157
35,597
15,858
11,460
10,764
9,895
22,080
2,271
15,265
$6,109
8,467
8,705
13,999
17,474
10,975
18,271
11,209
5,572
10,054
7,189
4,704
1,260
3,553
4,504
$327
7,877
4,602
5,818
15,023
6,908
15,022
2,021
$17,499
103
8,894
24,133
10,850
1,986
80
1,750
2,857
11,503
3,750
5,055
3,958
10,790
5,808
656
503
7,062
4,302
2,341
9,653
12,509
9,607
6,070
5,720
6., 747
9,478
3,300
15,415
3,225
12,825
3,343
11,650
18,433
11,500
5,991
16,241
4,305
3,042
13,159
10,382
7,960
10,978
4,013
7,773
8,220
3,226
3,835
19
20,161
17
1 161
7 206
807
20,911
7,929
3,305
11,354
5,172
4,044
180
11,216
983
479
100
5,304
1,423
850
121
$24,671
22,407
34,572
35,050
26,303
27,289
31,139
22,181
16,723
28,976
27,099'
27,585
19,609
31,796
10,115
32,136
16,352
29,573
25,706
10,347
18,701
30,548
5,508
15,434
33,980
36,606
32,348
22,884
22,266
21,102
29,759
31,171
15,667
63,321
14,001
29,526
22,338
17,391
10,020
10,402
24,135
6,479
$6,400
5,400
1,014
41,919
$109,308
57,654
3,265
$150
2,400
7,500
4,800
4,025
6,500
5,164
26,717
2,698
2,500
2,160
7,741
5,090
8,544
23,095
1,810
3,300
6,989
TABLE 1 6 . — COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS I N D E T A I L :
1937—Continued
I.—GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE, LEGISLATIVE, AND JUDICIAL—STAFF AGENCIES—Continued
Supervision
Accounting
and
internal
auditing
Independent accounting
and
auditing
Budgeting
Assessment
and levy
of taros
Collection,
enstody,
and disbursement
of funds
Licensing
Purchasing
and
custody of
supplies
Debt administration
Administration
of
special
funds
and i n VBstaents
Counsel
and legal
advice
Criminal
prosecution
Special
civil
counsel
Special
criminal
prosecution
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J.—
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.Cambridge, M a s s . —
New Bedford, Mass.
Reading, Pa.
Xnoxville, Tenn.Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.'
Tacoma, W a s h . — —
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
—
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.Tampa, Fla.
Somerville, Mass.
El Paso, T O T .
Evansville, Ind.Lynn, Mass.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn,
Waterbury, Conn.Lowell, Mass.
$2,250
4,650
5,389
3,569
6,808
8,934
3,630
6,000
Honolulu, Hawaii l/-
1 / Not i n c l u d e d i n group o r grand
$24,861
14,103
34,000
9,654
17,047
8,627
14,846
10,615
$3,656
1,991
4,500
1,952
3,279
346
6,152
5,386
$39,671
29,464
27,822
5,914
6,372
4,650
7,886
24,831
27,532
19,776
12,803
7,672
950
4,400
1,683
8,627
7,323
3,845
4,616
1,413
4,000
12,014
13,176
11,358
264
17,139
10,510
7,415
14,036
8,906
12,233
12,768
23,221
13,255
3,700
7,302
1,500
430
31
36,751
total.
3,926
36,722
9,256
20,474
30,180
23,775
$5,327
$73,733
63,676
21,833
7,998
14,782
28,181
46,980
33,968
40,083
300
14,463
13,744
54,519
34,737
75,379
12,010
22,632
67,199
2,804
18,895
31,187
11,665
30,874
9,501
300
25,394
27,748
29,159
36,522
25,209
44,872
56,225
26,556
1,697
36,671
29,877
18,115
44,055
35,353
101,194
$4,545
$2,247
4,280
1,932
1,717
7,334
1,160
8,225
7,585
3,484
6,395
5,848
30
2,420
4,764
3,334
2,669
1,992
3,340
4,461
6,931
$18,297
942
149
1,501
3,995
3,940
48,629
2,077
57,649
17,994
665
61
2,717
1,719
15,454
$8,744
76,081
158
5,185
2,094
3,016
1,600
1,866
7,721
5.443
8,014
56,057
271
5,529
1,482
3,185
4,158
667
400
2,075
10,274
2,181
234
2,500
5,274
3,127
$12,466
24,241
18,016
4,036
13,630
8,166
17 ,759
7,314
19,899
10,308
10,757
4,146
9,649
47,100
7,548
6,899
10,238
21,517
6,168
8,382
7,347
13,858
16,781
22,148
43,437
9,799
1,099
24,584
$243
$6,041
2,415
1,000
2,000
1,584
6,434
1,768
1,800
13,823
377
200
33,242
a
$625
H
TABLE 1 6 . — C O S T PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS I N D E T A I L :
1937—Continued
I.—GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE, LEGISLATIVE, AND JUDICIAL—STAFF AGENCIES—Continued
Administrative offices
and boards
R e c o r d i n g and r e p o r t i n g
Grand totalGroup I —
Group I I —
Group III-
City engineer and
public
works
P l a n n i n g and z o n i n g
Personnel administration
Planning
Personnel
selection
and administration
Pension
administration
Research and investigation
Special
research
projects
Public
officers
associations
Municipal
clerk
Recording
deeds and
mr>T*t g a g e s
General
public
reports
All
other
$2,700,189
$4,094,693
$554,385
$40,970
$3,856,019
$2,831,695
$766,355
$303,313
$1,681,727
$1,114,364
$316,514
$409,551
$57,824
1,829,564
361,202
509,423
3,228,334
687,469
178,890
485,950
23,014
45,421
19,437
15,158
6,37"
1,769,370
702,748
1,383,901
2,471,526
117,964
242,205
428,525
154,287
183,543
164,299
51,662
87,352
1,336,437
136,471
208,819
873,079
137,137
104,148
255,026
26,180
35,308
237,641
28,306
143,604
19,652
13,030
25,142
$1,231,418
120,131
$1,062,006
580,598
234,549
119,615
290,216
69,434
112,977
$439,513
785
2,600
$435,118
267,885
78,146
82,080
181,807
35,977
27,677
$337,472
334,461
19,979
735
36,123
3,335
7,958
$128,438
12,843
$122,133
7,200
103
$5,575
750
3,872
4,101
20,726
31,831
69,572
25,360
32,178
18,557
37,819
66,928
38,690
13,210
5,892
$559
$27,636
1,380
11,778
30,372
$42,179
11,873
5,429
13,928
1,323
12,680
Zoning
Research
bureaus
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, Pa.
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.—
Cleveland, O h i o — •
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
194,528
46,923
18,232
44,256
109,738
35,829
28,509
$19,437
3,818
6,249
210,999
153,447
99,806
129,431
59,230
106,026
31,260
$129,040
115,054
35,232
71,373
82,407
48,513
$4,839
13,603
468
$295,344
57,679
227,747
106,644
377,282
201,135
29,580
102,071
32,756
102,642
94,803
29,266
48,046
64.L75
1,725
$1,582,559
242,014
104,886
6,026
52,722
78,348
6,112
32,775
169,633
24,260
172,191
$40,336
20,438
18,291
72,013
18,258
15,723
$75,865
20,134
26,642
29,646
75,589
4,253
36,794
60,768
9,774
26,157
6,645
13,375
12,757
2,316
130
46,955
650
55,250
6,000
4,574
$8,163
$400
1,580
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.
New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o —
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, Mo.-Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.
Rochester, N. Y . ~
Jersey City, N. J.
H o u s t o n , Terr.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
$102,419
12,139
7,194
9,213
70,984
94,597
64,656
23,910
101,729
38,071
16,912
25,228
1,720
$15,158
$44,647
72,550
90,509
27,120
37,214
95,236
60,434
73,032
54,168
63,109
46,803
37,926
$9,086
10,608
63,Z\5
$15,881
9,688
38,236
20,350
8,783
7,444
14,028
26,339
4,102
55,054
4,102
8,299
5,169
9,930
3,094
15,507
6,943
$3,508
2,500
500
1,582
9,012
6,851
6,027
5,718
11,154
4,060
28,220
22,672
6,709
9,441
1,780
2,000
3,993
2,540
1,730
TABLE 16.-—COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
I.—GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE, LEGISLATIVE, AND JUDICIAL—STAFF AGENCIES—Continued
Administrative offices
and boards
Recording and reporting
B>
City nun
CITY
Municipal
clerk
Recording
deeds and
mortgages
General
public
reports
All
other
City engineer and
public
works
All other
Planning and zoning
Planning
Zoning
Personnel administration
Personnel
selection
and administration
Pension
administration
Research and investigation
Research
bureaus
Special
research
projects
Public
officers
associations
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
27
26
29
30
51
$6,123
'
32
33
36
45
46
48
49
51
52
53
55
56
57
$53,980
424
3,079
674
27,814
2,459
68,104
9,000
28,297
63,674
4,825
8,428
49,248
42,076
25,320
29,278
1,252
7,088
10,210
20,951
5,535
111
Grand Rapids, Mich.
8,753
3,141
3,008
6,329
8,676
11,365
32
16,052
14,600
25,076
28,710
56,662
38,674
26,159
1 472
1 383
7,501
4,840
20,561
8,345
4,126
17,610
19,766
17,893
25,257
19,223
14,015
42,399
32,206
2,102
1,180
4,033
'
$283
4,716
8,466
2,558
$8,626
11,242
4,869
4,805
1,565
2,775
4,567
5,458
652
1,896
13,724
1,750
5,318
12,539
157
15,917
2,564
8,953
14,936
9,000
89
Oklahoma City, Okla.
$11,773
34,623
10,400
17,830
4,000
15,193
17,799
10,113
15,644
38
39
40
41
42
43
8,200
3,099
9,716
$17,968
8,742
47,333
63,532
8,020
$6,823
3,664
806
647
$8,665
8,188
22,735
4,546
18,421
8,292
100
3,556
1,778
1,764
593
1,732
52
7,368
17,309
8,234
1,724
4,848
3,833
18,670
15
1,350
2,944
947
5,i72
6,229
1,755
903
2,372
103
5,172
605
184
300
799
150
$9,996
904
9,493
7,600
4,564
1,727
2,739
2,375
1,384
22,485
10,177
75
750
483
38
565
1,229
213
789
1,074
679
16
6,872
40,765
5,021
1,091
15,881
2,162
3,098
16,600
9,578
2,178
3,976
1,889
6,147
3,611
500
2,894
6,355
38
7,274
3,776
286
653
44,112
$967
350
22
3,270
1,462
$1,000
1,140
$480
500
3,000
108
80
58
60
61
6?
64
65
66
67
Scranton
Pa
S a l t Lake C i t y , U t a h
4,572
10,365
17,662
3,602
6,582
Jacksonville, Fla.
627
6,420
2,121
8,485
1,413
25,303
11,972
108,121
23,068
7,890
3,758
43
Kansas C i t y , Kans.
14,495
24
33,040
17,453
9,165
6,818
4,427
fifl
R9
70
71
72
3,753
2,961
3,521
6,828
3,940
331
616
260
15,435
3,600
8,100
37,076
73
74
75
14,709
8,775
20,238
18,381
3,479
441
339
2,000
450
48
14,761
3,301
6,896
13,562
9,947
78
79
80
81
82
Cambridge, Mass.
New B e d f o r d , M a s s .
501
666
7,297
575
47,481
4,406
16,771
7,244
923
30
1,516
348
2,404
1,932
5,610
1,875
385
1,000
9,130
605
16,864
3,467
2,443
115
2,593
2,148
913
1,950
806
755
170
16,751
215
250
747
1,800
557
691
3,849
2,409
3,527
1,825
339
5,093
93
1,093
114
10,248
620
250
4
1,923
1,184
642
496
244
275
2,398
904
583
373
15,380
352
910
3,789
741
440
2,695
2,255
248
70
150
12,700
3,094
15,537
500
496
170
838
4,605
1,545
3,440
5,610
South Bend, I n d . -
83
84
85
86
6,730
49
,
87
88
90
91
92
93
94
11,292
4,543
11,473
10,591
Honolulu, Hawaii 1 /
31,806
1/ Not included in group or grand totals.
2,040
9,472
295
5,822
3,797
16,389
3,707
7,949
18,573
508
4,500
23,211
17,483
14,386
44,320
165
7,205
4,998
7,900
396
10,896
11,979
2,286
25,167
8,239
2,558
16,474
3,738
3,068
9,071
2,322
2,803
7,795
34,055
13,771
2,100
3,281
4,911
251
1,037
2,336
348
124
684
615
402
1,061
2,401
11,123
5,227
1,746
710
12
407
756
1,044
6,574
2,158
3,654
11
39,383
97
920
2,500
514
11,316
6,374
107
600
3,049
835
120
4,999
1,439
940
TABLE 16.—COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL:
I.—GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE, LEGISLATIVE, AND
JUDICIAL—STAFF AGENCIES—Continued
General administrative buildings
City numbe
u
1937—Continued
II.—PUBLIC SAFETY
Community promotion
Police department
CITY
Grand total
All
other
Supervision
Office
buildings
All
other
Advertising
Expositions
All
other
$601,853
$20,908,256
$1,921,793
$763,404
$109,873
$321,490
$180,534
382,109
48,523
171,221
15,249,197
2,908,269
2,750,790
1,777,162
37,593
107,038
418,199
62,780
282,425
61,760
48,113
274,497
11,345
35,648
77,039
16,813
86,682
Supervision
Police
training
General
and
criminal
records
Identification
records
Communication
system
Detention
and
custody
of
prisoners
$330,107,033
$2,707,177
$285,602
$729,743
$815,049
$3,445,801
$1,477,329
223,777,412
35,964,481
70,365,140
1,348,842
433,010
925,325
195,815
47,154
42,633
467,145
76,045
186,553
396,001
131,771
287,277
2,184,115
221,584
1,040,102
721,024
278,222
478,083
$11,232
25,196
$523,376
148,191
466,789
279,672
79,092
144,395
Total
GROUP I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 AND OVER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, Pa.
Los Angeles, Calif.—
$43,220
26,335
6,898
8,983
3,072
4,200
$7,714,036
1,760,430
1,009,706
459,336
730,635
406,786
414,187
$1,046,022
319,386
58,595
80,690
250,104
$1,987
1,578
255,277
9,150
31,032
107,083
794,558
569,040
379,580
201,639
309,679
392,502
1,112
30,000
599
10,752
96,439
$9,554
$22,306
2,263
11,483
4,103
23,631
14,706
34,237
$86,624,288
27,652,974
16,421,179 1
16,153,920
14,349,982
7,590,908
7,816,231
20,000
$203,438
24,733
67,346
157,694
214,870
$6,825
122,202
$61,934
245,188
236,159
55,845
12,180
41,217
36,878
179,700
21,135
51,902
136,723
84,401
151,055
4,064
38,716
36,630
7,340
37,400
3,640
2,164
57,157
13,200
$20,023
198,351
43,881
225,139
St. Louis, Mo.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
San Francisco, Calif.
Buffalo, N. Y.
239,297
22,149
9,118
3,120
13,496
2,221
1,000
31,680
8,710
17,150
88,666
$10,001
64,090
2,238
710
1,886
252
46,768
7,775,889
9,721,080
5,488,168
7,113,864
6,696,530
5,177,130
5,195,269
9,733
17,120
13,320
19,466
129,770
87,431
75,497
58,292
123,045
68,565
114,612
89,965
$2,243
$21,824
18,852
10,201
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.'
New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J .
Kansas C i t y , Mo.—
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.Rochester, N. Y . — •
Jersey City, N. J.-
15,865
19,827
3,100
$269,838
207,698
264,071
543,346
379,864
332,105
81,405
246,505
303,943
$29,361
$13,27??
8,'321
16,000
1,560
:,785
$8,936
$2,769,554
3,275,744
3,036,361
5,913,892
2,378,350
$13,194
27,468
2,938,273
2,919,370
2,513,493
4,390,017
95,496
11,431
37,627
29,880
$4,000
19,358
3,741
6,507
4,445
8,157
$7,770
11,085
4,150
9,630
9,604
18,981
33,728
54,'03
55,921
23,609
76,151
17,167
25,365
66,086
94,566
118,842
Houston, T e x . —
Louisville, Ky.'
Portland, Oreg.'
7,877
1,708,609
1,610,164
2,510,654
16,375
67,846
37,980
7,000
18,198
13,575
18,073
34,967
3,233
43,366
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, O h i o —
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
S t . P a u l , Minn.Blnningham, Ala.
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
$2,400
1,482
2,100
8,980
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.Fort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
—
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.
21,343
San Diego, Calif. Long Beach, Califs
Nashville, T e n n . —
Springfield, Mass.'
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.Des Moines, I o w a —
Scranton, Pa.
26,264
3,000
Salt Lake City, Utah.
Yonkers, N. Y.
Faterson, N. J".
Jacksonville, F l a . —
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, T e n n . —
Kansas City, K a n s . —
Fort Wayne, Ind.
2,540
4,000
1,596
3,480
$1,367,074
1,648,420
2,341,189
2,083,278
1,654,926
1,452,820
1,668,970
1,224,364
$31,131
15,100
10,585
31,283
26,574
17,368
35,977
11,066
41,469
6,325
368,388
8,900
38,150
51,389
44,419
15,755
867,325
1,276,427
2,414,682
808,779
1,301,846
1,623,786
959,116
980,603
16,747
61,040
9,420
29,840
32,976
8,913
8,399
55,096
65,470
27,769
21,983
17,408
67,681
8,943
55,695
1,925,202
1,229,709
714,651
834,578
865,781
1,752,434
766,097
1,5-39,773
5,000
13,550
14,464
4,870
3,600
34,010
1,015,764
1,150,548
1,074,240
1,651,988
616,718
1,280,518
852,470
875,619
33,007
12,960
7,790
40,169
12,215
6,557
10,900
23,594
608,723
1,696,826
1,293,057
1,067,029
1,409,503
981,401
1,020,173
681,671
656,717
544,595
20,862
5,778
3,028
7,565
25,724
19,827
13,702
1,395
12,888
1,677
$43,221
44,304
89,554
146,253
45,948
35,129
124,427
26,752
$23,618
$500
$288
$24,596
15,500
4,000
$7,939
1,414
2,326
5,372
17,477
33,959
55,205
19,068
54,682
13,413
38,845
49,968
15,570
12,431
12,982
28,335
96,081
24,534
20,746
68,074
34,757
26,746
12,809
18,688
5,618
5,723
10,675
7,609
7,403
91
15,257
2,700
17,781
408
397
685
775
1,300
2,443
495
1,015
5,862
1,530
2,096
$13,320
26,982
$18,670
18,521
21,012
19,136
15,010
22,018
5,466
1,400
5,312
1,680
3,360
9,176
178
1,680
6,141
13,017
11,760
19,172
2,000
1,186
18,075
2,750
4,360
7,355
2,271
6,598
3,102
4,462
9,000
2,025
1,200
10,920
6,180
9,479
10,920
576
186
2,280
2,380
6,611
39,800
381
2,350
1,872
2,350
6,808
4,632
322
800
$14,822
23,757
13,311
17,709
27,897
12,886
40,542
16,624
$6,897
20,460
39,132
5,388
13,011
17,255
37,281
5,160
10,093
29,892
20,675
13,851
2,061
7,672
1,406
24,105
24,680
11,938
24,540
8,040
18,907
112,108
18,456
9,464
9,522
6,978
7,500
1,882
20,834
6,552
3,159
11,497
586
20,274
6,295
17,580
1,699
2,934
1,702
11,016
37,531
46,691
7,506
7,260
31,190
10,050
44,050
2,340
18,536
20,116
16,143
49,528
608
12,663
7,564
26,293
3,357
2,976
7,271
3,627
2,437
787
18,264
2,663
5,362
2,222
TABLE. 16.—COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
I.—GENERAL ADLIINISTRATIVE, LEGISLATIVE, AND
JUDICIAL—STAFF AGENCIES—Continued
City numbe
General administrative buildings
II.—PUBLIC SAFETY
Community promotion
Police department
CITY
Supervision
Office
buildings
All
other
Advertising
Ezpositions
All
other
All
other
Total
Supervision
General
and
criminal
records
Detention
and
custody
of
prisoners
Identification
records
Communication
system
$622
2,200
452
960
4,260
295
$6,204
4,906
2,700
6,780
7,535
6,998
1,608
24,336
8,415
28,202
1,680
10,704
6,685
257
4,827
842
2,823
3,656
500
398
9,624
2,400
3,145
9,984
15,045
26,178
2,550
15,046
19,431
8,914
1,296
1,135
1,014
1,500
Police
training
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
69
70
71
72
73
74
Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J.
75
76
77
78
79
Cambridge, Mass.
10,412
Knorville, Tenn.
1,500
1,920
Fall River, Mass.
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
$506
1,642
2,200
3,610
Somerville, Mass.
9,184
2,700
2,457
8,522
$516
$58,923
17,610
19,456
10,274
37,435
25,40C
44,946
62,141
25,458
15,130
27,855
7,544
32,819
9,302
15,875
9,175
30,474
1/ Not included in group or grand t o t a l s .
$3,600
5,790
15,131
6,120
8,632
8,668
1,065,406
796,989
448,727
650,705
648,568
4,500
15,841
11,252
6,528
18,302
564,677
718,563
1,056,115
658,055
478,381
4,777
19,251
12,918
6,544
21,554
683,747
439,686
852,397
410,402
650,338
6,224
7,872
8,013
3,885
773
11,061
3,400
9,905
2,201
917,535
880,621
657,389
1,007,032
744,650
731
962,717
$100
1,454
$2,036
1,369
29,366
1,230
45,000
1,609
1,430
46,914
10,494
24,165
3i543
13,105
17,813
36,014
34,978
40,537
36,353
$801,712
581,155
1,016,973
525,769
614,441
715,717
$223
158,347
i.3,498
4,237
127
9,815
92
5,930
71
8,984
4,959
4,999
1
14,233
$50
$500
2,040
11,460
255
799
2,496
3,578
4,292
300
2,000
4,814
2,000
4,654
2,738
$6,033
8,116
978
15,204
6,553
10,631
1,960
1,487
1,097
10,797
2,056
15,536
29,739
12,132
14,628
5,013
847
1,499
TABLE 16.—COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
II.—PUBLIC SAFETY—Continued
Fire department
Police department—Continued
Criminal
investigation
Uniformed
patrol
Vice and
mo-al
control
Crime
prevention
(juveniles )
$301,245
$9,751,107
#72,894,978
$731,208
30,353
170,908
99,984
5,459,091
1,653,618
2,638,398
47,154,799
7,645,768
18,094,411
416,249
41,299
273,660
Motor
vehicle
inspection
Grand total
Group I
Group II
Group III
Traffic
control
Special
detail
services
Undistributed
$472,168
$14,595,654
$402,631
$5,106,330 $78,995,767 11,860,378
358,830
32,031
81,307
9,309,859
1,638,378
3,647,417
94,483
88,817
219,331
2,473,501
950,643
1,682,186
69,637,290
5,759,719
3,598,758
Supervision
Training
schools
Communication
system
Fire prevention
Hydrant
and water
service
$165,764 83,182,683 |$3,007,978 i3,845,202
492,126
343,417
1,024,835
100,026
26,019
39,719
$85,596
47,244
27,214
22,780
$13,978
5,390
6,213
37,238
43,639
16,908
59,840
40,506
34,075
48,111
2,700
1,818,378
376,909
987,396
2,543,273
204,529
260,176
1,334,405
447,976
2,062,821
$511,184 ftl,427,330
118,278
309,999
27,600
94,934
43,311
147,159
541,240
73,275
87,968
68,527
73,416
$131,966
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
$66,090
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.'
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.1
Washington, D. C Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N . Y.
$2,760
$799,871
1,106,350
1,485,437
$14,812,811
8,489,891
6,928,358
1,764,528
$186,376
644,000
3,068,574
8,860
298,270
232,956
419,643
237,716
3,816,839
29,712
234,848
1,871,778
2,449,590
2,198,263
1,754,167
9,800
78,509
47,399
20,289
45,104
268,790
14,150
$1,761,646
1,437,613
980,172
1,932,554
3,876
516,170
640,329
204,034
814,650
386,031
391,785
240,999
$2,823
75,749
3,274
7,487
5,150
$305,569 856,497,189
1,094,446
178,758
467,748
144,698
278,235
142,390
176,188
4,323,671
6,891
502,164
434,473
120,966
141,726
129,715
198,816
2,355,490
20,503
89,765
18,060
10,100
7,940
4,620
12,754
161,181
87,431
116,764
36,808
60,427
49,967
147,888
1,965
47,070
53,360
61,815
206,898
736,387
40,175
112,005
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.Rochester, N. Y . —
$29,355
$27,272
$14,316
91,121
567,055
120,288
126,398
162,767
153,115
2,544,717
985,425
795,415
608,638
$12,785
7,553
3,263
$53,714
15,607
39,849
81,820
80,054
17,873
31,310
179,665
$59,518
7,110
210
$74,735
$1,210,768
1,360,603
1,434,952
207,724
1,159,797
9,400
43,533
99,479
50,487
$35,640
$42,250
$13,599
34,891
16,265
65,156
18,323
39,068
$4,000
687
6,004
3,100
85,965
34,506
23,326
21,917
45,103
30,010
15,029
4,813
2,618
22,944
$48,000
368,966
TABLE 1 6 . —COS J PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL:
1937—Continued
II.—PUBLIC SAFETY—Continued
Police department—Continued
City numbe
u
CITY
Motor
vehicle
inspection
Criminal
investigation
Uniformed
patrol
Vice and
moral
control
Crime
prevention
(juveniles)
Traffic
control
Fire department
Special
detail
services
All other
Undistributed
Supervision
Training
schools
cation
system
Fire prevention
Hydrant
and water
service
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000—Continued
Jersey City, N.
Houston, Tex.
L o u i s v i l l e , Ky.Portland, Oreg.-
$2,100
$244,693
70,327
88,499
57,364
$28,768
$1,563,231
424,159
696,911
$20,961
$600,458
179,735
219,978
138,315
$10,150
$418,337
19,145
37,203
$479,663
87,692
4,727
$58,680
14,074
35,856
47,505
861
8,238
$22,398
34,285
24,699
42,460
$2,820
$14,861
39,637
39,328
5,373
8,595
12,522
26,271
23,520
$3,129
$30,116
24,631
1,271
37,457
$247
30,763
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, O h i o —
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.'
Fort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.
San Diego, C a l i f . —
Long Beach, Calif.-
$3,600
194
11,427
17,739
111,460
138,132
74,388
$566,894
529,153
602,107
423,111
798,757
153,7vio
368,601
248,040
55,781
84,791
55,800
88,620
121,260
40,920
55,315
71,645
254,396
625,512
18,180
216,034
292,807
301,200
214,807
431,300
58,750
22,691
21,842
303,785
217,648
271,642
$91,620
124,605
126,540
42,444
102,080
689,436
232,688
194,719
$20,220
7,656
$1,800
11,760
36,080
11,220
4,422
2,850
3,360
3,840
26,928
20,022
3,720
5,600
6,527
34,100
22,072
12,324
$35,697
95,990
152,510
124,315
9,985
180,606
85,555
72,691
46,658
70,083
200,332
156,343
78,758
103,508
28,119
134,205
97,824
126,114
80,423
16,401
5,965
112,128
8,954
8,602
72,143
107,756
$20,418
250
35,643
$20,724
46,068
2,100
76,128
19,683
4,920
3,120
11,160
47,779
115,472
61,972
56,606
46,147
$5,350
275,280
16,959
420,524
17,678
2,787
7,671
37,245
51,928
$8,433
40,730
44,852
55,745
11,567
11,093
48,855
16,220
24,264
44,178
25,536
34,155
44,822
27,651
12,785
3,568
1,560
2,040
6,720
166,017
8,737
29,702
13,yi9
70,587
92,358
5,653
2,612
2,400
45,547
29,279
24,418
2i,liS4
371,751
391,299
13,544
10,650
13,805
5,633
3,600
4,812
12,967
16,980
19,268
2,850
7,997
20,600
39,354
8,900
24,166
35,442
13,783
5,452
25,006
26,825
13,157
11,511
18,694
38,137
12,331
28,766
16,959
12,960
$1,013
$2,520
20,641
176,857
100,935
16,664
14,040
5,000
88,786
6,782
4,529
7,200
8,970
7,365
7,662
9,280
3,057
145,800
140,835
10,260
250
5,106
33,450
415
13,974
5,047
11,509
10,500
64,636
2,675
2,400
44,940
52,458
308
81,971
70,560
24,424
60,516
Nashville, Term.
Springfield, M a s s . —
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.
Des Moines, I o w a — —
Soranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N . Y .
Peterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, F l a . —
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, T e n n . —
Kansas City, Kans.
Fort Wayne, I n d . —
Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J . —
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.
Cambridge, Mass.
New Bedford, M a s s . —
Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, Tenn.
Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.
8,312
5,523
72,850
44,000
42,672
28,687
295,501
422,319
214,929
420,258
183,443
205,398
175,753
667,925
591,142
278,511
511,970
270,144
288,871
255,545
16,860
115,116
5,008
23,244
4,070
63,325
27,876
40,614
346,034
203,572
276,800
87,335
153,486
6,498
133,709
10,508
4,800
5,184
3,960
461,
335,
215,
25,051
38,688
180,
161,
Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.Tampa, Fla.
Somerville, Mass.
38,754
51,662
35,088
11,871
130,
183,
146,
140,
312,
98,
332,
EL Paso, T e x . — —
Evansville, Ind.Lynn, M a s s . —
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.Lowell, Mass.
34,845
86,
27,630
33,000
21,032
26,905
246,
241
165,
"72,
35,987
Honolulu, Hawaii l/-
1/ Not included in group or grand t o t a l s .
76,480
116,014
12,981
8,988
11,340
63,048
8,963
18,766
1,440
4,600
9,160
7,047
130,569
57,452
77,258
13,781
48,827
12,506
39,345
25,387
25,893
12,000
14,000
1,000
48,735
616
5,415
15,638
29,240
50,419
35,963
14,011
12,312
32,390
104,228
19,417
32,287
38,462
2,077
22,740
817
52,870
26,652
1,607
5,202
32,820
8,742
154
26,950
4,142
19,130
18,704
16,199
136,857
48,472
41,131
3,710
10,513
7,032
88,060
3,270
32,791
1,908
17,584
15,362
4,034
10,650
6,200
6,648
17.76P
2,710
28,530
32,600
28,417
43,938
4,947
4,199
23,411
314
31,128
82,510
50,506
8,046
546
223,953
556
9,413
9,759
21,055
316,700
280,666
4,410
18,876
2,022
4,128
19,623
13,337
12,698
12,980
10,505
32,710
14,938
9,622
4,235
18,774
7,486
62,756
4,849
19,305
271,413
41,509
1,800
593,860
17,220
34,681
9,074
7,470
18,653
13,639
6,341
5,188
3,028
7,790
25,287
22,416
5,780
2,280
24,000
32,233
3,474
1,419
11,318
8,062
14,428
4,500
11,400
2,484
7,752
2,188
220,379
62,308
18,040
30,808
2,350
2,380
10,037
26,787
21,183
21,965
101,266
45,900
14,250
5,472
68,679
73,949
1,627
3,600
10,860
7,300
8,400
5,356
3,770
13,225
8,821
13,995
10,080
1,563
2,292
11,912
4,500
7,209
4,010
10,165
31,732
1,166
16,336
167
8,113
9,577
21,493
9,984
31,363
21,849
11,040
13,503
11,363
12,045
13,636
12,888
10,781
6,810
773
2,900
15,497
12,485
42,496
2,040
51,593
54,662
1,964
6,076
1,342
1,143
18,176
601
619
28,085
1,075
10,620
27,879
1,800
1,720
4,607
70,386
65,223
78,000
53,776
41,967
151
14,599
2,100
40,372
12,700
3,992
2,913
76,430
20,000
141,100
20,000
TABLE 16.—COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL: 1937—Continued
II.—PUBLIC SAFETY'—Continued
u
,0
Protective inspection
Fire department—Continued
CITY
1
City
Fire fighting force
Engine service
Truck service
Fireboat
service
Salvage Volunteer
service service
$27,455,664
$11,255,687
$926,745
$38,247
$152,180
14,950,372
3,082,543
9,422,749
6,604,592
1,292,047
3,359,048
677,195
184,409
65,141
21,531
16,716
7,600
6,600
137,980
Supervision
Building
inspection
Plumbing
inspection
Electrical
inspection
Gas
inspection
$63,939,903
$1,188,615
$3,190,146
$1,220,156
$1,598,126
$86,565
40,889,676
7,915,301
15,134,926
1,000,184
58,658
129,773
2,197,936
333,462
658,748
660,533
209,620
350,003
994,003
185,719
418,404
49,382
18,049
19,134
$623,862
71,527
$876,048
255,262
94,105
116,629
244,734
75,278
51,604
$178,228
74,576
27,298
54,001
119,738
12,840
17,520
$29,246
399,479
20,666
64,727
138,954
22,680
32,642
56,113
67,839
97,424
49,022
120,004
44,000
49,874
22,713
28,000
32,718
41,746
28,900
22,255
36,989
97,412
15,680
46,845
54,483
34,200
$38,940
9,958
46,420
80,052
17,656
28,515
10,800
11,331
39,145
$33,124
26,146
9,709
26,104
12,097
11,461
3,854
12,310
39,012
All other
Undistributed
$956,396
$5,277,586
776,855
35,731
143,810
2,800,630
848,676
1,628,280
Rescue
squads
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, Pa.-Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$7,600
$4,369,904
2,347,955
$1,789,426
934,857
$463,925
39,330
$58,877
131,212
19,280
597,120
1,392,000
826,000
2,070,473
1,268,678
1,068,618
1,249,411
770,759
681,462
377,952
627,016
976
105,000
74,000
151,676
58,656
22,290
49,590
51,190
57,250
128,525
42,273
$325,278
482
488,876
521,185
2,738
3,426
199,559
775,149
88,465
199,973
144,378
51,121
$23,650,357
602,449
126,398
4,122,090
4,574,720
2,754,643
43,291
46,476
44,015
2,993,367
122,603
1,897,836
511
44,702
46,084
80,456
2,114
6,000
36,359
GROUP I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 5 0 0 , 0 0 0
$13,063
35,972
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
$12,785
$705,943
607,171
572,000
$294,845
312,557
375,200
97,095
$6,600
$23,132
7,216
146,213
81,692
44,687
98,551
102,949
287,163
$1,128,600
1,153,866
1,291,964
1,790,595
733,707
75,790
146,683
850,771
$13,080
13,001
8,491
16,967
$16,058
28,506
53,435
10,461
14,773
6,300
1,390
$10,045
6,614
1,390
Houston, Tex.-Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.-
734,806
420,972
776,457
118,627
190,818
9,177
29,209
$21,531
14,220
8,913
27,512
14,220
4,379
17,204
9,484
25,637
23,515
13,975
$5,314
8,045
23,138
6,722
10,274
$7,351
7,453
18,215
12,805
20,777
12,200
11,598
11,805
8,981
12,650
9,150
5,932
12,029
2,541
5,392
9,150
5,809
10,661
3,999
6,530
33,621
6,900
11,984
14,998
13,142
15,678
5,965
6,687
6,827
7,619
6,552
10,800
5,550
9,367
4,050
12,142
18,933
5,386
4,939
6,244
5,792
4,505
2,815
2,041
7,471
4,322
10,647
10,894
2,759
12,609
7,509
1,968
3,200
19,392
7,556
6,956
10,876
20,531
14,335
7,980
5,210
3,124
9,642
3,869
9,000
7,429
2,897
11,873
4,842
5,532
1,776
32,308
3,707
5,297
11,604
5,929
4,265
4,614
2,201
5,607
4,381
2,845
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, OhioToledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.—
A t l a n t a , Ga.
$34,860
$574,055
$186,210
35,660
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Mlnn.Birmingham, Ala.
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.--
383,780
131,491
Providence, R. I.San Antonio, Tex.Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y . —
Dayton, Ohio
259,446
264,916
459,599
232,540
43,850
149,246
220,857
99,420
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.Fort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.-San Diego, Calif.Long Beach, Calif..
Nashville, T e n n . —
Springfield, Mass.
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkera, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
37,487
$595,843
656,391
124,213
838,717
646,925
4,777
9,967
10,039
43,957
52,883
697,582
13,860
364,479
20,389
408,731
157,096
143,075
45,146
13,725
100,811
58,260
61,862
37,967
8,855
38,429
2,062
72,217
21,632
$15,000
358,845
36,437
328,475
365,696
365,280
274,686
44,162
48,720
117,120
$9,048
73,320
383,827
1,003
151,000
31,400
98,705
21,700
15,045
38,448
21,850
18,975
219,369
322,800
27,701
275,781
236,400
222,998
23,370
1,586
24,333
23,162
23,392
6,488
118,000
146,880
94,606
4,912
3,272
12,274
52,028
60,317
812,124
369,372
429,854
114,849
35,401
16,296
26,544
6,893
$6,442
3,778
12,675
5,100
319,262
559,939
5,981
6,190
8,360
2,717
5,757
6,403
6,557
758,036
323,288
446,729
4,554
12,928
19,566
518,983
405,894
9,162
5,076
12,000
14,445
28,123
13,907
6,662
6,297
10,846
6,546
4,269
4,348
2,775
1,012
4,703
2,201
10,093
8,932
2,400
9,810
16,062
3,938
525
$1,560
TABLE 16.—COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
I I . — PUBLIC SAFETY—Continued
Protective inspection
Fire department—Continued
fl>
CITY
City
1
Fire fighting force
Engine service
Truck service
Fireboat
service
Salvage Volunteer
service service
Rescue
squads
All other
Undistributed
Supervision
Building
inspection
Plumbing
inspection
Electrical
inspection
Gas
inspection
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
$204,744
$62,340
155,764
62,451
$14,158
31,142
991
34,316
12,535
4,797
$2,250
3,127
2,095
4,157
4,500
3,870
2,640
2,804
2,442
2,320
11,400
4,265
4,471
2,169
6,210
5,210
32,223
4,430
1,348
9,629
4,314
4,449
2,026
3,954
3,000
2,297
20,475
3,345
1,808
3,007
366,453
2,950
4,695
5,544
5,200
4,986
5,745
9,108
6 849
3^868
2,551
1,198
1,286
4,100
2,485
2,591
2,004
3 763
3,'707
325,372
22,135
$325,398
205,828
270,149
307,639
410,188
182,165
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
7,073
8,561
36,261
28,624
$200
122,780
107,512
227,793
221,703
178,489
77,654
44,352
74,069
279,709
122,115
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
10,568
215,791
23e,312
VJaterbury, Conn.
50,644
44,058
11,315
195,810
100,500
$23,480
44,780
3,269
30,296
12,635
26,724
25,094
10,507
12,922
14,356
28,201
14,424
94
550
1/ Not included in group or grand t o t a l s .
$4,740
295,714
285,761
447,064
8,620
270,285
1,558
278,975
4,280
353
3.6,561
151,131
2,492
382,549
305,190
478,441
38,188
277,992
2,720
1,967
$2,972
5,478
6,928
3,348
6,771
2,423
6,779
$3,026
2,094
1,836
8,281
2,640
6,707
4,936
9,672
$2,600
10,285
2,026
4,498
3,105
16,580
3,351
1,546
500
2,886
22,359
2,581
4,200
8,000
3,009
6 849
3^949
500
1,198
TABLE 16.—COST PAYlvIENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL:
1937—Continued
II.—PUBLIC SAFETY—Continued
Other p r o t e c t i o n
P r o t e c t i v e inspection—Continued
Boiler
inspection
Grand total-
Group I
Group I I —
Group III-
Elevator
inspection
Weights and
measures
M i l i t i a and
armories
Examinat i o n of
engineers
and
plumbers
Protect i o n to
animals
Morgue
Investigation of
causes of
death
$276,310
$520,542
$1,105,020
$570,464
$1,251,218
$120,375
$28,302
$774,168
$266,620
$926,512
211,743
26,324
38,243
461,436
23,808
35,298
644,039
165,423
295,558
401,113
109,102
60,249
1,144,984
42,879
63,355
102,851
5,633
11,891
5,867
2,060
20,375
372,085
173,501
228,582
208,793
51,154
6,673
833,805
89,346
3,361
$69,925
16,081
13,205
27,220
$164,731
182,462
66,655
66,164
65,095
10,168
38,740
Flood
control
$1,214,294
250,990
457,042
285,366
995,143
58,046
161,105
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.'
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.'
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$16,839
75,719
21,598
24,652
20,519
20,260
3,873
4,757
3,125
3,470
10,172
6,759
$238,674
61,725
36,823
22,236
12,3*5
17,760
20,260
$48,355
87,088
182,619
46,148
43,567
18,776
29,901
11,227
31,206
4,400
18,190
48,936
19,962
22,547
30,482
23,189
24,279
4,800
$630
236,074
$1,007,641
20,499
57 ,475
22 851
4 ,920
21,661
29,249
14 186
22 727
20 236
4,180
$9
57,216
1,450
14,996
15,656
14,277
42,582
84
1,520
1,448
2,220
3,680
675
4,521
9,899
$36,867
6,700
81,120
102,969
52,436
11,391
18,500
4,500
12,600
18,000
1,773
8,313
16,916
16,380
12,982
7,071
8,081
12,300
9,169
3,890
12,489
*>240,542
15,939
45,981
109,111
47,678
$158,503
67,324
54,533
159,270
212,088
56,222
4,591
1,119
2,291
9,166
985
222,454
16,118
30,479
21,081
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.New Orleans, L a . — •
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J.
Kan3as City, M o . —
S e a t t l e , Wash.
I n d i a n a p o l i s , Ind.Rochester, N. Y . —
$4,440
$10,005
5,021
9,474
47,018
7,877
10,138
7,987
25,250
$8,132
7,357
3,912
2,200
4,706
2,080
3,600
$22,651
8,879
27,551
15,461
2,172
1,994
$1,975
$216
380
360
2,709
$7,783
9,827
32,818
7,500
1,576
25,507
8,881
19,499
1,801
6,332
$11,521
18,035
14,173
$416,803
11,942
18,611
13,082
8,913
8,585
8,580
6,111
$3,716
4,000
1,477
15,800
15,746
10,253
2,730
TABLE 16.—-COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL:
1937—Continued
II.—PUBLIC SAFETY—Continued
Protective
Boiler
inspection
Other p r o t e c t i o n
inspection—Continued
Elevator
inspection
Weights and
measures
M i l i t i a and
armories
Examinat i o n of
engineers
and
plumbers
Protect i o n to
animals
Morgue
Investigation of
causes of
death
Flood
control
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000—Continued
Jersey City, N.
Houston, T e x . —
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
$2,520
2,203
$3,961
$27,462
9,197
5,522
5,493
$30,359
$3,877
2,475
16,831
17,721
$8,000
18,534
8,758
24,818
$168
$8,335
11,204
$4,324
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPUIATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, O h i o Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.'
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond. Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids. Mich.Fort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.
San Diego, C a l i f . —
$5,272
5,025
$4,603
$4,200
$700
3,300
2,035
6,100
$2,969
97
639
$1,560
$1,200
2,000
11,075
1,140
$8,886
1,200
8,039
2,400
4,934
8,786
$6,673
$10,059
2 509
36 753
10 188
1,339
2,178
2,178
1,020
5,896
4,311
6,684
7,676
3,100
3,782
11,200
3,948
26,077
14,476
3,640
4,471
2,604
6,593
2,473
12,920
1,263
3,735
2,138
1,583
1,224
394
127
799
5,213
2,611
9,989
1 369
2 170
12 729
12,182
10,328
3,480
13,058
9,000
5,846
1,300
6,503
7,394
1,284
5,459
2,850
2,675
4,519
2,060
8,470
2,398
913
77,418
367
463
543
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
I T
V.
O
<-
I
< <•
2,572
3,000
110
4,800
14,231
2,163
1,193
2,163
'* *
•p6? ellp "
18
2,015
4,292
6,363
2,423
3,894
2,227
3,577
2,584
2,507
1,790
2,635
1,649
1,966
450
5,720
2,850
1,882
3,600
3,887
1,808
3,644
4,978
4,290
1,079
2,477
2,300
4,041
5,730
10,285
8,064
1,792
1,620
611
1,607
2,054
4,122
4,515
1,745
1,500
7,200
1,491
1,400
9,622
3,555
T
n
T
iit'
1,945
2,768
8,332
2,535
253
80
1,071
14,434
2,917
5,000
5,829
1,120
61
1,015
86
100
700
1,294
2,021
735
1,500
2,700
644
1,600
395
336
625
608
1,684
3,505
8,018
5,507
150
2,600
4,847
9,861
3,661
2,000
3,088
80
5,264
22,298
1,460
16,427
430
32,477
1,696
2,000
4,082
263
3,299
1,800
9,177
303
2,497
620
2,481
975
110
1,483
515
2,050
987
3,356
3,788
40,576
15
715
1,406
3,400
265
3,ioe
5
923
1,747
2,572
2,092
1,320
2,478
2,056
1,745
1,388
2,040
5,377
400
3,887
20,517
1,256
4,522
1/ Not included in group or grand totals.
2,509
675
3,010
7,501
4,000
2,004
9,896
5,768
9,769
813
108
1,700
_,
1,150
4,303
2,896
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
828
2,824
1,983
110
100
TABLE 16.—COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL: 1937—-Continued
III.—HIGHWAYS
Roadway8
Supervision
Grand total-
Group I
Group I I —
Group III-
Paved
streets
Unpaved
streets
$106,242,397
$2,607,431
$31,507,760
$6,756,903
65,361,537
15,792,460
25,088,400
1,787,462
182,633
637,336
19,347,131
4,076,648
8,083,981
3,085,509
1,208,011
2,463,383
3,218
30,300
59,155
Sidewalks
and
crosswalks
Culverts
$678,835
$95,063
210,940
158,277
309,618
Snow and
ice
removal
Undistributed
Street
lighting
Bridges,
viaducts,
and grade
separations
Waterways
12,593,615 $17,159,056 $33,689,230 $9,275,215 B285.117 6491,835 £1,009,664
1,544,199
513,681
535,735
10,925,188
3,371,638
2,862,230
20,258,074
4,842,359
8,588,797
$6,890,870
751,964
$6,810,798 |$3,145,904
2,786,004 1,823,685
79,916
145,069
928,815
133,677
1,931,011
34,475
755,355
212,414
973,840
373,193
222,165
224,346
45,324
7,406,758
809,960
1,058,497
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . — •
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.—
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
$22,730,107
10,094,557
1,495,991
4,233,011
4,680,385
3,765,689
2,017,718
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.—
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif
Washington, D. C
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
3,148,456
2,927,307
2,936,537
1,207,156
1,768,197
2,211,746
2,144,680
$815,258
146,058
62,616
271,308
40,272
11,344
$4,047,729
4,554,840
500,074
1,985,691
477,464
1,088,894
622,099
7,671
21,122
175,853
170,689
65,271
1,815,362
1.199.R01
1,027,558
364,848
268,720
726,757
667,294
$24,181
182,841
705,158
,658,659
48,662
$14,843
1,275
13,722
5,400
4,187
461,821
$3,218
40,942
18,586
31,554
75,828
8,790
$7,781
5,932
$1,019,548
3,107
22,348
78,018
4,274
56,835
10,200
396,380
30,206
433,004
1,546,420
720,867
25,168
1,025
100,071
29,213
1,327,194
982,206
769,479
712,610
738,442
580,510
881,894
496,416
304,460
60,635
75,213
434,120
167,497
$74,516
1,079,895
$374,583
332,112
$88,071
173,300
396,996
564,185
375,000
362,209
841,729
328,925
49^511
3,873
128,437
19,382
29,701
39,299
18,750
1,698
7,503
22,053
299,865
$78,360
8,631
$7,963
224,362
52,792
84,800
6,774
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, M i n n . —
New Orleans, La.
Cincinnati, Ohio
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, Mo.
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, I n d . —
Rochester, N. Y.
Jersey City, N. J.—-\
$1,735,810 1
1,583 423
1,560 763
954 752
1,375 738
2,250 530
1,001 277
1,566 403
974 665 |J
$349,680
$2,701
11,562
75,941
968,883
474,165
307
347,019
396,553
527,823
$22,547
$62,031
13,069
6,921
4,394
64,580
31,753
13,050
26,072
$153,556
18,543
7,138
26,702
230,881
2,585
788,974
1,090,903
195,037
$250
223,728
368
Houston, T e x . —
Louisville, Ky.Portland, Oreg.-
1,090,223
681,187
1,011,683
18,997
34,997
8,551
283 587
337 330
143 503
1,920
1,767
1,694
1,365
72,911
50,218
143,574
270,498
291,412
70,007
1,183
189,515
$7,261
215,467
260,488
230,782
152,363
216,102
100,569
$130,487
1,000
46,159
> III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, O h i o Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.'
$558,875
673,115
575,856
748,324
458,121
301,700
525,565
249,750
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Term.
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla..
739,188
525,141
675,824
315,932
416,637
758,291
505,887
249,344
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.Fort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.
987,465
469,848
312,014
198,229
250,634
429,810
368,474
362,955
San Diego, Calif.Long Beach, Calif..
Nashville, T e n n . —
Springfield, Mass.Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.—
Des Moines, I o w a —
Scranton, Pa.
349,247
487,646
196,5e9
480,510
238,719
846,242
317,153
313,924
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, F l a . —
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.——
Kansas City, K a n s . —
413,932
439,126
191,571
532,640
305,645
133,806
284,567
243,096
178,718
£6,060
72 688
11 486
39 211
17,364
3,483
138,026
49,118
4,170
164,487
276,681
372,212
129,372
$12,175
31,723
20,190
104,139
100,499
81,143
145,573
86,937
$18,474
71
124,603
129,623
13,715
21,786
4,318
14,358
9,167
1,949
20,938
236,929
192,370
43,057
347,737
79,823
9,592
14,220
139,566
9,200
11,818
5,364
1,500
3,000
6,439
40,706
173,789
203,490
3,165
39,601
14,337
91,214
30,615
39,420
11,173
3,000
7,369
18,663
114,464
1,363
2,496
2,418
4,612
991
68,501
79,494
2,675
10,491
14,604
20,225
585
11,080
6,559
13,139
2,678
3,333
17,768
1,580
5,590
7,305
10,115
1,215
26,774
9,953
18,947
78,133
15,759
21,188
5,055
3,955
4,257
17,783
2,397
3,272
17,032
5,026
6,978
37,574
12,711
3,587
13,502
1,340
1,065
1,930
24,499
1,907
18,271
11,727
2,627
21,937
550
480
$185
1,498
16
71,223
1,425
$239,854
6,317
76,506
92,277
210,031
106,039
137,636
111,912
74,942
66,471
60,944
$2,136
4,421
$4,985
426
18,5e2
30,650
325,626
13,127
18,359
450
37,185
126,920
72,526
173,631
180,840
259,794
85,309
230,019
305,545
128,578
74,976
20,942
17,890
38,202
1,042
1,480
3,582
27,213
795
3,525
261,361
100,270
121,780
59,531
81,225
186,681
107,827
159,816
6,075
1,340
86,416
166,807
152,093
63,624
262,133
69,391
135,959
142,028
90,751
6,490
19,254
585
8,764
1,090
99,017
30,613
112,264
146,963
197,455
104,107
142,657
135,975
62,367
141,607
83,584
80,010
2,972
16,715
1,032
235
9,183
16,225
18,049
4,332
124,363
255
26
2,116
7,800
7,961
16,932
5,244
12,930
2,363
12,780
718
TABLE 16.—COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
III.—HIGHWAYS
u
City num
JO
Roadways
CITY
Total
Supervision
Paved
streets
Unpaved
streets
Alleys
Sidewalks
and
crosswalks
Culverts
Snow and
ice
removal
Undistributed
Street
lighting
Bridges,
viaducts,
and grade
separations
Waterways
Tunnels
All other
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
Elizabeth, N. J.
Fall River, Mass.
Cambridge, Mass.
New Bedford, Mass.
16,423
13,094
$59,061
54,042
65,863
133,752
16,067
84,530
311,695
361,390
191,421
226,815
242,423
277,613
8,575
4,250
15,697
168,329
125,927
16,543
16,938
5,515
23,545
22,344
33,718
49,077
61,659
149,866
293,169
267,756
85,319
225,564
Wilmington, Del.
Somerville, Mass.
267,861
355,500
245,041 |
1,138,082
90
91
92
93
'"
$7,000
2,700
14,365
225,690
201,124
438,726
136,901
339,603
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
$99,119
191,123
227,858
236,930
127,674
296,386
317,641 1
Lowell. Mass.
Honolulu, Hawaii
l/—
758,993
1/ Not included in group or grand t o t a l s .
12,958
6,633
6,180
11,815
1,316
6,500
7,158
57,689
58,115
26,821
101,046
53,996
138,641
49,886
65,392
410
7,388
$33,058
$165
$7,470
5,416
15,851
53,090
4,572
$372
$2,124
481
12,733
20,659
$115,893
119,411
99,496
58,132
95,496
35,333
136,046
39,848
37,366
117,263
129,590
103,991
88,919
97,644
104,647
$10,479
632 1
590
8,422
1,850
2,116
1,664
590
73,797
33,147
1,010
58,582
464
18,888
813
$10,000
1,977
5,077
21,000
3,581
1,724
19,699
3,015
5,341
75,896
40,753
212
19,175
17,710
145,242
24,437
136,388
66,589
159,605
52,143
460,994
171,900
352
1,079
1,082
388,361
59 479
18
4,968
25,277
74,906
44.384
4,771
89,622
229,328
82,905
109,470
97,962
143,545
83,381
52,178
82,676
5,666
1,000
454
7,664
$6,500
$374
5
705
71,189
817
30,434
4,382
25,771
12,075
108
4,013
2,057
29,963
72,483
13,251
1,500
3,623
2,018
172
39,558
1,868
17,654
19,830
13,036
170,283
144,664
74,784
110,491
109,300
130
4,623
29,295
16,684
31,652
653,365
99,188
705
277
1
419
600
5,383
TABLE 16.—COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL:
1937—Continued
IV. —SANITATION AND WASTE REMOVAL
Sewers and sewage
disposal
Supervision
Grand total-
Group I
Group I I —
Group III-
Sewer system
Street sanitation
Sewage
treatment
and
disposal
Street
cleaning
All
other
Waste disposal
Waste collection
Garbage
Other waste
Other
waste
Garbage
$99,947,445
$786,070
113,340,662
$5,101,680
#32,946,667
$456,567
#18,148,868
$3,765,178
$14,596,033
$4,036,646
$209,663
$4,614,449
69,827,555
10,634,953
19,484,937
638,162
15,765
132,143
8,345,316
1,841,356
3,153,990
3,064,072
408,784
1,628,824
25,581,209
2,562,430
4,803,028
216,072
22,452
218,043
8,950,168
3,634,113
5,564,587
1,359,779
740,962
1,664,431
13,839,148
272,328
484,557
2,396,990
577,212
1,062,444
60,926
48,912
99,825
4,411,948
99,431
103,070
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION 0? 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 1 1 1 . —
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, M o . — — —
$32,147,485
9,516,542
3,580,165
4,914,577
1,970,615
1,982,600
886,860
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
2,566,658
3,020,513
1,753,415
895,455
1,826,921
2,990,474
1,775,275
$555,595
9,536
2,272
41,067
14,723
14,969
$2,863,017
1,404,515
234,812
676,775
327,136
183,827
261,711
478,120
703,451
114,770
319,331
402,318
279,642
95,891
$319,611
1,321,471
111,273
69,426
198,398
7,482
51,525
951,928
32,956
$14,323,599
2,580,861
1,143,918
2,828,958
608,795
403,385
309,422
612,324
608,991
400,124
548,919
448,418
393,523
369,972
$3,708,499
$10,377,164
$52,679
$3,248,237
264,442
1,038,069
579,095
374,625
224,363
1,518,757
212,719
403,108
1,021,806
150,130
1,023,295
117,333
257,462
275,200
493,444
1,054,385
$807,944
150,679
297,362
81,131
75,526
38,160
374,625
22,769
334,268
54,925
$112,348
754,941
492,490
70,233
136,234
147,951
$161,013
$75,491
10,305
120,149
$12,470
165,277
48,456
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.•
New Orleans, La.—
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J .
Kansas City, Mo.—
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.'
Rochester, N. Y . —
$594,049
1,251,387
892,711
2,034,678
731,968
619,056
732,536
1,454,753
$2,006
7,086
$111,647
426,693
81,114
560,848
3,080
134,095
123,013
102,903
$190,843
68,122
$135,680
289,422
183,991
426,309
341,867
60,044
138,348
225,497
$4,945
$263,462
521,802
305,003
822,190
344,305
387,271
69,029
116,649
$4,210
7,566
504,372
117,537
133,590
$14,573
1,993
80,984
153,038
$35,241
5,534
73,775
TABLE 16.—COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL:
1937—Continued
IV.—SANITATION AND WASTE REMOVAL
Sewers and sewage
disposal
u
City nun
CITY
Total
Supervision
Sewer system
Sewage
treatment
and
disposal
Street sanitation
Street
cleaning
All
other
Waste collection
Garbage
Ashes
Waste disposal
Other waste
Garbage
Ashes
Other
waste
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000—Continued
Jersey City, N.
Houston, Tex.—
L o u i s v i l l e , Ky.Portland, Oreg.•
$953,213
523,630
512,044
334,928
$6,673
$55,334
88,013
92,643
61,973
$147,987
1,832
$377,610
85,779
93,079
204,804
$484,536
143,518
176,348
$75,577
$80
$3,876
5,549
$58,333
31,900
45,019
$13,671
$5,549
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, O h i o —
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.-
$418,071
488,360
226,094
414,130
505,871
447,398
303,007
276,450
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
309,707
368,001
771,225
374,757
207,686
768,327
409,820
263,378
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngatown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.'
Fort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.
San Diego, Calif.—
332,508
368,523
161,420
181,888
217,272
445,207
218,228
254,739
227,339
$4,800
10,824
13,577
3,600
$11,816
16,083
39,485
38,468
75,171
52,522
44,227
15,911
39,076
78,139
229,854
41,234
40,524
63,873
119,263
25,379
114,645
59,744
14,197
20,264
14,739
49,203
21,672
38,080
38,278
$90,427
106,840
21,515
42,040
2,761
50,117
114,412
72,249
61,371
104,363
69,176
59,250
37,941
45,613
54,641
23,213
$103,440
165,362
150,508
331,563
134,541
77,689
104,889
62,558
$33,265
$91,052
120,733
56,375
9,171
13,500
186,038
213,134
53,844
145,527
130,085
57,024
117,926
110,746
90,267
251,949
47,126
53,008
90,429
141,281
246,793
146,928
74,500
74,259
84,765
73,672
74;413
49\597
35,612
47,589
90,367
27,862
108,894
48,712
101,086
40.356
53,081
50.370
110,983
20,953
61,994
63,073
41,838
12,999
$75,557
$45,178
46,077
13,760
$1,025
76,357
57,500
$8,255
60,549
89,250
2,068
110,460
204,684
46,257
3,128
378
184,474
8,781
5,389
35,155
6,210
$9,163
16,322
2,4t>i
5,155
24,289
75,562
1,000
Long Beach, Calif.
Nashville, Tenn.
Springfield, Mass.
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, Utah-
363,639
179,141
567,103
79,168
367,641
209,857
283,392
102,825
Yonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J.
Jadksonville, FLa.
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.
Kansas City, Kans.
1,034,112
377,344
429,016
546,598
271,467
272,165
163,342
40,473
Fort Wayne, Ind.
Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J.
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.
Cambridge, Mass.
New Bedford, Mass.
144,952
174,104
213,995
224,584
119,286
224,857
72,881
417,341
232,511
Reading, Pa.
Khoxville, Tenn.
Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.
Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, F l a . — — — — —•
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.
152,738
156,281
296,648
81,245
216,966
315,908
181,516
101,287
254,313
Tampa, Fla.
Somerville, Mass.
El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.
Lynn, Mass.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.
Lowell, Mass.
169,448
364,907
102,015
63,136
237,394
221,435
108,995
165,566
203,939
Honolulu, Hawaii l/-
1/ Not included in group or
7,026
3,000
5,985
7,911
19,144
2,400
3,000
4,250
59,384
9,054
40,195
16,857
133,202
48,836
38,134
33,734
119,512
174,399
201,576
37,766
30,817
39,417
75,826
5,504
27,061
14,073
30,705
37,200
21,572
28,620
2,658
100,643
23,688
16,664
26,838
17,708
14,531
29,392
26,073
25,045
21,364
15,847
4,800
1,316
11,813
79,690
8,267
22,654
27,805
12,669
42,826
38,791
63,733
81,295
1 totals.
12,193
13,915
42,901
9,602
6,235
66,534
39,439
37,005
22,888
24,312
20,352
52
29,514
38,638
14,115
145,621
28,246
22,604
3,113
16,610
23,670
2,299
50,000
3,037
51, .533
33,539
128,720
7,754
43,284
69,210
52,649
17,940
80,017
116,764
68,877
36,556
150,349
29,015
69,797
269,784
65,738
59,353
22,809
8,051
629,789
120,795
116,060
39,336
62,450
127,041
58,246
26,918
1,024
64,820
59,912
39,769
74,228
12,217
79,733
75,600
38,782
41,412
32,269
41,759
58,184
24,970
82,874
10,063
53,050
22,447
44,788
95,461
24,800
120,145
62,780
62,562
31,805
90,441
105,704
118,780
10,512
2,511
113,409
59,113
51,703
37,537
46,886
38,418
65,434
127,472
30,200
75,250
13,183
70,446
43,013
20,495
29,592
21,738
29,125
13,938
57,404
28,322
70,417
13,608
3,500
313,613
25,673
5,749
95,672
22,026
63,694
53,135
33,672
10,098
44,524
25,108
15,596
4,463
67,105
88,110
32,320
100,926
254,306
40,155
18,598
34,385
60,938
3,144
25,036
5,999
41,771
155,765
35,038
25,658
28,979
29,128
1,841
155
69,248
6,486
35,106
6,535
15,191
25,899
9,804
2,402
10,460
103,608
51,279
3,799
29,012
4,000
50,378
118,569
37,165
T A B L E 1 6 . — C O S T P A Y M E N T S F O R O P E R A T I O N A N D M A I N T E N A N C E B Y F U N C T I O N S IN D E T A I L :
1937—Continued
to
IV. —SANITATION AND WASTE
REMOVAL —Cont inued
V.—CONSERVATION OF HEALTH
Regulation and inspection
Comfort
stations
Grand total-
Group I
Group II
Group I I I —
regulations
Supervision
Vital
statistics
Control of communicable diseases
Milk and
dairy
products
Other food
and drugs
Sanitary
inspection
All
other
Tuberculosis
Venereal
diseases
$571,235
$198,790
$1,174,943
$27,686,660
$2,503,639
$795,595
$1,658,104
$2,052,386
$2,027,134
$110,886
$1,837,779
$938,290
$2,360,879
93,426
239,577
119,060
59,004
20,726
606,473
258,778
309,692
16,889,189
3,893,108
6,904,363
1,442,181
358,050
703,408
515,671
106,795
173,129
946,097
186,614
525,393
1,122,156
347,747
582,483
1,118,047
375,703
533,384
53,941
33,034
23,911
1,495,480
137,641
204,658
661,345
95,022
181,923
1,533,644
308,770
518,465
$361,360
$317,324
97,090
$277,322
298,904
107,518
182,692
140,701
110,327
53,275
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich,
Los Angeles, Calif.Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$10,024
12,938
37,672
3,810
$43,091
6,900
6,130
4,200
1,250
23,680
42,314
64,437
7,357
16,902
11,457
15,830
6,572
14,825
11,560
7,911
8,432
$100,399
28,841
94,106
61,215
89,103
98,265
5,000
6,465
52,221
70,858
$4,777,468
1,901,930
1,061,788
1,600,085
1,706,122
788,017
636,072
$581,988
276,179
50,400
151,221
103,065
20,004
23,805
$187,032
48,721
11,387
34,661
34,995
12,140
12,644
$194,522
208,671
61,461
72,036
47,695
70,895
56,021
$352,340
94,357
23,605
110,440
83,161
36,507
57,977
$294,007
46,956
106,309
92,605
166,759
1,555
40,526
582,985
1,222,902
523,093
624,750
562,764
376,984
524,229
22,881
32,822
17,186
55,478
51,639
30,093
25,420
21,618
80,240
9,833
16,653
10,030
19,209
16,508
32,483
51,974
10,080
38,945
34,004
25,137
42,173
61,340
64,492
62,752
60,357
29,249
51,751
33,828
17,750
129,421
$31,624
67,744
161,629
283,716
104,590
56,078
20,255
69,910
55,586
56,182
40,481
74,041
40,477
23,358
24,113
8,652
6,975
237,615
16,375
98,071
49,730
16,277
35,320
6,983
51,245
8,138
9,924
$7,560
$5,340
19,692
28,685
1,313
1,770
27,165
17,554
10,818
67,790
66,617
85,892
89,665
7,873
42,969
40,984
28,905
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.New Orleans, La. — •
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, 2nd.Rochester, N. Y . —
Jersey City, N. J.-
$16,427
33,454
8,250
17,618
3,036
11,132
$2,220
3,165
15,680
11,150
6,015
4,670
13,088
$5,549
9,334
169,566
6,312
18,035
4,212
1,251
22,645
$300,879
270,406
257,001
850,699
188,588
257,137
211,639
453,733
512,728
$13,260
12,175
7 035
56 [ 087
44,602
35,915
18,526
31,154
78,937
$7,174
16,364
7 221
17^500
8,296
1,317
3,266
8,312
22,925
$16,760
34,084
15.876
17,321
8,759
5,373
23,529
$22,480
34,084
31.182
96,715
12,180
40,882
7,149
14,704
18,421
$11,240
17,175
15.312
96,700
37.622
34,150
26,538
27,528
58,322
$15,275
2,329
4,209
$4,240
84,897
18,960
95,996
4,913
18,266
4,560
4,209
34,062
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.Portland, O r e g . — — — — —
11,752
10,122
136,472
249,129
204,697
18,858
15,775
24,926
2,095
7,379
4,946
11,102
30,574
23,236
4,947
22,543
11,177
22,162
27,492
20,296
GROUP III.—CITIBS HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, Ohio
Toledo, O h i o — —
—
Oakland, Calif.
Denver, C o l o . — - — —
Atlanta, Oa.
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.
Birmingham, A l a . — — - — — - —
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N . Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
$468
•22,341
19,830
4,899
1,425
2,500
3,900
205
2,013
33,505
2,012
2,395
13,299
5,978
17,431
26,483
9,642
5,355
9,461
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, V a . — — —
Youngstown, Ohio--—
Grand Rapids, Mich.Tort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
—
F l i n t , Mich.
New Haven, Conn.
6,939
2,831
1,818
6,020
16,934
21,744
703
5,715
San Diego, Calif.
Long Beach, Calif.
Nashville, Tenn.
Springfield, Mass.
Tulsa, O k l a . —
Bridgeport, Conn.
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, Utah
Yonkers, N . Y.
Paterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.-—
Cha t tanooga, Tenn.
Kansas City, Eans.
#133
15,764
5,967
417
10,533
3,305
1,575
2,146
11,349
2,886
2,998
3,925
4,806
—
—
—
9,349
654
60,670
39,596
984
$2,556
23,941
14,081
27,296
$25,960
14,560
37,927
25,283
15,375
7,802
4,450
17,132
$16,766
12,580
21,184
4,804
6,628
6,835
$11,109
10,545
41,155
15,655
13,041
20,960
4,449
13,461
5,719
13,040
27,363
48,439
10,560
16,105
10,692
9,695
5,000
2,842
9,038
1,500
1,200
8,291
19,275
14,440
15,632
9,720
2,085
9,823
5,641
23,104
2,202
58,906
6,258
2,984
1,500
18,075
8,847
20,216
3,904
48,197
7,190
6,917
34,365
16,488
164,178
150,227
62,050
124,566
109,164
179,984
94,655
136,850
30,302
4,162
5,267
11,550
5,004
7,306
7,990
18,808
1,536
2,801
1,500
12,445
6,880
6,859
16,817
7,626
5,536
15,063
12,471
7,100
15,453
8,311
20,510
12 3C5
9,360
4,190
10,410
8,795
704
7,432
2,541
10,481
17,160
10,342
3,259
4,545
9,114
2,640
6,660
4,297
7,725
8,867
5,518
16,475
124,157
84,135
120,257
116,885
36,821
108,983
81,406
53,342
9,582
7,859
8,584
15,809
8,361
7,442
9,271
2,860
6,360
12,339
5,009
2,400
4,122
4,713
5,791
13,843
17,757
5,625
6,691
3,606
11,319
1,710
12,865
7,036
8,129
2,346
2,505
3,966
6,511
4,751
83,895
193,861
117,055
180,434
142,210
84,690
96,472
36,169
82,187
4,628
22,364
23,049
13,716
25,679
3,657
11,110
9,067
17,210
7,869
7,482
8,280
9,800
37,109
8,025
15,483
2,414
14,095
5,950
$107,643
122,917
214,542
160,928
99,312
101,017
153,536
114,161
$8,395
8,555
10,790
15,590
11,561
7,284
21,108
9,621
$4,442
2,135
4,590
3,487
141,232
181,059
166,885
229,502
62,809
316,078
116,679
97,679
1,320
14,968
1,325
9,130
5,051
1,643
1,359
1,616
4,919
6,134
3,988
4,176
7,341
1,320
4,065
6,668
13,296
9,134
10,920
5,774
5,911
2,702
13,841
7,769
5,736
7,320
7,979
2,656
5,001
25,277
2,100
5,004
11,113
4,733
6,000
10,609
11,460
4,450
8,934
$4,978
10,169
13,219
$5,151
152
9,674
3,391
34,025
23,035
6,742
14,808
7,642
8,774
16,250
27,006
11,522
3,240
4,290
17,454
1,204
5,370
$7,072
458
8,615
4,080
1,953
1,633
9,037
9,404
11,880
1,542
2,310
10,699
8,473
14,476
2,023
6,318
7,900
4,259
1,261
7,742
3,571
746
1,371
6,385
34,164
9,923
17,242
2,624
3,486
2,782
TABLE 1 6 . — C O S T PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS I N D E T A I L :
IV. —SANITATION AND WASTE
REMOVAL—Continued
1937—Continued
V. —CONSERVATION OF HEALTH
Regulation and inspection
Comfort
stations
Smoke
regulations
Supervision
Vital
statistics
Milk and
dairyproducts
Other food
and drugs
Sanitary
inspection
Control of c<
All
other
Tuberculosis
.icable diseases
Venereal
diseases
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
Fort Wayne, Ind.Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J.Wichita, Kans.
|1,500
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.Cambridge, M a s s . —
New Bedford, Mass.'
Reading, Pa.
3,844
$7,471
3,688
$1,860
4,644
Knoxvllle, Tenn.Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.
Tampa, Fla.
4,500
260
Somerville, Mass.'
El Paso, Ter.
Evansville, Ind.Lynn, Mass.
112
1,957
Utica, N. Y.
Duiuth. Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.Lowell, Mass.
5,000
1,423
2,436
10,133
1,319
5,980
6,626
Honolulu, Hawaii l / ~
1/ Not included in group or grand totals.
1,403
$45,632
63,779
86,209
83,596
44,121
$3,507
4,695
7,602
3,773
6,371
61,006
76,097
97,581
83,280
92,739
10,413
9,625
9,244
13,044
5,026
450
990
50,698
41,077
35,626
54,916
101,259
11,153
2,400
1,200
2,290
6,366
6,637
51,173
37,296
49,168
61,647
3,349
5,895
67,961
62,626
45,995
63,078
$4,220
$2,648
1,010
1,200
2,066
12,814
8,662
2,784
2,526
$2,340
1,959
$17,023
2,170
$5,713
$1,620
3,527
7,230
2,391
7,380
2,079
12,911
1,404
1,926
4,649
2,686
6,802
2,022
12,642
5,231
1,877
6,802
6,722
12,452
7,000
1,200
900
3,628
1,922
2,916
2,760
6,035
1,728
5,500
7,429
10,131
2,381
13,855
1,072
1,992
1,300
582
6,291
1,709
2,183
4,388
5,738
5,323
1,984
1,500
97,517
57,613
61,572
80,489
7,108
10,461
9 965
18)034
2,700
42
10»307
1^549
2,700
6,100
4.897
6,826
7,650
2,057
292,289
19,477
9,259
3,645
7,460
2,485
4,166
4,763
724
9,299
4,231
9,263
7,140
4,068
2,848
2,136
12,051
5,746
1,996
14,333
2,989
5,202
2,000
5,500
8,683
4,004
2,183
6,878
2,400
10,251
1,654
272
7,372
11,652
4,612
8,717
2,612
1,800
1,826
9,800
$4,190
3,665
13,606
12,221
480
2,721
4,762
1,022
8,499
16,335
4,315
5,901
2,275
37
2,941
1,837
8,400
13,600
1,193
10,812
TABLE 16.—COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL: 1937—-Continued
V. —CONSERVATION OF HEALTH—Continued
«
Child health services
Cit
CITY
Adult
health
services
VI.—HOSPITALS
Health
centers
and
general
clinics
Special municipal hospitals
All
other
Supervision
Pre-school
and
pre-natal
School
$2,545,232
$6,802,367
$851,383
$182,701
$1,424,891
$659,875
$935,519
$98,059,013
$514,305
1,971,015
148,609
425,608
3,702,743
1,055,966
2,043,658
666,049
152,751
32,583
87,762
53,945
40,994
842,462
218,500
363,929
267,694
199,562
192,619
462,902
114,399
358,218
72,197,494
15,478,798
10,382,721
All
other
Laboratory
Total
General municipal
hospitals
Communicable diseases
Tuberculosis
Venereal
diseases
All other
$49,061,995
$15,797,433
$162,181
$5,069,088
402,663
50,599
61,043
34,624,430
8,914,731
5,522,834
11,223,315
3,316,393
1,257,725
100,899
10,838
50,444
3,912,718
253,112
903,258
$265,738
$17,444,522
2,345,610
1,494,694
1,376,259
2,989,388
814,868
1,295,534
$2,754,960
2,739,969
$100,899
72,957
369,702
$1,382,284
548,823
398,812
359,747
236,147
177,957
115,326
602,099
3,031,347
928,772
537,873
944,234
819,230
76,045
647,041
303,569
776,806
437,167
559,640
390,497
298,086
2,231
103,232
71,204
52,602
1,897
164,370
$19,597
8,739
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
D e t r o i t , Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.
Washington, D. C . — —
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
83,367
$1,160,100
125,429
449,891
357,907
341,372
160,205
173,712
65,828
161,490
161,623
10,463
99,476
28,567
67,139
116,463
244,474
136,131
148,326
104,621
65,668
118,444
$423,749
554,857
101,371
164,721
48,364
$276,004
$41,282
23,058
16,410
248,436
8,724
$253,551
119,142
59,044
69,579
64,007
$12,078
39,744
14,810
45,178
30,883
18,351
18,274
34,215
26,922
63,572
1,575
103,599
42,108
57,711
$44,809
40,937
277,689
95,370
1,097
5,056
30,757
$28,632,115
5,858,000
3,915,726
6,985,255
4,373,303
2,523,687
2,919,592
1,847,374
3,709,025
981,823
1,979,333
3,911,665
2,507,393
2,053,203
10,072
28,981
41,452
28,420
1.366,630
728,332
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.
New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.Rochester, N. Y . ~
$3,143
38,264
3,825
10,975
$120,827
31,921
82,645
189,025
30,477
52,329
79,992
158,990
$10,560
25,292
9,196
$27,432
$53,301
$10,470
$81,438
801
106,193
«
26,624
29,832
35,577
$38,256
31,864
19,684
5,413
51,142
1,940
13,172
$1,685,953
60,869
1,842,207
2,616,198
1,161,414
1,006,186
811,916
247,713
$7,525
3,622
39,452
$813,672
$702,988
1,245,464
1,059,353
480,093
314,968
886,809
593,145
534,325
774,425
123,562
322,716
150,055
294,900
$10,838
16,594
40,162
39,587
TABLE 1 6 . — C O S T PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS I N D E T A I L :
1937—Continued
City number
V.—CONSERVATION OF HEALTH—Continued
Child health services
CITT
Pre-school
and
pre-natal
All
other
School
Adult
health
services
Laboratory-
VI.—HOSPITALS
Health
centers
and
general
clinics
Special municipal hospitals
All
other
Total
Supervision
General municipal
hospitals
Communicable diseases
Tuberculosis.
Venereal
diseases
All other
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPDIATION OF 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 — C o n t i n u e d
Jersey City, N. J.
Houston, Ter.
Louisville, Kjr.
Portland, O r e * . —
#77,703
14,699
#196,219
37,674
23,988
51,879
#26,139
4,168
#7,417
#8,041
7,648
#53,365
7,810
#1,108
17,880
#3,365,620
491,728
833,416
355,578
#1,951,854
358,950
443,186
253,548
#113,433
#445,168
81,947
381,353
18,643
15,000
OROOP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, O h i o —
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif. Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.
Akron, Ohio
—
Memphis, T e n n . — - —
Providence, R. I . - —
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, N e b r . — > - - — Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Worcester, Mass.Riohmond, V a . ~ — —
Youngs town, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.Fort Worth, Tez.
Hartford, C o n n . — —
Flint, M i c h . —
New Haven, C o n n . — San Diego, C a l i f . —
Long Beach, C a l i f . —
#3,488
15,394
32,845
16,576
3,890
12,087
25,066
3,000
30,200
7,286
18,802
#15,539
32,487
61,911
59,335
38,627
#6,528
7,985
7,672
#1,063
3,000
#16,348
#210
1,213
7,099
7,610
8,330
56,085
15,319
13,428
67,290
19,906
58,372
17,017
24,899
91,831
13,742
#5,743
377
6,661
10,430
400
3,446
2,872
500
9,228
1,327
38,735
7,196
7,884
65,041
1,740
39,641
23,018
54,823
32,704
71,512
42,151
27,149
63,493
33,578
11,506
3,171
6,256
7,088
10,117
2,397
9,125
4,127
5,417
6,502
1,643
16,781
12,544
8,684
21,376
32,689
5,000
2,040
41,838
21,923
50
#4,354
37,081
1,080
533,748
745,139
189,437
267,440
12,000
511,555
504,915
12,970
90,764
2,700
10,763
850,395
365,960
83,713
140,985
73,200
219,866
679,091
213,746
#31,089
#7,940
5,851
#479,028
541,091
152,405
267,440
#143,061
24,601
4,076
395,457
58,961
13,950
#19,469
6,487
30,580
41,518
15,775
108,772
12,970
70,171
543,571
232,061
218,168
142,662
18,949
57,000
53,810
672,165
103,575
16,200
10,763
73,204
12,450
18,461
72,784
Hastnrillo, Tenn.
8prlngfield, Mass.
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, Utah
Tonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J.
——•
—
27,011
Jacksonville, KLa.
1
Albany, N. T.
Norfolk, 7a.
Trenton, N. J . — •
—
Chattanooga, T e n n . — — — — •
Kansas City, Kans.»
Port Wayne, Ind.
Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
14,669
10,608
66
6,372
Elizabeth, N. J.
Wichita, Bans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.
Cambridge, Mass.
New Bedford, Mass.
Beading, Pa.
Knoxville, Tenn.
12,965
^
1
Peoria, 111.
-j
South Bend, Ind.
Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.—
—
Gary, Ind.
Canton, O h i o — — — - — — —
Wilmington, Del.
Tampa, Bla.
-—
Somerville, Mass.
El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.
Lynn, Mass.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.
Lowell, M a s s . — • — - —
7,503
12,434
66,281 I
—
-)
13,948
1,257
12,000
6,370
16,264
31,587
2,325
2,175
500
941
2,500
9,540
3,900
~
10,501
—
A
1,534
Honolulu, Hawaii 1/
1/ Not Included in group or grand totals.
18,428
37,503
35,075
21,826
65,148
35,646
44,396
48,067
16,327
43,053
5,195
1,783
10,979
22,328
50,330
235,435
190,528
3,455
232,555
5,712
5,288
11,787
4,200
2,573
4,146
32,335
6,543
26,786
27,846
4,326
1,620
58,077
4,370
1,945
6,100
1,515
4,814
126,142
14,364
26,103
16,860
17,369
20,911
43,882
21,011
36,092
8,717
657
4,274
6,788
4,315
7,362
7,989
9,805
74,672
10,683
17,805
17,222
15,786
3,263
31,967
11,843
22,033
8,780
1,974
4,800
3,000
5,723
4,127
2,215
29,174
7,894
27,302
18,812
21,144
13,419
25,369
20,631
63,653
6,000
13,304
15,353
11,213
403,785
139,895
48,170
170,672
78,781
101,685
257,559
5,300
2,522
14,000
8,949
7,264
224,935
8,595
4,257
31,201
3,455
36,710
48,873
28,620
58,277
27,748
37,516
79,724
27,000
9,333
36,142
6,377
14,706
18,578
248,701
341,991
185,991
7,442
128,825
251,168
260,268
217,559
85,357
62,756
11,136
23,235
6,527
2,957
4,638
5,000
4,410
8,536
15,553
91,216
48,887
2,349
598,160
280,393
1,075
1,995
111,425
29,906
12,500
118,321
102,644
60,400
98,048
72,706
3,320
7,500
3,734
3,674
1,415
6,829
2,349
595,760
1,350
39,771
2,300
30,982
6,441
14,671
183,597
2,709
269,893
30,159
102,644
47,324
10,628
161,099
1,064
1,997
66,132
7 1 . —HOSPITALS—Continued
S p e c i a l municipal
hospitals—Continued
u
VII.—CHARITIES
Municipal
tional
Patients in other hospitals
institucare
Other I n s t i t u t i o n a l and
n o n i n s t i t u t i o n a l care
Dependent
and n e g lected
children
Public
assistance
Administration
General
relief
City numbe
CITY
Commmicable
Mental
diseases
Grand t o t a l
#8,596,213
All
other
diseases
Tuberoulosis
Venereal diseases
•1,612,981 12,820,593
$22,884
All
other
All
other
Mental
All
Total
Supervision
other
$135,640 *5,258,512 18,953,024 $54,164 $332,082,953
Adult d e pendents
$2,287,489 BIO,976,950 $1,437,588 $3,522,417
$215,276,898
|!
TABLE 16.—COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
Group I
7,100,736
1,334,371
161,106
759,647
834,585
18,749
2,287,250
24,657
508,686
4,108
1,682
17,094
13,677
121,963
4,493,904
513,685
250,923
7,273,880
213,586
1,465,558
267
10,559
43,338
262,445,960
30,579,508
39,057,485
7,496,553
1,341,866
2,138,531
826,648
330,418
280,522
1,762,476
411,863
1,348,078
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, Pa.—
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.'
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$1,350,470
100,899
1,264,912
1,782,980
$509,241
$626,079
250,406
29,095
767,803
110,688
965,089
856,757
1,923
$10,842
$4,108
$460,246
259,076
209,364
490,460
34,271
($4,298,821
21,800
17,561
1,061,918
200,000
104,658
31,476
469,988
369,680
530,525
46,574
33,216
114,525
2,324,987
79,546
18,225
11,281
4,136
1,051
917,123
$148,942,293
33,877,775
1,508,297
8,197,507
11,379,106
8,316,494
2,729,982
527,514
817
659,830
$267
5,365,609
13,561,385
4,189,151
4,640,889
3,370,248
6,306,397
10,060,827
$20,706
54,586
260,539
54,293
$1,300,848
580,435
267,840
939,690
632,876
150,871
151,746
$396,762
15,445
$171,855
15,777
69,646
855,336
88,629
8,800
56,241
80,186
898,937
1,221,928
580,627
168,463
174,732
427,560
368,726
134,640
286,067
112,599
1,017,607
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.—-|
New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o —
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, I n d . — H
?lo,394
22,987
$102,065
$2,158
$1,682
21,141
1,358
46,954
$1,730
$74,773
43,396
168,561
192,058
193,167
47,372
63,713
$531
20,263
164,449
$88,231
49,011
62,513
176,448,021
17,818,860
21,010,017
22
23
24
25
26
Rochester, N. Y.
Jersey City, N. J . —
33,191
417,936
30,831
Louisville, Ky.
1,205
427,363
8,877
64,613
94,405
9,866
20,000
10,000
3,774
5,979,439 1|
1,938,646
383,068
903,721
907,150
391,250
29,875
181,341
146,065
23,807
66,306
141,307
51,559
56,317
185,870
63,517
3,021,681
1,484,486
283,769
230,697
288,742
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
27
28
29
30
31
32
#514,073
670,146
22,351
4,891,043
276,937
178,433
791,605
121,544
#4,354
5,992
Oakland, Calif.
$1,080
#16,200
$12,000
35
36
79,153
Providence, R. I.
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
372,985
4,220
1,660,302
19,596
2,238
3,445,579
374,037
23,982
#17,094
178,052
#145,180
Syracuse, N. Y.
3,754
2,700
Oklahoma City, Okla.649
910
5,130
71,263
Grand Rapids, Mich.—
Flint, Mich.
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
San Diego, Calif.
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
14,435
64,656
19,530
63,493
14,181
6,926
10,500
11,345
129,443
75,734
12,378
57,469
91,024
Des Moines, Iowa
8,714
3,498
#9,213
Trenton, N. J.
6,570
24,272
5,670
287,921
80,000
20,400
165,002
32,052
#1,280
2,831,319
562,667
20,487
340,549
222,687
1,708,929
179,323
1,162,114
4,778
27,855
62,605
2.047,705
12,702
946,467
6,439
500
1,250,193
325,816
32,779
483,235
276,691
824,672
45,265 1
#2,937
#11,439
$8,221
663
53,425
62,500
$247,163
3,600
#490,908
652,676
16,077
1,084,404
244,082
134,655
478,176
119,336
37,841
29,419
8,617
24,371
99,298
125,843
44,456
2,117
226,515
336,960
51,920
1,807,695
312,841
23,982
141,938
92,157
110,097
1,461,236
437,304
17,732
336,953
157,822
722,240
159,795
758,933
372,985
19,596
18,551
18,887
458,203
15,418
79,434
22,484
123,829
3,335
160,310
16,211
152,164
1,654
46,562
185,598
1,358
30,954
176,373
10,881
7,698
20,500
65,626
87,878
4,610
36,786
12,477
554,466
6,439
15,169
11,717
17,068
322,167
31,889
372,181
32,256
1937—Continued
71. —HOSPITALS—Continued
Spaolal municipal
hospitals—Continued
Municipal I n s t i t u t i o n a l ©are
Patients in other hospitals
All
other
Communicable diseases
Mental
diseases
Tuberculosis
Venereal dis-
Superrision
All
other
Adult dependents
Dependent
and neglected
children
Other institutional and
noninstitutional care
Public assistance
Administration
!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
i
80
i
i
1,950
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
1
65,666
I
154,755 |
160,281
I
; : ; i
iii!
iiii
ii||f!l
;
20,000
65,155
245,495
I
2,498
37,398
95,707
32,518
I
—
47,176
427,885
I
1/ Not included i n group or grand t o t a l s .
29,105
32,736
I
Honolulu, Hawaii J/-
6,176
6,574
30,518
63,946
I
2,966
20,392
560,069
715,105
I
12,012
26,599
I
5,267
29,906
5,014
!!!!!!!!!
12,500
400
4,770
36,471
1,971,798
7,135
9,685
1,567,195
784,000
16,094 |
454,744
1,608,678 |
=
87,762
!EF~
21,983
•53,813
I
1,500
84,775
98,421
I
•9,000
2,070
160,281
I
---------
Canton, O h i o —
2,400
I
|42,058
•
85 Wilmington, D e l . - — —
86 Tampa, ? l a . — — —
87 Somerrille, Mass.
88
89 ETansrille, i n d . - - —
90 Lynn, M a s s . — — —
91
92 Duluth. M i n n . - — — —
99 Waterbury, C o n n . — —
94 Lowell. M a s s , —
63,789
80,799
500,255
I
1,499,580
40,000
Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.
71,505
75,382
•794,685
87
309,495
4,577
I
68,580
2,595
108,491
•15,410
:::::::::
I
8,208
•28,067
6,827
I
•1,208
59,967
•15,153
I
New Bedford, M a s s . —
Wichita, Sans.
Spokane, Wash.
Pall River, Mass.
Cambridge, Mass.
•726
811,756
757
552,859
12,077 j
11,605
1,443,230
1,554,156
!!!!!!!
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
85
84
:::::::
•5,900
70,000
1
Kansas City, K a n s . —
Port Wayne, Ind.
Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
Mill iii Iiiiiiiii!
iiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiii!
67
68
69
70
71
72
79
74
75
i i i i
OB0UP III.—CITIES HATING A POPULATION OP 100,000 TO 900,000—Continued
iii II
1 iiiiiiiii
TABLE 1 6 . — COST PAXUENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL:
18,760
41,588
18,889
4,770
20,220
1,547,080
6,733
5,185
451,685
652,415
3,575
205,490
601,243
TABLE 16.—COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
VIII
711. —CHARITIES—Continued
Municipal correction institutions
Other i n s t i t u t i o n a l and noninstitutlonal care—Continued
Welfare serrice
Public assistance—Continued
Old-age
assistance
Grand total——
Group I
Group I I —
Group I I I -
$45,301,877
30,493,907
5,327,491
9,480,479
Aid to dependent
children
Aid to
blind
Veterans
aid
1
All
other
$38,015,199 82,290,658 811,487,590 8615,747
32,412,129
3,516,154
2,086,916
2,090,739
156,863
43,056
CORRECTION
8,606,922
998,376
1,882,292
Regulation of
foster
or
boarding
homes
Legal
aid
Employment
agencies
Supervision
All
other
All
other
$97,845 $39,060 8280,394 $123,561 tt329,680 821,329,855
19,257
9,260
10,543
214,715
126,855
274,177
114,090
93,540
72,764
$104,868 112,049,311 &720.671
307,890
11,484
10,306
17,610,735
2,637,194
1,081,926
$5,657 |$250,000
21,403
$4,528,663
2,087,921
2,655,814
695,403
1,537,770
417,329
403,213
$3,380,927
1,091,597
647,517
488,740
1,015,454
179,649
185,035
428,800
1,152,809
781,884
314,169
1,821,091
372,626
413,243
169,932
768,375
327,814
211,562
1,023,424
243,287
272,892
75,452
13,623
34,486
90,930
1,419
12,519
10,006,205
1,358,890
684,216
576,809
83,533
60,329
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N . T .
Chicago, 111.
—-Philadelphia, Pa.
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.Clereland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
$14,052,215
210,686
140,993
439,594
5,236,621
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Franolseo, Calif,
Washington, D . C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$18,761,476
1,233,624
712,620
1,905,184
919,522
1,091,841
296,951
$236,943
511,189
18,000
1,667,805
3,535,760
737,281
1,921,856
534,420
1,200,107
816,567
1,601,521
1,414,067
1,121,646
894,324
636,195
793,017
1,030,141
107,832
$2,958,800
7,300
$518,974
35,962
572,679
376,530
90,089
45,351
617,183
588,528
49,266
308,688
142,461
35,468
68,715
23,649
$6,500,259
5,955
69,880
213,556
3,866
184,387
3,700
660,082
44,093
45
3,334
917,765
$25,012
$20,011
$14,100
84,500
57,890
687
18,941
5,454
$7,967
1,475
24,189
1,000
4,317
15,113
18,174
4,984
31,804
5,150
1,000
£9,120
12,639
55,455
11,290
$40,487
15,420
28,121
6,902
$31,708
286,748
69,647
67,751
11,959
23,507
62,213
23,276
QEOUP II.—CITIES BAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.New Orleans, La.—«
Cincinnati, O h i o —
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.-
97,452
903,652
$234
53,819
6,974
$2,391
450
209,024
2,390
51,422
14,434
80,237
23,826
$932
31,849
...
.....
1,094
996
664
-
$4,400
$559
.....
_
__—
9,327
.....
$242,746
189,176
228,598
518,956
287,648
179,210
36,449
$1,419
$125,365
111,060
150,143
252,868
84,291
76,461
814
$19,657
_27,274
—.-.2,010
TABLE 16.—COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
VII. —CHARITIES—Continued
VIII.—CORRECTION
Other institutional and nonlnstltutional care—Continued
Public assistance—Continued
Old-age
assistance
Aid to dependent
children
Aid to
blind
Veterans*
aid
Municipal correction institutions
Welfare serrioe
All
other
Regulation of
foster
or
boarding
homes
Legal
aid
Employment
agencies
Adults
All
other
Supervision
All
other
GROUP H . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPOLATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000—Continued
Rochester, N. Y . —
Jersey City, N. J.<
Houston, Tex.-—-—
LouisTille, K y . - —
Portland, O r e g . — -
•977,360
84,385
1,020
297,582
•807,699
154,743
16,366
223,596
56,982
•18,266
90
11,624
•576,724
9,636
•120
•3,400
•1,598
•7,772
1,789
12,338
3,884
91,200
93,698
•232
13,391
•219,012
293,434
163,686
191,362
86,917
•9,547
•123,031
209,361
65,641
83,165
76,690
23,048
1,997
•38,999
40,998
•4,000
53,803
15,593
16,495
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
27
28
29
30
31
38
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
Columbus, O h i o - — — Toledo, O h i o — —
Oakland, Calif.
Atlanta, Ga.
— —
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.
Birmingham, Ala.
Akron, O h i o — - — — —
Memphis, Tenn.
Providence, R. I . — San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
—
Oklahoma City, Okla—
43
45
46
48
49
50
-~-~•8,473
•3,086,838
8,400
•40,603
300
•2,444
5,368
•12,500
875
7,800
•35,313
48,296
~
•7,200
•3,000
260,599
7,169
1,080
365,408
1,161
1,479
1,896
5,066
312
~:z:
4,178
8,745
159,486
42
1,200
465,060
351,084
2,429
809,380
845,194
21,044
200,948
804
3,238
3,909
1,038
2,000
12
7,898
2,755
2,300
1,160
2,238
259,787
13,200
67,213
832,895
73,403
99,770
32,088
8,270
61,839
55,187
88,084
19,086
•1,798
3,000
455
88,458
30,336
1,971 |
80,194
18,741 1
3,835
•8,671
8,270
5,604
56,835
41,345
88,084
13,782
10,716
86,688
179,967
671,906
Youngstovn, OhioGrand Rapids, Mich.-Fort Worth, T e x . — —
Hartford, C o n n . — - —
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, C o n n . — —
•376,716
10,680
—
•3,801
86,688
8,117
80,328
23,413
6,634
12,679
3,235
6,923
906
2,160
138
4,800
8,498
1,348
38,413
149
2,031
6,053 1
:::::::
12,654
62
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
61
62
63
1
764
Long Beach, C a l i f . —
Nashville, Tenn.
Springfield, M a s s . —
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.
Dea Moines, Iowa
584,933
193,783
20
4,275
112,803
226,759
25,552
247
1
66,429
234
350
225
500
1,890
22,334
69,597
1,785
36,387
4,656
19,762
34,963
19,994
23,304
10,483
4,656
6,173
1,397
500
13,396
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
299
Jacksonville, F l a . —
640
65
66
67
68
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, T e n n . —
Kansas City, K a n s . —
Fort Wayne, Ind.
70
71
Erie, Pa.
300
100
3,957
87
11,642
425
555,557
323,958
732,954
16,288
3,600
3,600
103,617
149,305
77,374
Fall River, Mass.
New Bedford, Mass.
9,000
2,500
170,767
250
3,399
64,434
14,403
1,000
300
600
200
213
32,072
1,200
91,000
167
33,842
250
30,385
32,379
:::::::
6,301
1,727
4,293
6,465
5,291
11,699
14,807
1,200
2,700
74
75
4,014
11,018
400
4,119
3,900
3,150
168
300
118,501
91,029
133,634
650
11,497
13,312
11,497
24,070
4,855
3,377
678
329
2,224
17,033
77
78
13,422
22,242
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
South Bend, Ind.
Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
1,775
:::::::
2,070
21,751
19,413
2,778
3,000
41,526
41,526
90,787
184
14,661
14,661
68,897
119,415
2,685
3,034
4,580
6,120
605
Wilmington, Del.
1,800
9,000
Somerville, Mass.
393,212
Evansville, I n d . — —
3,500
698,993
154,310
529,671
91,778
400
1,000
84,364
12,170
951
38,781
126,203
27,845
61,232
Duluth, Minn.
Honolulu, Hawaii l/—J
1/ Not included in group or grand totals.
1,200
-------
151
4,100
926
214,266
—
2,000
8,642
65,357
2,338
3,000
:::::::
—
65,357
TABLE 16.—COST PAYIvISNTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
umber
VIII.—CORRECTION—Continued
CITY
o
Group III-
Institutional
industry
activities
(net)
Delinquents in other institutions
$152,674
$598,387
$76,165
102,081
526,749
66,850
4,788
76,165
50,593
Adults
Minors
Men
X.—LIBRARIES
Probation
and
parole
XI.—RECREATION
Cultural-scientific
recreation
IX.—SCHOOLS
Supervision
Total
Accessions
Library
services
Total
Supervision
Women
$2,476,044 13,164,239 1596,128,836 $24,101,002
2,221,903
215,066
39,075
2,547,465
486,162
130,612
375,360,668
68,523,384
152,244,784
bl,718,381 &3,500,732 £18,881,889 158,131,752
336,685
635,457
746,239
14,150,375
3,737,563
6,213,064
1,842,166
683,366
975,200
11,971,524
2,418,740
4,491,625
38,841,912
6,490,657
12,799,183
Art galleries
$770,444 fcl,029,942 i2,221,189
502,028
76,026"
192,390
942,408
28,288
59,246
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPUIATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, Pa.—
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.'
$69,092
$300,000
58,400
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif,
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$208,426
293,178
1,115,000
18,842
135,649
26,528
219,842
15,141
101,704
162,479
84,106
4,785
$870,218 ($151,346,306
41,597,796
308,438
28,648,559
207,900
26,958,277
137,016
26,082,483
260,047
14,261,368
62,854
10,305,794
54,508
39,026
322,345
66,897
27,513
12,257
74,223
104,223
9,259,508
16,289,347
12,167,316
9,008,813
10,239,171
9,123,063
10,072,867
$3,038,614
1,469,959
686,984
1,313,522
1,251,678
1,554,671
471,452
$39,450
20,994
37,940
36,288
579,405
1,307,893
656,103
447,008
471,117
410,490
491,479
$329,645
254,870
61,396
203,322
233,527
24,654
82,321
19,000
52,100
19,585
13,320
35,320
11,711
26,323
106,000
132,158
108,865
106,852
82,392
49,767
91,051
$2,708,969 ($10,498,160
1,175,639
7,682,841
604,594
2,421,558
1,072,260
1,880,953
981,863
2,476,297
1,554,671
1,082,018
364,477
1,533,302
$317,749
454,405
1,123,635
527,653
326,836
353,405
349,012
374,105
1,052,919
2,485,687
1,091,775
1,870,155
1,599,249
1,828,135
1,338,863
33,929
12,526
$864,156
366,123
$6,940
664,*922
1,290
853,102
507,402
410,417
734,338
8,972
7,973
16,087
$355,882
120,170
60,000
128,537
2,333
586
97,830
41,748
82,662
13,532
9,000
20,000
60,822
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPDIATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.'
New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.'
Rochester, N. Y . —
165,043
*>54,400
13.309
53,586
101.045
$7,806,563
3,897,999
7,588,455
9,606,862
12,323
1,496
7,565
20,604
52,624
18,947
27,569
65,830
5,312,219
5,535,606
4,915,428
6,903,925
$8,035
$478,067
79 ,862
467 079
541 375
273
307
337
402
1
1
$103,301
12,490
101,090
93,628
$374,766
67,372
$7,900
352,985
892 l|
9,336
13,419
5,600
18,339
59,596
55,552
48,394
105,008
204,270
238,902
283,920
279,545
(
II
202
873
914
Museums
$11,446
16,842
1,710,633
237,068
273,488
Jersey City, N. J.•
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
30,313
31,390
37,149
5,452,433
3,912,593
3,909,981
3,681,320
236,443
94,421
261,812
256,623
184,656
12,444
10,488
20,290
15,412
18,817
13,160
56,918
36,375
63,160
238,164
179,415
628,979
213,604
398,454
430,936
•27,169
206,705
223,454
52,458
86,833
59,893
166,269
76,568
•80,786
156,678
576,755
734,864
176,715
261,309
378,952
225,813
62,046
292,185
504,763
249,622
154,457
382,289
198,905
173,140
4,800
17,052
17,712
458
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
12,314
1,500
Columbus, O h i o —
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.
$13,398
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
Providence, R. I . —
San Antonio, T e x . —
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
8,310
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.Fort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.
38,413
6,053
San Diego, Calif. Long Beach, Calif.Nashville, T e n n . —
Springfield, Mass.Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.—
Des Moines, Iowa-—
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, Utah-|
Yonkers, N. Y.
Peterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.
20,898
2,572
14,640
2,600
5,826
9,000
1,687
1,200
•50,593
1,500
•3,408,564
4,285,052
5,721,598
4,593,810
3,474,114
3,147,288
3,371,522
2,433,288
•106,808
268,257
270,446
241,100
117,776
59,893
204,581
100,060
•68,160
11,349
11,280
143,304
8,502
•11,479
50,203
35,712
45,338
22,441
12,000
7,300
26,312
16,192
4,230,917
1,649,400
4,468,062
2,805,450
2,701,787
3,925,197
2,704,552
2,483,819
149,354
95,180
67,050
52,373
69,760
138,624
208,497
84,530 |
6,500
6,780
37,325
29,334
24,359
10,325
7,650
5,162
5,223
3,526
12,636
19,103
36,266
36,401
105,529
59,066
67,050
24,488
46,799
111,871
167,069
42,906
3,831,908
2,419,291
2,871,368
2,339,332
2,090,990
3,171,155
2,544,448
2,625,509
176,197
68,507
14,400
6,200
22,067
16,373
139,730
45,934
132,793
45,708
123,000
94,618
124,650
1,177
131,616
45,708
123,000
65,267
30,064
207,939
167,719
199,863
174,458
268,885
369,846
118,334
227,441
2,930,686
2,710,099
1,240,345
2,917,454
1,918,914
1,863,899
2,270,563
1,954,356
119,507
149,374
45,829
192,236
48,294
150,281
99,889
45,047
102,635
122,997
33,388
192,236
27,539
104,787
73,345
14,969
342,612
442,138
185,734
385,112
124,756
189,038
118,338
122,037
2,172,726
3,622,796
2,018,970
1,515,794
1,870,767
1,264,163
1,724,658
1,005,051
89,975
74,470
84,325
74,753
111,961
43,011
98,841
42,864 1
63,694
49,214
60,960
57,430
111,961
11,936
66,888
31,691
219,698
273,655
72,129
213,536
369,483
111,478
91,289
83,570
64,950
29,351
29,636
6,525
5,520
10,989
19,852
6,921
4,470
7,500
8,460
22,310
16,285
37,994
18,084
7,768
10,426
11,195
8,436
6,960
15,855
14,061
14,929
10,363
23,301
8,100
6,500
7,774
23,853
4,673
•4,197
•8,472
•5,898
18,000
300
4,500
4,000
£0,124
46,923
9,189
15,678
9,785
7,992
21,388
7,619
2,117
2,830
10,750
4,574
270
10,207
7,038
28,055
12,255
16,067
3,715
3,177
22,319
11,741
2,000
7,497
TABLE 1 6 . — COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL:
X.—LIBRARIES
umber
VIII. — CORRECTION—Continued
CITY
a
>>
o
Institutional
industry
activities
(net)
Delinquents in other institutions
Adults
Minors
Men
1937—Continued
Probation
and
parole
XI.—RECREATION
Cultural-scientific
recreation
IX-SCHOOLS
Total
Supervision
Accessions
Library
services
Total
Supervision
Women
Art galleries
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVINa A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
Kansas City, Kans.
Fort Wayne, I n d . —
Camden, N. J .
E r i e , Pa»
E l i z a b e t h , N. J . —
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
F a l l River, M a s s . Cambridge, Mass.—
New Bedford, Mass.Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, Tenn,—
P e o r i a , 111.
South Bend, I n d . —
Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, F l a .
••••
Gary, Ind.—
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, D e l . Tampa, F l a .
Somerville, Mass.
El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.Lynn, Mass.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.—
Lowell, Mass.
$78
$600
1,775
$2,778
2,010
Honolulu, Hawaii 1/-
1/ Not included in group or grand totals.
3,034
2,570
6,120
$1,386,638
1,354,509
1,658,024
1,814,530
1,921,592
1,898,487
1,701,242
1,223,625
1,843,607
$35,233
112,917
39,553
60,709
70,487
64,560
67,254
42,278
80,369
$16,167
3,000
1,464,006
1,757,640
1,257,834
1,227,052
1,317,606
1,552,411
1,181,391
1,581,399
1,501,256
60,136
49,039
37,950
73,050
90,890
74,234
25,518
105,516
36,911
12,517
5,000
5,932
44,954
5,000
6,630
766
11,561
2,213
12,157
19,283
15,218
8,400
19,619
1,488,365
1,171,153
1,588,033
1,014,580
1,238,150
1,551,110
1,655,386
1,683,284
1,701,055
1,211,157
54,687
20,547
90,836
31,214
74,126
82,503
87,171
79,686
58,866
36,405
3,420
4,000
3,510
4,300
2,757
165
11,190
4,800
4,945
5,696
5,000
11,714
3,895
4,598
$10,249
85,769
32,671
37,990
70,322
39,525
62,454
30,340
65,132
$53,080
99,865
82,571
56,565
69,507
156,763
179,358
68,185
215,349
28,887
7,862
46,853
32,478
29,805
15,939
66,607
52,386
25,518
68,229
9,430
87,814
167,124
21,202
184,702
72,452
109,710
195,667
119,846
72,355
2,192
17,223
5,392
15,554
19,250
11,515
9,965
9,350
6,351
54,687
14,935
69,613
22,312
54,272
63,253
70,656
58,007
45,621
25,456
101,722
71,913
121,553
81,949
109,215
173,171
97,257
127,543
142,040
72,338
$8,817
24,148
6,882
19,962
13,845
6,993
9,541
3,158
$3,197
100
$3,619
3,322
$225
728
4,600
4,300
5,045
1,340
4,075
6,740
TABLE 16.—COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
XI. —RECREATION—Cont inue d
Zoos, aquariums, and
botanical
gardens
Grand total-
Group I
Group I I —
Group III—
Community
music,
drama, and
celebrations
Municipal parks
Organized recreation
C u l t u r a l - s c i e n t i f i c recreation—Con.
Outdoor play areas and activities
Administration
Playground
Hecreation
buildings
and indoor
activities
is, 966, 966
$1,230,643
$106,094
$669,261
$4,554,525
$2,239,242
$5,892,061
#2,397,106
2,337,185
215,694
414,087
788,804
141,666
300,173
92,747
48
13,299
354,431
51,885
262,945
2,970,430
643,081
941,014
704,295
467,518
1,067,429
4,422,421
440,293
1,029,347
1,927,916
121,895
347,295
$739,795
396,514
57,051
225,091
35,135
35,996
203,679
$123,406
20,222
53,525
25,109
43,218
4,939
7,126
$1,975,726
676,710
67,911
117,622
530,142
36,174
51,164
$99,635
697,045
277,570
68,447
4,664
126,641
55,584
85,079
97,830
128,020
211,714
91,653
29,628
79,645
42,044
50,352
199,437
52,589
76,616
10,578
Undistributed and
other
Administration
$1,167,536
122,022
604,751
205,314
357,471
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.'
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, M a s s . — — — —
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$6,000
27,825
24,630
5,366
$123,199
14,415
28,966
61,063
7,540
2,700
17,062
323
6,861
685
3,995
6,705
52,379
31,060
12,406
13,996
$259,973
530,161
55,237
548,514
36,129
155,853
66,362
387,907
73,462
453,160
93,740
214,031
95,901
$126,936
44,885
83,708
89,637
42,169
26,241
74,683
47,689
65,174
58,092
45,081
9,296
253,079
311,440
65,744
101,928
159,237
66,248
$13,201
343,376
$148,788
67,817
18,714
41,638
72,052
2,700
62,4
154,168
4,502
70,952
96,464
215,154
57,096
5,544
4,213
522
20,205
34,478
48,107
15,977
71,793
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.
New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o —
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.Rochester, N. Y . —
Jersey City, N. J.Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
$18,857
28,170
42,544
33,375
32,993
$15,369
10,920
17,655
12,717
24,119
2,492
1,050
24,180
2,000
$131,149
25,196
$21,453
44,719
2,520
152,727
$48
4,004
8,032
29,169
76,699
106,022
18,396
32,133
42,747
46,416
13,339
$107,280
14,166
34,162
24,744
34,677
55,802
$28,912
30,942
104,255
28,946
45,930
20,562
40,229
39,891
13,537
89,480
9,642
27,425
29,662
11,000
34,020
56,845
25,702
$33,355
33,223
11,016
2,931
8,590
23,900
$14,955
30,354
32,176
48,899
3,000
17,759
32,696
19,625
5,850
TABLE 16.—COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
ber
XI. —RECREATION—Continued
Cultural-scientific recreation—Con.
Organized recreation
Municipal parks
CITY
t
City
Zoos, aquariums, and
botanical
gardens
Community
music,
drama, and
celebrations
Outdoor play areas and activities
All other
Administration
Playground
Golf
All other
Recreation
buildings
and indoor
activities
Undistributed and
other
Administration
Park areas
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, OhioToledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.'
Denver, Colo.—
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.Akron, Ohio
Memphis, T e n n . —
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.'
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y . —
Dayton, Ohio
$48,627
7,099
20,118
8,140
29,931
16,935
38,421
2,365
12,119
Nashville. T e n n . —
Springfieid, Mass.
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.Des Moines, I o w a —
Scranton, Pa.
17,436
364
200
853
$6,000
14,322
466
$2,280
14,880
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mieh.Fort Worth, T e x . —
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.—
San Diego, Calif.Long Beach, Calif.
$21,878
6,000
12,268
$17,713
22,252
10,320
2,875
44,347
$14,733
176,240
2,374
13,722
3,900
33,421
4,638
27,486
336
23,567
59,565
52,943
11,196
13,991
15,017
27,991
22,700
25,860
12,408
4,653
58,162
18,039
10,176
4,367
3,000
9,382
26,259
19,600
2,103
39,658
23,736
36,519
18,932
5,395
6,372
1,060
$4,627
16,522
40,708
68,919
28,914
$51,211
21,725
582
1,551
2,161
41,169.
2,404
19,301
6,238
7,361
199
27,722
15,028
22,483
2,323
7,086
19,065
10,310
88,108
10,424
279
4,430
3,507
3,311
3,760
15,310
665
600 I
6,304
15,923
3,109
7,453
19,189
15,470
5,267
10,951
64,654
17,366
31,915
14,321
2,923
20,347
7,395
2,735
6,505
11,215
16,286
5,387
34,240
18,750
30,714
39,726
45,109
23,000
2,345
9,900
2,940
112,947
12,124
36,829
12,945
8,692
14,969
46,712
42,397
12,449
7,874
18,086
19,883
201,358
39,394
50,726
96,667
71,482
76,360
76,345
192,955
39,282
115,386
129,906
102,058
2,663
190
25,306
37,658
307,068
95,660
44,069
39,744
4,862
21,787
23,531
3,512
$148,824
320,580
87,905
122,742
87,146
89,174
9,101
8,165
4,736
14,771
3,600
11,517
8,253
22,757
28,769
2,580
655
26,031
$10,335
10,395
8,305
14,459
14,773
7,399
3,223
86,384
170,683
66,780
111,786
44,833
25,969
3,924
4,730
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y .
PaterBon, N. J.
JacksonTille, Fla.
Albany, N. Y
Norfolk, Va.
Wilmington, Del.Tampa, Pla.
Somerrille, Mass.
El Paso, Tex.
Evaneville, Ind.—
Lynn, M a s s . —
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.Lowell, Mass.
Honolulu, Hawaii l/-
l/ Not included in group or grand totals.
17,225
94
14,543
5,280
319
9,819
31,060
13,704
17,336
30,345
25,630
39,826
60,138
15,410
244
13,059
6,875
853
6,997
6,759
1,127
4,161
27,227
4,757
2,545
7,478
6,806
9,284
19,534
15,960
5,656
14,517
4,380
17,037
3,127
4,874
21,510
7,874
15,646
3,515
3,256
4,438
7,103
9,690
500
1,000
2,523
15,584
6,673
1,275
1,700
1,677
70,260
213
210
4,536
8,205
7,071
35,933
9,199
11,569
11,350
6,134
34,909
32,833
3,338
1,061
1,980
225
1,663
23,375
2,135
2,106 I
9,296
4,413
3,859
6,669
3,858
5,328
5,149
49,538
6,887
17,075
4,000
973
4,664
846
1,904
2,124
28,396
3,237
15
8,800
2,874
Cambridge, M a s s . —
New Bedford, Mass.
Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, Tenn.—
Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.
Tecoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
•
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
13,735
37,334
11,088
7,594
8,035
1,753
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.Kansas City, Kans.Port Wayne, Ind.
Camden, N. J.
Erie, P a . —
Elizabeth, N. J.—
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Pall Rirer, Mass.-
16,576
29,504
15,696
2,181
8,509
7,746
24,075
7,076
11,866
37,914
7,935
7,094
10,453
22,334
12,109
24,490
7,736
17,702
18,480
14,293
3,736
11,935
9,155
1,953
4,518
14,712
3,792
18,489
3,994
21,996
8,078
3,942
2,612
3,062
125
3,523
5,939
3,749
11,531
2,510
10,679
4,516
3,899
4,522
100
16,548
474
4,656
4,500
8,521
11,214
3,142
TABLE 1 6 . — C O S T PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS I N D E T A I L :
1937—Continued
2 1 . —RECREATION—Continued
Municipal parks—Continued
Nurseries
and
forestry-
Street trees
and other
plantings
$1,621,056
$1,103,356
$1,039,868
1,241,987
151,367
227,702
687,347
119,487
296,522
471,899
190,274
377,695
Parkways
and
boulevards
Grand t o t a l -
Group I
Group I I —
Group I I I -
Special recreation facilities
Park lighting
Undistributed and
other
Auditoriums
and
stadiums
$2,686,772
$1,008,034
$1,140,329
$2,137,481
2,106,011
293,529
287,232
750,146
115,532
142,356
993,895
461,765
681,821
Park policing
667,340
19,921
453,068
Recreation
piers and
yacht
harbors
Refectories
(net)
$19,086
$54,742
$27,737
19,086
21,518
Auto and
trailer
$81,324
52,253
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.'
C l e v e l a n d , Ohio
S t . L o u i s , Mo.
B a l t i m o r e , Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San F r a n c i s c o , C a l i f . Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
B u f f a l o , N. Y.
$201,428
422,535
$141,787
178,012
144,656
73,874
$24,323
7,563
2,018
39,963
30,718
22,810
517,489
28,380
24,125
28,407
18,108
5,171
68,222
34,328
18,487
19,802
13,105
126,586
176,258
31,563
$825,457
795,003
$433,421
77,932
$414 ,821
$25,716
152,398
24,298
187 , 2 3 5
57,019
39,250
84,080
42,000
51,002
33,154
182,427
4,930
30,939
31,940
46,470
46,853
93,457
303,083
152,936
13,086
49 , 4 9 9
2 ,306
—
20,624
100,420
3,405
135,626
49,982
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.
New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o —
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . ~
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.'
Rochester, N. Y . —
$1,494
6,890
92,464
10,172
$11,839
7,240
14,451
51,402
15,943
15,583
3,029
$10,146
$54,133
$44,429
101,012
6,567
18,500
86,655
55,374
15,751
14,959
6,900
$77,770
57,413
5,693
$19,899
59,655
$8,658
13 479
151,314
35,009
960
68,505
11,480
$52,253
Jersey City, N.
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.Portland, Oreg.-
10,410
26,941
12,554
7,949
17,543
20,786
26,772
51,926
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
55
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
$35,551
66,464
$78,551
4,726
4,093
0
Cto^h
C
6I
M^ '
*
XT"
*
59
60
61
62
65
64
65
66
$29,814
5,036
$18,426
7,310
57,913
9,240
5,296
17,156
840
1,212
24,846
$5,934
18,061
22,224
4,454
648
9,778
39,978
2,500
2,900
9,000
16,201
3,000
11,048
17,743
4,420
8,900
3,600
10,772
25,886
3,198
124,991
35,377
2,591
8,366
761
17,879
15,628
19,180
23,392
4,593
31,400
15,065
4,167
14,595
686
2,750
10,940
37,674
6,181
869
58,277
16,637
85,267
36,165
19,959
2,963
17,765
6,838
r
*p?° ' T nn#
1,070
2,045
8,088
9,970
3,887
161
794
1,792
400
5,833
4,103
2,231
953
544
2,242
15,206
23,243
10,859
$15,065
45,225
53,624
13,202
3,435
5,114
18,803
10,860
V
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
$6,776
13,334
13,481
3,700
22,452
7,760
$9,327
$1,060
12,505
1,731
$16,300
9,000
10,143
3,615
2,435
21,000
8,328
800
9,899
9,668
25,686
15,000
$7,606
767
4,782
1,721
5,687
2,637
2,767
5,827
26,599
6,065
3,353
3,002
3,904
16,669
5,870
7,456
3,060
6,650
7,006
45,144
15,556
495
579
1,088
94,141
22,997
88
5,000
16,793
939
TABLE 1 6 . — C O S T PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS I N DETAIL:
1937—Continued
XI. —RECREATION—Continued
Municipal parka—Continued
u
Special recreation facilities
CITY
I
Parkways
and
bouleTards
o
Nurseries
and
forestry
Street trees
and other
plantings
Park policing
Park lighting
Undistributed and
other
Auditoriums
and
stadiums
Auto and
trailer
camps
Recreation
piers and
yacht
harbors
Refeotoriea
(net)
All other
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 — C o n t i n u e d
Kansas C i t y , K a n s . '
F o r t Wayne, I n d . —
Camden, N. J .
E r i e , Pa.
E l i z a b e t h , N. J . —
W i c h i t a , Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.Cambridge, Mass.—New B e d f o r d , M a s s .
Reading, P a .
Knoxville, Tenn.—
Peoria, 111.
S o u t h Bend, I n d . —
Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, F l a .
Gary, I n d .
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, D e l . —
Tampa, F l a .
Somerville, Mass.El P a s o , T e x .
Evansville, Ind.—
Lynn, Mass.
U t i c a , N. Y.
D u l u t h , Minn.
$2,783
996
$8,541
$10,004
401
141
911
5,319
6,804
25,521
14,556
l/~
1/ Not included in group or grand totals.
$1,163
436
288
813
8,539
1,632
91
13,626
6,654
2,000
1,307
911
3,535
11,599
$14,247
$668
3,334
3,141
7,711
9,301
2,867
6,859
40,479
1,791
1,852
3,052
1,248
2,678
14,455
10,353
9,056
7,530
20,978
3,178
1,176
17,685
46
3,993
3,244
10,640
1,604
16,644
6,735
8,023
4,122
2,000
$12,973
$1,340
$12,414
2,457
3,971
751
6,202
2,920
14,074
1,706
1,362
5,210
Lowell, Mass.
H o n o l u l u , Hawaii
$16,131
16,263
$8,250
TABLE 16.—COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
XII. -MISCELLANEOUS
Pension and g r a t u i t i e s on account of service
Compensation for
employee injury
Municipal
Judgments
and losses
(not a l l o cated)
Grand total-
Compen- service
enterNoninaur- sation
prises
ance com- i n s u r (not alance
pensation
(not a l l o - premiums located)
(not a l cated)
located)
School
teachers
$171,678,076
$2,765,810
$22,149,775
$17,238,675
$22,747,177
$28,176,142
Group I
Group I I —
Group III-
130,020,136
17,397,572
24,260,368
1,541,136
435,155
789,519
16,896,814
2,052,590
3,200,371
11,625,347
2,129,582
3,483,746
16,630,670
1,986,464
4,130,043
24,034,636
2,176,849
1,964,657
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
$71,888,205
13,374,308
10,987,723
4,817,430
3,647,364
2,166,509
1,315,988
$562,321
260,881
57,330
37,728
73,367
81,122
57,451
$7,665,600
3,460,487
1,039,731
655,865
683,242
445,111
399,650
$5,240,827
1,681,842
307,451
435,697
621,020
386,029
181,446
$8,234,630
2,975,564
1,556,443
453,478
3,387,853
4,100,496
2,679,331
4,614,531
2,217,195
1,891,129
2,932,074
31,676
137,644
149,669
23,731
23,826
44,390
130,186
387,103
382,512
338,872
628,364
355,266
324,825
231,038
422,843
419,350
657,811
367,936
361,045
311,012
28,071
591,640
537,104
299,005
457,323
205,721
702,414
Markets
and warehouses
Cemeteries and
crematories
Contributions to
publicservice
enterprises
$1,949,525 ($543,944 $3,821,981 »1,633,138 fel,145,515$61,383,253
1,758,480
70,684
120,361
106,297
91,724
345,923
3,105,513
178,708
537,760
1,099,137
223,041
310,960
202,784 47,243,180
6,743,853
105,673
837,058 7,396,220
$412,254
70,102
8,893
1,609,869
246,008
570
159,035
$635,471
4,800
7,900
50,186
834,636,866
346,766
4,665,562
311,702
1,451,053
$1,751
135,316
131,606
361,035
406,746
83,570
29,405
36,732
GHOUP I.—CITIES HATING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OTER
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif,
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
589,277
$13,049,287
3,573,806
1,500,899
204,858
162,445
170,384
$941,411
274,416
81,088
52,786
76,048
1,137,458
1,411,536
777,411
697,678
455,062
59,006
$14,982
99,259
76,328
104,051
93,346
53,411
39,366
79,792
893,812
63,006
58,428
69,427
30,865
3,356
95,418
1,139,518
804,298
229,205
2,267,883
1,478
453,996
438,502
GHOUP II.—CITIES HATING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, M i n n . — |
New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o —
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind. 1
Rochester, N. Y . —
Jersey City, N. J.
j
$1,275,570
1,651,669
2,248,553
3,132,367
686,284
1,198,547
618,271
2,142,810
1,513,766
$6,274
204,650
17,241
3,022
13,511
14,712
154,176
2,035
$154,419
104,652
280,484
415,977
12,175
204,097
111,930
136,588
514,026
$205,494
120,209
244,780
378,644
76,137
292,652
118,656
172,176
389,008
$1,048
$272,620
94,183
390,731
284,885
$453,127
4,790
180,497
406,447
63,460
60,759
476,873
189,609
341,205
1,460
320,380
443,147
9,848
$60,612
19,804
$16,170
14,849
52,530
47,894
39,983
$3,292
80,602
20,051
25,415
13,204
8,759
26,903
16,011
$1,272
1,838
93,637
$138,527
973,216
1,032,606
1,532,653
150,487
258,578
44,888
673,715
TABLE 16.—COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BY FUNCTIONS IN DETAIL:
1937—Continued
XII. —MISCELLANEOUS
Pension and g r a t u i t i e s on account of service
Judgments
and l o s s e s
(not a l l o cated)
Compensation for
employee injury
Noninsurance compensation
(not a l l o cated)
School
teachers
Compensation
insurance
Municipal
service
enterprises
(not allocated)
Markets
and warehouses
Cemeteries and
crematories
Contributions to
publicservice
enterprises
(not allocated)
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 600,000—Continued
Houston, T e x . —
Louisville, Kyv
Portland, Oreg.
$896,295
386,774
1,646,666
Columbus, O h i o Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif. Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.-
$28,804
$18,671
863
$78,180
40,062
$786,272
652,707
1,847,806
623,583
254,537
134,835
439,864
186,660
$203,907
123,905
76,704
133,409
66,864
66,907
123,699
55,663
$186,793
169,548
38,109
9,024
4,264
10,288
7,143
$111,679
131,977
80,110
133,039
68,893
55,947
127,579
55,337
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, T e x . —
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Worcester, Mass.
659,223
200,019
898,672
127,005
568,717
891,086
676,870
282,711
587,758
16,131
830
4,924
8,143
286
7,084
1,558
17,828
78,935
55,099
23,327
146,134
36,580
117,811
78,752
70,289
8,388
55,529
43,914
35,233
136,621
25,536
228,705
76,368
81,289
40,746
51,665
211,769
21,950
107,560
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.'
Fort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.
San Diego, C a l i f . —
Long Beach, Calif.—
412,837
675,565
145,160
142,426
441,345
102,025
468,581
668,453
661,920
1,440
61,203
569
3,722
25,872
111
41,119
11,529
837
32,150
4,800
12',47 6
301457
7,781
72,644
9,694
93,104
44,407
26,905
$58,206
173,620
$1,133
152,211
$7,282
$3,415
5,511
$27,256
$845,718
41,484
1,051,981
$21,773
178,403
195,162
$133,947
74,589
1,654,876
71,894
9,956
7,717
54,796
19,975
$26,602
1,578
34,894
2,681
292,353
94,665
245,649
20,857
75,362
34,930
364,970
50,492
13,691
4,933
15,154
11,128
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
40,492
3,412
55,124
53,824
24,402
171,066
48,554
$74,467
50,018
$29,693
44,961
1,050
32,952
3,600
30,781
$9,986
172
5,340
3,341
$16,038
5,240
$24,179
4,678
203
14,750
$3,987
2,000
4,298
192,902
4,562
2,722
19,524
145,844
272,128
132,745
684
203,626
20,178
18,172
109,661
51,032
16,365
27,640
165,257
64,045
34,344
143 793
23^674
107 7 4 1
22 575
92 469
54,113
16,885
3.094
7,801
7,003
34,195
4,869
75,319
23,226
18,088
15,967
6,285
60,287
198,405
565,554
12,118
24,160
2,901
17,980
1,994
25,843
1,883
82,218
70.649
13,102
59,874
440,346
579,741
22,595
3,753
25
60,719
7,847
42,059
10,413
62
50
41,702
24,386
41,486
71,112
1,218
20,788
202,726
335,664
224,028
311,292
290,189
179,805
408,642
1,042,536
3,221
32,325
67
31,917
18,593
8,256
14,875
15,039
Paterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N . J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.'
Kansas City, Kans.
Fort Wayne, I n d . —
294,200
417,585
785,837
155,548
265,104
130,221
77,067
150,169
3,962
7,086
8,240
124
Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J . —
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.Cambridge, M a s s . —
New Bedford, Mass.-
304,236
273,037
181,721
81,236
126,676
216,285
389,228
235,401
Reading, Pa.
Khoxville, Tenn.Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.-
187,498
126,399
173,582
Nashville, Tenn.
Springfield, M a s s . —
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N . Y .
Tampa, Fla.
Somerville, Mass.
El Paso, Tex.
89,382
160,125
217,877
93,115
185,249
232,308
Evan8ville, Ind.~
Lynn, Mass.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.Lowell, Mass.
114,278
195,013
48,496
179,042
276,637
396,856
197,702
199,950
373,491
Honolulu, Hawaii l/-
507,015
1/ Not included in group or grand t o t a l s .
8,643
17,007
5,105
5 ,922
322
776
35 ,949
2,520
2,643
19,101
1,168
1,341
16,092
29,487
2,041
17,517
12,031
15,717
46,660
8,031
22,592
4,328
60,812
45,936
34,235
19,729
114,579
48,774 I
46,197
25,737
95,772
52,490
33,747
300
79,628
83,396
68,164
38,885
31,281
90,478
21,698
29,846
33,553
79,863
36,072
38,912
40,032
83,691 I
19,266 I
30,214
31,515
109,413
5,583
60,340
4,950
33,863
41,698
54,889
39,522
80,263
10,895
56,912
30,461
51,254
37,035
62,612
19,008
7,844
24,195
44,930
23,452
21,819
17,026
15,077
32,898
38,655
10,911
22,884
40,206
32,543
55,597
10,303
9,982
36,115
2,133
39,057
30,106
15,547
28,983
25,971
35,871
30,543
28,276
26,670
30,332
35,473
8,609
35,722
38,235
33,211
43,212
14,869
31,103
24,016
39,913
19,771
23,211
88,078
62,800
39,032
69,964
41,914
259,214
87,952
138,652
9,786
61,632
16,605
12,584
54,036
13,423
42,863
5,426
11,846
25,282
18,975
380
24,546
40,998
61,672
49,215
83,918
42,242
21,490
16,858
23,299
67,665
27,059
59,552
236,401
161,826
1,375
157,137
431,740
245,948
5,852
54,392
86,139
6,228
29,930
,161
24,447
28,145
5,919
8,149
3,763
2,664
6,467
480
39,939
11,249
37,455
54,783
1,433
16,175
14,712
3,130
818
34,198
49,981
58,555
42,812
2,534
55,326
49,916
32,600
10,904
1,916
1,210
4,634
1,872
8,141
47,182
118,212
1,537
2,669
66,443
27,932
6,196
172,196
11,957
2,427
6,770
302
50
2,414
15,591
55,906
78,207
2,391
2,770
14,324
3,644
2,163
65,541
21,088
5,983
170,327
2,909
14,066
42,360
124,520
80,609
78,174
44,234
6,257
31,474
14,382
12,936
931
813
17,481
86,657
19,321
3,803
37,954
9,052
4,771
12,002
33,175
57,201
9,661
2,478
8,991
11,938
144,432
2,529
7,499
9,287
27,001
6,,7 95
27,696
20,486
20,439
7,856
19,826
166,302
27,098
8,402
46,765
124,125
37,627
13,433
18,729
32,232
166,396
20,656
25,367
17,523
57,449
83,041
54,705
2,200
175
4,132
44,759
74,623
41,181
799
22,105
35,340
2,235
32,549
36,845
33,863
15,345
86,518
1,444
4,336
67.741
11,918
176
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
TABLE 17
Cost payments, total and per capita, for operation and maintenance of general government, are shown in table 17 under the 12 major functional classifications discussed in connection with table 16.
PER CAPITA COST PATMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF GENERAL GOVERNMENT.—The
general average of per capita expenditures for the operation and maintenance of
general government was $53.75 for the 94 cities as a whole, the cities in group
I having the highest average of $63.39 as compared with an average of $35.68 in
group III. Individually, the per capita averages ranged from the highest of
$85.30 in the city of New York and $81.30 in Boston to $18.73 in El Paso and
$19.34 in Birmingham.
The level of per capita expenditures of the individual cities varies strikingly within the functional groups presented. For example, the per capita cost
of police protection is a larger item of public safety than fire protection in
all but one of the cities in group I and group II, whereas fire protection is a
larger per capita cost item in 40 of the 68 cities in group III. In almost all
cases, school expenditures were the largest per capita cost items, but it should
be noted that In six cities—Minneapolis, Denver, Lowell, Fall River, New Bedford, and Somerville—per capita expenditures for charities were the largest.
Per capita expenditures for charities reveal wide fluctuations, averaging $18.5-9
in Minneapolis as against 1 cent or less, or even nothing, in other cities. It
should be emphasized in this connection that although these wide variations may
be due to unusual local conditions, they occasionally were caused by Imperfect
statements that defied proper classification or by special local arrangements
whereby relief and welfare activities were assumed either by the States or by
the Federal Government.
Per capita payments for operation and maintenance of general government are
larger for cities in group I and group II than they otherwise would be because
of the fact that New York, Philadelphia, St. Louis, Baltimore, Boston, San
Francisco, Washington, and New Orleans exercise all the executive and judicial
functions usually possessed by counties. To secure comparability between the
payments for all general governmental functions in these cities and in other
cities of groups I and II which exercise no county functions, certain percentages of the payments for operation and maintenance of county governments of the
other cities of groups I and II are combined with the city payments, as explained in the Introduction.
TRENDS IN PER CAPITA COSTS OF OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.-The revised classification of accounts adopted for the 1937 report does not permit reference to previous volumes for comparative trends in per capita costs
of operating and maintaining general government. To pre1926
|41.22
sent certain trend comparisions since 1926, however, the
1928
44.96
1930
47.66
statistics published in such years were revised according
1932
47.87
to 1937 classifications, with the accompanying results
1934
46.44
indicated. Although previously presented comparisons
1936
49.06
have indicated that the cost of operating and maintaining
1937
53.75
general government has Increased $288,000,000, or 16.6
percent, since 1930, the foregoing per capita comparisons show a less extreme
Increase when the factor of population growth is considered. The increase in
the latter case is only 12.8 percent.
TABLE 18
The percent distribution of cost payments for operating and maintaining
general government in the 94 cities during 1937 is shown in table 18 under the
12 major functional activities.
PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS.—The percent distribution of expenditures for operating and maintaining general government Is, like
per capita costs, subject to wide variance among the individual cities. For
example, school expenditures constituted 60.6 percent of operation and maintenance costs in Wichita, but only 23.9 percent of such expenditures in Miami and
Jersey City. For nearly all cities a larger percentage was reported for schools
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—COST PAYMENTS
177
than for any other purpose shown in table 17, the only exception being the six
cities that reported the largest expenditures for charities and relief (see
above). It is to be noted, however, that the cities in group III report a
higher percentage of expenditures for schools than the cities in groups I or II,
suggesting that expense for this purpose, while increasing with population
growth, does not adjust itself to the population factor so quickly as other
cost items. Cities in group III also reported a relatively larger percentage
of total expenditures for public safety, highways, libraries, and recreation
than the cities in group I.
Other interesting variations in the percentage distribution of operation
and maintenance expenditures are shown under the caption of "Highways,M which
item accounted for 21 percent of WaterburyTs expenditures but only 1.8 percent
of Philadelphia's. General administrative, legislative, and Judicial costs accounted for only 2.9 percent of operation and maintenance expense in Evansvllle,
Wichita, and South Bend, as against 15.5 percent in New Orleans.
TREND OF PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.—As previously indicated, cost payments have been subjected to so many revisions in compilation
procedure that comparisons with previous years are elusive. To present comparative trends as to percentage distribution of expenditures for operation and
maintenance in the case of six of the major functions, statistics previously
published have been revised to conform with the 1937 classifications. The figures are as follows:
PERCENT
1926 1928 1930 1932 1934 1936 1937
Charities
Public safety
Highways
General administrative, legislative,
and judicial
Sanitation and waste
35.6 35.6 34.5 33.6 30.2 31.0 29.4
9.8 16.5 15.2 16.4
3.1 3.5
3.9
20.1 19.7 19.8 18.2 17.1 17.2 16.3
8.8 8.2
6.8
8.0
5.9
6.2
5.2
8.9
9.0
9.1
8.3
7.8
8.1
7.9
7.7
7.7
7.4
6.5
5.3
5.3
4.9
As seen from the foregoing, the percent distribution of expenditures for
the larger major functions was relatively less In 1937 for all Items except
charities.
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
178
TABLE 1 7 . — C O S T PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,
ALL MAJOR FUNCTIONS
I.—GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE, LEGISLATIVE, AND JUDICIAL
II.—PUBLIC SAFETY
Police department
Per
capita
Grand total'
Group I
Group IIGroup III
-—
Per
capita
Per
capita
$2,025,052,436
$53.75
$159,557,414
$4.24
$192,711,789
$5.12
1,402,929,107
232,169,946
389,953,383
63.39
50.33
35.68
116,446,134
21,040,268
22,071,012
5.26
4.56
2.02
1 4 0 , 2 4 7 ,,397
19,168,967
33,295,425
6.34
4.16
3.05
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A
New Tork, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$610,260,559
172,960,618
82,190,756
84,127,761
81,329,374
48,267,544
34,619,539
$85.30
49.55
41.66
50.49
60.06
52.56
41.70
$45,106,855
17,846,015
8,806,972
6,377,821
7,874,269
3,818,254
3,583,335
$6.30
5.11
4.46
3.83
5.82
4.16
4.32
$57,072,286
18,228,244
11,651,262
10,325,404
7,130,103
4,457,411
5,255,422
$7.98
5.22
5.91
6.20
5.27
4.85
6.33
38,296,529
63,972,224
38,623,016
36,200,187
36,642,265
35,553,829
39,884,906
46.87
81.30
56.92
55.17
58.82
59.35
68.25
2,301,073
4,473,780
5,374,420
3,484,064
2,158,117
2,358,262
2,882,897
2.82
5.69
7.92
5.31
3.46
3.94
4.93
4,501,390
5,630,629
3,029,499
3,519,501
3,719,077
2,964,458
2,762,711
5.51
7.16
4.46
5.36
5.97
4.95
4.73
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A
Minneapolis, Minn.'
New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
$28,310,821
15,128,484
23,951,966
35,161,513
15,634,623
17,100,749
$59.26
32.12
52.06
78.66
37.89
45.71
$1,674,681
2,343,677
2,127,240
2,845,726
2,040,748
1,757,793
$3.51
4.98
4.62
6.37
4.95
4.70
$1,417,88)3
1,499,839
1,566,132
3,587,515
1,390,019
1,424,969
$2.97
3.18
3.40
8.03
3.37
3.81
Indianapolis, Ind.Rochester, N. Y . —
Jersey City, N. J.Houston, Tez.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
14,723,559
25,365,216
22,793,859
10,651,697
10,728,020
12,619,439
39.57
76.06
71.25
33.51
33.79
40.83
950,152
1,746,705
2,533,915
1,037,368
789,976
1,192,287
2.55
5.24
7.92
3.26
2.49
3.86
1,235,374
1,218,311
2,988,192
822,692
924,445
1,093,591
3.32
3.65
9.34
2.59
2.91
3.54
GROUP III. —CITIES HAVING A
$7,953,936
9,539,825
12,314,947
16,322,545
8,194,668
$26.54
31.92
41.66
55.67
29.22
$566,103
488,796
517,230
1,197,967
399,132
$1.89
1.64
1.75
4.09
1.42
$675,859
82)8,140
1,048,356
1,003,626
8(51,537
$2.26
2.80
3.55
3.42
3.14
6,589,735
8,611,224
5,286,402
7,966,573
5,400,904
23.70
30.99
19.34
30.05
20.65
307,335
444,343
287,185
406,512
278,691
1.11
1.60
1.05
1.53
1.07
639,054
737,084
519,953
4132,2154
536,111
2.30
2.65
1.90
1.82
2.05
Providence, R. I.San Antonio, Tex. •
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y . —
Dayton, Ohio
13,031,341
5,348,156
5,786,067
12,964,709
6,554,668
50.98
21.96
26.57
60.44
31.73
898,961
338,452
287,160
624,233
315,153
3.52
1.39
1.32
2.91
1.53
1,159,656
330,962
535,376
712,552
475,395
4.54
1.36
2.46
3.32
2.30
Oklahoma City, Okla.Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Yoimgstown, Ohio
Grand R a p i d s , M i c h . -
4,911,943
12,359,604
6,826,164
5,581,886
4,845,276
24.39
62.42
36.92
32.04
28.04
231,658
462,764
590,682
269,716
229,503
1.15
2.34
3.19
1.55
1.33
515,983
961,134
564,759
394,430
362,177
2.56
4.85
3.05
2.26
2.10
4,511,942
9,447,011
5,363,213
7,502,913
6,252,806
26.67
56.07
32.08
46.12
39.06
225,195
567,022
197,920
380,502
470,263
1.33
3.37
1.18
2.34
2.94
388,294
865,893
402,135
797,978
519,241
2.29
5.14
2.41
4.90
3.24
Columbus, OhioToledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, C o l o . —
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.--
F o r t Worth, T e x . Hartford, Conn.—
F l i n t , Mich.
New Haven, Conn.San Diego, Calif.
PART I I : GENERAL GOVERNMENT—COST PAYMENTS
TOTAL AND P E R C A P I T A ,
BY MAJOR F U N C T I O N S : . 1 9 3 7
II.—PUBLIC SAFETY—Continued
Fire department
IV. —SANITATION
AND WASTE
REMOVAL
III.—HIGHWAYS
All other
Total
Per
capita
Total
Per
capita
$122,064,413
$3.24
$15,330,831
$0.41
$106,242,397
72,995,128
14,785,688
34,283,597
3.30
3.21
3.14
10,534,887
2,009,826
2,786,118
.48
.44
.25
65,361,537
15,792,460
25,088,400
Total
179
Per
capita
Total
$2.82 $99,947,445
2.95
3.42
2.30
Per
capita
V. —CONSERVATION
OF HEALTH
Total
Per
capita
$2.65 $27,686,660
$0.73
69,827,555
10,634,953
19,484,937
3.16
2.31
1.78
16,889,189
3,893,108
6,904,363
.76
.84
.63
$3.18 $32,147,485
5,516,542
2.89
.76 3,580,165
4,914,577
2.54
3.46
1,970,615
4.10
1,982,600
886,860
2.43
$4.49
2.73
1.81
2.95
1.46
2.16
1.07
$4,777,468
1,901,930
1,061,788
1,600,085
1,706,122
788,017
636,072
$0.67
i
o
POPULATION OF 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 AND OVER
$26,139,311
7,774,562
4,223,766
5,063,423
5,928,360
2,846,037
2,244,686
$3.65
2.23
2.14
3.04
4.38
3.10
2.70
$3,412,691
1,650,168
546,151
765,093
1,291,519
287,460
316,123
$0.48
.47
.28
.46
.95
.31
.38
$22,730,107
10,094,557
1,495,991
4,233,011
4,680,385
3,765,689
2,017,718
3,007,499
3,650,160
2,092,675
3,363,945
2,443,835
1,975,095
2,241,774
3.68
4.64
3.08
5.13
3.92
3.30
3.84
267,000
440,291
365,994
230,418
533,618
237,577
190,784
.33
.56
.54
.35
.86
.40
.33
3,148,456
2,927,307
2,936,537
1,207,156
1,768,197
2,211,746
2,144,680
3.85
3.72
4.33
1.84
2.84
3.69
3.67
2,566,658
3,020,513
1,753,415
895,455
1,826,921
2,990,474
1,775,275
3.14
3.84
2.58
1.36
2.93
4.99
3.04
582,985
1,222,902
523,093
624,750
562,764
376,984
524,229
.54
.54
.96
1.26
.86
.77
.71
1.55
.77
.95
.90
.63
.90
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
POPULATION OF 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 5 0 0 , 0 0 0
15
.57 16
.56 17
1.90 18
.46 19
.69 20
$1,177,303
1,245,687
1,291,964
2,104,459
881,886
1,359,655
$2.46
2.64
2.81
4.71
2.14
3.63
$174,363
530,218
178,265
221,918
106,445
153,649
$0.37
1.13
.39
.50
.26
.41
$1,735,810
1,589,429
1,560,763
954,752
1,375,738
2,250,530
$3.63
3.37
3.39
2.14
3.33
6.02
$594,049
1,251,387
892,711
2,034,678
731,968
619,056
$1.24
2.66
1.94
4.55
1.77
1.65
$300,879
270,406
257,001
850,699
188,588
257,137
1,605,922
1,174,180
1,252,257
807,796
611,710
1,272,869
4.32
3.52
3.91
2.54
1.93
4.12
78,074
121,002
149,568
78,121
74,009
144,194
.21
.36
.47
.25
.23
.47
1,001,277
1,566,403
974,665
1,090,223
681,187
1,011,683
2.69
4.70
3.05
3.43
2.15
3.27
732,536
1,454,753
953,213
523,630
512,044
334,928
1.97
4.36
2.98
1.65
1.61
1.08
211,639
453,733
512,728
136,472
249,129
204,697
$0.36
.41
.73
.55
.35
27
28
29
30
31
.36
.55
.42
.53
.69
32
33
34
35
36
$0.63
.57 21
22
23
.43 24
.78 25
.66 26
1.36
1.60
POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0
$654,361
774,138
1,203,643
1,000,770
713,440
$2.18
2.59
4.07
3.41
2.54
$36,854
36,142
89,190
78,882
59,949
$0.12
.12
.30
.27
.21
$558,875
673,115
575,856
748,324
458,121
$1.86
2.25
1.95
2.55
1.63
$418,071
488,360
226,094
414,130
505,871
$1.39
1.63
1.41
1.80
$107,643
122,917
214,542
160,928
99,312
731,236
854,120
652,484
366,842
623,704
2.63
3.07
2.39
1.38
2.39
82,530
77,766
51,917
18,229
116,612
.30
.28
.19
.07
.45
301,700
525,565
249,750
739,188
525,141
1.09
1.89
2.79
2.01
447,398
303,007
276,450
309,707
368,001
1.61
1.09
1.01
1.17
1.41
101,017
153,536
114,161
141,232
181,059
1,165,699
404,752
716,429
864,800
451,633
4.56
1.66
3.29
4.03
2.19
89,327
73,065
50,041
46,434
32,088
.35
.30
.23
.22
.16
675,824
315,932
416,637
758,291
505,887
2.64
1.30
1.91
3.54
2.45
771,225
374,757
207,686
768,327
409,820
•3.02
1.54
166,885
229,502
62,809
316,078
116,679
423,285
890,559
591,343
303,571
441,598
2.10
4.50
3.20
1.74
2.56
41,335
73,509
73,607
16,650
30,803
.21
.37
.40
.10
.18
249,344
987,465
469,848
312,014
198,229
1.24
4.99
2.54
1.79
1.15
263,378
332,508
368,523
161,420
181,888
1.31
1.68
1.99
1.05
97,679
164,178
150,227
62,050
124,566
452,813
752,926
331,593
706,756
446,104
2.68
4.47
1.98
4.34
2.79
24,674
133,615
32,369
35,039
50,419
.15
.79
.19
.22
.31
250,634
429,810
368,474
362,955
349,247
1.48
2.55
2.20
2.23
2.18
217,272
445,207
218,228
254,739
227,339
1.28
2.64
1.31
1.57
1.42
109,164
179,984
94,655
136,850
124,157
.91
.76
.95
3.58
1.98
.93
.65 37
.94 38
.29 39
1.47 40
.56 41
.49
.83
.81
.36
.72
42
43
44
45
46
.65 47
48
.57 49
.84 50
.78 51
1.07
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
180
| Citjr number
TABLE 1 7 . — C O S T PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,
ALL MAJOR FUNCTIONS
I.—GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE, LEGISLATIVE, AND JUDICIAL
CITY
TOTAL
II.—PUBLIC SAFETY
Police department
Total
Per
capita
Total
Per
capita
Total
Per
capita
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A. POPULATION
Long B e a c h , C a l i f . '
Nashville, Tenn.—
S p r i n g f i e l d , Mass.T u l s a , Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.-
#6,523,438
3,871,211
9,268,627
3,515,740
6,652,374
$41.55
24.78
60.42
23.75
45.16
•423,750
258,713
381,657
175,778
350,802
$2.70
1.66
2.49
1.19
2.38
$563,348
489,135
731,442
260,648
561,983
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J.
4,498,399
4,090,968
4,440,773
10,794,576
5,170,691
30.96
28.33
30.80
76.83
37.20
252,095
247,593
315,748
754,216
256,329
1.73
1.71
2.19
5.37
1.84
333,713
385,703
332,019
978,290
636,947
Jacksonville, Fla.Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.-
4,867,122
6,601,310
3,935,512
4,993,511
2,840,629
35.04
50.86
30.34
40.24
23.00
323,314
404,199
443,476
213,885
117,979
2.33
3.11
3.42
1.72
.96
494,201
827,410
468,606
523,806
263,778
Kansas City, Kans.Fort Wayne, I n d . —
Camden, N. J.—
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J . —
2,675,821
2,633,650
4,620,338
3,613,265
4,444,012
21.68
21.93
38.79
30.54
37.69
159,683
81,892
367,358
284,106
211,111
1.29
.68
3.08
2.40
1.79
236,059
241,802
426,353
259,138
520,100
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.Cambridge, M a s s . —
New Bedford, Mass.
3,132,366
3,501,240
4,609,242
6,490,427
5,057,609
26.64
30.03
39.99
56.78
44.92
90,896
175,767
190,548
323,331
220,151
.77
1.51
1.65
2.83
1.96
219,655
267,869
354,631
514,270
411,366
Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, Tenn.'
Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.Tacoma, Wash.
3,323,383
3,064,707
3,523,628
2,603,965
3,299,948
29.73
27.71
32.09
23.76
30.50
241,063
163,115
209,865
75,735
207,480
2.16
1.47
1.91
.69
1.92
284,675
295,927
290,145
239,917
243,933
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.'
Tampa, Fla.
4,949,371
3,031,640
2,958,970
3,240,462
2,870,598
45.74
28.07
27.53
30.40
26.95
636,718
104,119
142,100
218,516
170,367
5.88
.96
1.32
2.05
1.60
535,799
317,004
267,404
344,1306
206,863
Somerville, Mass.El Paso, Tex.Evansville, Ind.Lynn, MasB.
5,890,061
1,981,974
2,707,299
5,291,275
55.67
18.73
25.76
51.42
258,198
93,673
79,550
233,787
2.44
.89
.76
2.27
375,369
161,1332
287,985
381,679
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.Lowell, Mass.
4,948,722
3,567,030
5,432,083
4,956,958
48.23
35.01
53.62
49.45
267,301
328,703
399,008
234,859
2.61
3.23
3.94
2.34
377,674
278,484
420,976
334,732
Honolulu, Hawaii l/~
4,605,676
1/ Not included in group or grand totals.
508,055
PART I I : GENERAL GOVERNMENT—COST PAYMENTS
181
AND PER CAPITA, BY MAJOR FUNCTIONS: 1937—Continued
Fire department
Total
Per
capita
All other
Total
IT. —SANITATION
AND WASTE
REMOVAL
III.—HIGHWAYS
Per
capita
Total
Per
capita
Total
Per
capita
Y. —CONSERVATION
OF HEALTH
Total
Per
capita
u
1
City
II.—PUBLIC SAFETY—Continued
OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
•534,909
535,013
859,720
337,422
700,330
$3.41
3.42
5.60
2.28
4.75
152,291
50,092
60,826
18,648
18,205
$0.33
.32
.40
.13
.12
#487,646
196,589
480,510
238,719
846,242
$3.11
1.26
3.13
1.61
5.75
$363,639
179,141
567,103
79,168
367,641
$2.32
1.15
3.70
480,768
467,640
248,814
639,901
623,277
3.31
3.24
1.73
4.55
4.48
37,989
22,276
27,890
78,635
32,833
.26
.15
.19
.56
.24
317,153
313,924
413,932
439,126
191,571
2.18
2.17
2.87
3.13
1.38
209,857
283,392
102,825
1,034,112
377,344
1.44
1.96
512,367
531,765
459,113
475,083
408,235
3.69
4.10
3.54
3.83
3.31
60,461
50,328
53,682
21,284
9,658
.44
.39
.41
.17
.08
532,640
305,645
133,806
284,567
243,096
3.83
2.35
1.03
2.29
1.97
367,265
285,992
354,376
306,514
469,081
2.98
2.38
2.98
2.59
3.98
53,393
16,801
20,983
15,503
27,792
.43
.14
.18
.13
.24
178,718
99,119
191,123
227,858
236,930
1.45
288,350
313,486
344,266
511,920
348,896
2.45
2.69
2.99
4.48
3.10
17,764
33,086
16,820
39,216
36,727
.15
.28
.15
.34
.33
153,546
340,671
337,975
309,851
455,448
1.37
3.08
3.08
2.83
4.21
10,506
14,107
20,448
14,909
19,182
.09
.13
.19
.14
.18
405,625
325,395
201,157
322,140
217,031
3.75
3.01
1.87
3.02
2.04
114,691
15,656
9,820
16,801
15,792
439,455
235,921
339,504
506,526
4.15
2.23
3.23
4.92
484,461
356,302
563,034
366,453
325,922
.53
2.50
|84,135
120,257
116,885
36,821
108,983
$0.54
.77
.76
.25
.74
52
53
54
55
56
7.36
2.71
81,406
53,342
83,895
193,861
117,055
.56 57
.37 58
.58 59
1.38 60
.84 61
429,016
546,598
271,467
272,165
163,342
3.09
4.21
2.09
2.19
1.32
180,434
142,210
84,690
96,472
36,169
1.30
1.10
40,473
144,952
174,104
213,995
224,584
.33
1.60
1.93
2.01
1.21
1.46
1.81
1.90
82,187
45,632
63,779
86,209
83,596
.67
.38
.54
.73
.71
67
68
69
70
71
127,674
296,386
311,695
361,390
191,421
1.09
2.54
2.70
3.16
1.70
119,286
224,857
72,881
417,341
232,511
1.01
1.93
44,121
61,006
76,097
97,581
83,280
.38
.52
.66
.85
.74
72
73
74
75
76
226,815
242,423
277,613
225,690
201,124
2.03
2.19
2.53
2.06
1.86
152,738
166,281
296,648
81,245
216,966
1.37
1.41
2.70
92,739
50,698
41,077
35,626
54,916
.83
.46
.37
.33
.51
77
78
79
80
81
.14
.09
.16
.15
438,726
135,901
339,603
149,866
293,169
4.05
1.27
3.16
1.41
2.75
315,908
181,516
101,287
254,313
169,448
2.92
1.68
101,259
51,173
37,296
49,168
61,647
.94
.47
.35
.46
.58
82
83
84
85
86
37,573
12,649
22,849
29,330
.36
.12
.22
.29
267,756
85,319
225,564
267,861
2.53
364,907
102,015
83,136
237,394
3.45
2.15
2.60
2.31
67,961
62,626
45,995
63,078
.64
.59
.44
.61
87
88
89
90
4.72
3.50
5.56
3.66
18,486
22,603
23,022
43,465
.18
.22
.23
.43
355,500
245,041
1,138,082
317,641
3.46
2.40
11.23
3.17
221,435
108,995
165,566
203,939
2.16
1.07
1.63
2.03
97,517
57,613
61,572
80,489
.95
.57
.61
.80
91
92
93
94
1.61
28,740
.14
758,993
3.74
350,861
1.73
292,289
1.44
1.06
.83
.81
.71
.63
3.65
2.06
.74
2.01
.94
2.39
1.59
.96
.79
62
63
.65 64
.78 65
.29 66
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
182
TABLE 1 7 . — C O S T PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE,
VI.—HOSPITALS
VII.—CHARITIES
Per
capita
Per
capita
Grand t o t a l
$98,059,013
Group I
Group I I
Group I I I
72,197,494
15,478,798
10,382,721
$2.60 $332,082,953
3.26
3.36
.95
VIII.—CORRECTION
262,445,960
30,579,508
39,057,485
I X . — SCHOOLS
Per
capita
$8.81 $21,329,855
11.86
6.63
3.57
17,610,735
2,637,194
1,081,926
TOTAL
capita
$0.57 &596,128,836 * 1 5 . 8 2
.80
.57
.10
375,360,668
68,523,384
152,244,784
16.96
14.86
13.93
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A
New York, N. Y.
$28,632,115
Chicago, 111.
5,858,000
Philadelphia, Pa.
1
3,915,726
Detroit, Mich.
6,985,255
4,373,303
Los Angeles, Calif,
2,523,687
Cleveland, Ohio
1
2,919,592
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.|
Washington, D. C.Milwaukee, Wis.
1
Buffalo, N. Y.
1,847,374
3,709,025
981,823
1,979,333
3,911,665
2,507,393
2,053,203
$4.00 $148,942,293 ($20.82
1.68
9.71
33,877,775
1.98
.76
1,508,297
4.19
4.92
8,197,507
3.23
8.40
11,379,106
2.75
9.06
8,316,494
3.52
3.29
2,729,982
$4,528,663
2,087,921
2,655,814
695,403
1,537,770
417,329
403,213
6.57
17.23
6.17
7.07
5.41
10.53
17.22
428,800
1,152,809
781,884
314,169
1,821,091
372,626
413,243
2.26
4.71
1.45
3.02
6.28
4.19
3.51
5,365,609
13,561,385
4,189,151
4,640,889
3,370,248
6,306,397
10,060,827
$ 0 . 6 3 B151,34(5,306 | $ 2 1 . 1 5
4 1 , 5 9 ' ' , 796 1 1 . 9 2
.60
28,64)3,559 1 4 . 5 2
1.35
.42
26,958,277 16.18
26,082,4813 1 9 . 2 6
1.14
14,261,368 15.53
.45
.49
10,3015,794 1 2 . 4 1
.52
1.47
1.15
.48
2.92
.62
.71
9,259,508
16,289,347
12,167,316
9,008,813
10,239,171
9,123,063
10,072,867
11.33
20.70
17.93
13.73
16.44
15.23
17.24
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A
Minneapolis, M i n n . —
New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, Ohio
1
Newark, N. J.
1
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.Rochester, N. Y . —
Jersey City, N. J.Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
$1,685,953
60,869
1,842,207
2,616,198
1,161,414
1,006,186
$3.53
.13
4.00
5.85
2.81
2.69
811,916
1,247,713
3,365,620
491,728
833,416
355,578
2.18
3.74
10.52
1.55
2.62
1.15
$8,882,793 &18.59
.32
152,143
7.14
3,284,774
5,481,086 12.26
.84
345,362
543,136
1.45
1,778,190
5,979,439
1,938,646
383,068
903,721
907,150
4.78
17.93
6.06
1.20
2.85
2.93
$242,746
189,176
228,598
518,956
287,648
179,210
$0.51
.40
.50
1.16
.70
36,449
219,012
293,434
163,686
191,362
86,917
.10
.66
.92
.51
.60
.28
$7,8C6,563 $16.34
8.28
3,897,999
7,56-8,455 16.49
9,606,362 21.49
5,312,219 12.87
5,535,606 14.80
4,915,428
6,905,925
5,452,433
3,912,593
3,909,981
3,681,320
13.21
20.70
17.04
12.31
12.31
11.91
GROUP I I I . — CITIES HAVING A
Columbus, OhioToledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, C o l o . —
Atlanta, Ga.
$4,354
37,081
1,080
533,748
745,139
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, M i n n . —
Bi rmingham, Ala. —
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
189,437
267,440
12,000
U/)
1.82
2.66
.96
.04
511,555
Providence, R. I.San Antonio, Tex.Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y . —
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.Fort Worth, T e x . «
H a r t f o r d , Conn.
F l i n t , Mich.
New Haven, Conn.—
San Diego, Calif.-
$0.01
.12
1
$514,073
670,146
22,351
4,891,043
276.937
$1.72
2.24
.08
16.68
.99
$35,313
48,296
178,433
791,605
121,544
372,985
4,220
.64
2.85
.44
1.41
.02
8,270
61,839
55,127
28,084
19,026
12,970
90,764
2,700
.06
.42
.01
1,660,302
19,596
2,238
3,445,579
374,037
6.50
.08
.01
16.06
1.81
10,763
850,395
365,960
83,713
140,985
.05
4.29
1.98
.48
.82
23,982
2,831,319
562,667
20,487
340,549
.12
14.30
3.04
.12
1.97
73,200
219,866
679,091
213,746
.43
1.30
4.06
1.31
222,687
1,708,929
179,323
1,162,114
4,778
1.32
10.14
1.07
7.14
.03
1/ Less than 1/2 of 1 cent.
$0.12
.16
99,770
32,088
$ 3 , 4 0 8 , 5 6 4 |$11.37
4,285,052 14.34
5,721,598 19.36
4,593,810 15.67
3,474,114 12.39
.11
.07
3,147,238
3,371,522
2,433,288
4,230,917
1,649,400
11.32
12.13
8.90
15.96
6.31
455
82,452
.40
4,468,062
2,805,450
2,701,787
3,925,197
2,704,552
17.48
11.52
12.40
18.30
13.09
30,336
1,971
20,194
12,741
3,235
.15
.01
.11
.07
.02
2,483,819
3,631,908
2,419,291
2,871,368
2,339,332
12.33
19.35
13.08
16.48
13.54
2,090,990
3,171,155
2,544,448
2,^)25,509
2,930,686
12.36
18.82
15.22
16.14
18.31
.03
.22
26,688
38,413
6,053
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—COST PAYMENTS
183
AND PER CAPITA, BY MAJOR FUNCTIONS: 1937—Continued
XL.—RECREATION
X.—LIBRARIES
X I I . —MISCELLANEOUS
Per
capita
Per
capita
Per
capita
Total
Per
capita
Total
Per
capita
$24,101,002
$0.64
$58,131,752
$1.54
$90,311,769
$2.40
$61,383,253
$1.63
$19,983,054
$0.53'
14,150,375
3,737,563
6,213,064
.64
.81
.57
38,341,912
6,490,657
12,799,183
1.76
1.41
1.17
69,187,467
8,345,485
12,778,817
3.13
1.81
1.17
47,243,180
6,743,853
7,396,220
2.13
1.46
.68
13,589,489
2,308,234
4,085,331
.61
.50
.37
$34,190,344 $4.78
11,691,699
3.35
4,404,524
2.23
1,749,898
1.05
1,466,707
1.08
1,590,801
1.73
.70
581,096
$34,636,866
346,766
4,665,562
311,702
1,451,053
135,316
361,035
$4.84
1,139,518
804,298
229,205
2,267,883
1,478
453,996
438,502
1.39
1.02
Pensions
All
other
City numbe
u
Contributions to
publicservice
enterprises
POPULATION OP 500,000 AND OVER
$3,038,614
1,469,959
686,984
1,313,522
1,251,678
1,554,671
471,452
579,405
1,307,893
656,103
447,008
471,117
410,490
491,479
$0.42
.42
.35
.79
.92
1.69
.57
.71
1.66
.97
.68
.76
.69
.84
$10,498,160
7,682,841
2,421,558
1,880,953
2,476,297
1,082,018
1,533,302
$1.47
2.20
1.23
1.13
1.83
1.18
1.85
1,052,919
2,485,687
1,091,775
1,870,155
1,599,249
1,828,135
1,338,863
1.29
3.16
1.61
2.85
2.57
3.05
2.29
1,526,753
2,813,122
2,116,377
1,993,366
1,908,685
922,032
2,232,063
1.87
3.57
3.12
3.04
3.06
1.54
3.82
.10
2.37
.19
1.07
.15
.43
.34
3.46
<V. >
76
.75
$3,060,995 $0.43
.38
1,335,843
.97
1,917,637
2,755,830
1.65
.54
729,604
.48
440,392
.45
373,857
721,582
483,076
333,749
353,282
307,032
515,101
261,509
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
.88
.61
.49
.54
.49
.86
.45
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
$51,383 $0.11
.75
354,619
.26
119,455
.25
113,761
447,485
1.08
.10
38,555
15
16
17
18
19
20
282,038
363,078
77,976
50,577
207,771
201,536
.24
.16
.66
.65
21
22
23
24
25
26
$120,253 $0.40
.36
107,727
.12
35,066
.39
114,175
.10
27,318
27
28
29
30
31
POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
$478,067
79,862
467,079
541,375
273,202
307,873
337,914
402,892
236,443
94,421
261,812
256,623
$1.00
.17
1.02
1.21
.66
.82
.91
1.21
.74
.30
.82
.83
$864,156
366,123
418,224
664,922
853,102
507,402
$1.81
410,417
734,338
628,979
213,604
398,454
430,936
1.10
2.20
1.97
.78
.91
1.49
2.07
1.36
$1,085,660 $2.27
.69
323,834
1,096,492
2.38
1,485,953
3.32
.21
88,312
901,414 2.41
291,345
1,106,017
1,435,790
.78
3.32
4.49
.67
1.25
1.39
137,519
393,149
.43
1.27
$138,527 $0.29
973,216
2.07
1,032,606
2.24
1,532,653
3.43
.36
150,487
.69
258,578
44,888
673,715
845,718
41,484
1,051,981
.12
2.02
—
2.66
.13
3.40
.76
1.09
POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
$106,808
268,257
270,446
241,100
117,776
$0.36
$80,786
156,678
576,755
734,864
176,715
$0.27
.90
.91
.82
.42
59,893
204,581
100,060
149,354
95,180
.22
.74
.37
.56
.36
261,309
378,952
225,813
62,046
292,185
.94
67,050
52,373
69,760
138,624
208,497
.26
.22
.32
.65
1.01
504,763
249,622
154,457
382,289
198,905
84,530
176,197
68,507
.42
.89
.37
132,793
.77
173,140
207,939
167,719
199,863
174,458
45,708
123,000
94,618
124,650
119,507
.27
.73
.57
.77
.75
268,885
369,846
118,334
227,441
342,612
.52
1.95
2.51
.63
1.36
.83
.23
1.12
1.97
1.03
.71
1.78
.96
.86
1.05
.91
1.15
1.01
1.59
2.19
.71
1.40
2.14
$532,072 $1.78
470,391
1.57
.53
157,864
437,514 1.49
.77
217,263
122,854
335,625
141,781
310,782
84,808
.44
1.21
.52
1.17
.32
583,217
62,116
493,044
630,874
284,323
2.28
49,134
389,028
125,407
233,294
66,607
.24
14,784
255,072
35,681
245,566
173,550
.26
2.26
2.94
1.38
1.96
.68
1.34
$133,947 $0.45
.25
74,589
1,654,876
5.60
.25
71,894
.04
9,956
7,717
54,796
19,975
292,353
94,665
245,649
20,857
75,362
34,930
364,970
50,492
13,691
198,405
565,554
.03
.20
.07
1.10
.36
.96
.09
.35
.16
1.77
.25
.07
1.07
3.25
.39
.09
1.51
.21
1.51
1.08
82,218
70,649
13,102
59,874
440,346
.49
.42
.08
.37
2.75
4,264
49,443
24,904
56,088
20,546
.02
.18
.09
.21
.08
32
33
34
35
36
69,806
44,032
.27
.18
311
(V)
1.05
.13
37
38
39
40
41
183,085
185,039
89,025
75,015
78,553
.91
.93
.48
.43
.45
42
43
44
45
46
45,424
115,624
53,242
163,141
54,557
.27
.69
.32
47
48
49
50
51
225,282
27,577
1.00
.34
184
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
TABLE 17.—COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, TOTAL
VII.—CHARITIES
VI. —HOSPITALS
VIII.—CORRECTION
.IX. —SCHOOLS
CITY
Total
Per
capita
Total
Per
capita
Total
Per
capita
TotaL
Per
capita
1
City xmmbe
u
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION
Long Beach, Calif.
N a s h v i l l e , Tenn.—
S p r i n g f i e l d , Mass.
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.-
$235,435
190,528
3,455
232,555
$1.51
1.24
.02
1.58
$27,855
62,605
2,047,705
12,702
946,467
6,439
500
$0.18
.40
13.35
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J.
15,353
11,213
403,785
139,895
2.87
1.01
1,250,193
325,816
8.90
2.34
Jacksonville, F l a . —
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, T e n n . —
48,170
170,672
78,781
101,685
257,559
.35
1.31
.61
.82
2.09
32,779
483,235
276,691
824,672
.24
3.72
2.13
6.65
.37
45,265
Kansas City, Earn
Fort Wayne, Ind.'
Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J.'
5,300
.04
126,142
14,364
74,672
1.06
.12
.63
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Pall River, Mass.Cambridge, M a s s . —
New Bedford, Mass.
18,578
248,701
341,991
185,991
.16
2.16
2.99
1.65
Reading, Pa.
Knorville, T e n n . —
Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.—
Taconw, Wash.
260,268
91,216
48,887
2,349
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.'
Tampa, Fla.
598,160
280,393
Somerville, Mass
EL Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.'
Lynn, Mass.
111,425
29,906
12,500
118,321
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.'
Lowell, Mass.
102,644
60,400
98,048
72,706
Honolulu, Hawaii 2/-A
183,597
39,771
$22,334
69,597
1,785
36,387
4,656
$0.14
.45
13,396
9,000
.09
.06
32,072
1,200
91,000
.23
.01
.70
11/)
.25
.03
.04
(1/)
33,842
.01
811,736
737
352,839
12,077
11,605
1,443,230
1,354,156
1,499,580
.10
.10
12.52
11.85
13.32
11,497
24,070
80,799
300,255
.73
2.73
17,033
.01
2.99
678
329
.10
.21
.01
(l/>
1,775
2,070
1,181,391
1,581,399
1,501,256
1,488,365
1,171,153
.03
.03
.39
18.64
.07
.09
13.29
184
14,661
(1/)
.14
1,588,033
1,014,580
1,2158,150
1,551,110
7.64
.16
4.49
16.05
3,034
4,580
6,120
605
.03
.04
.06
.01
1,655,386
1,683,284
1,701,055
1,211,157
2.63
.34
1.05
.28
.12
1.15
1,971,798
7,133
9,683
1,367,193
1.00
.59
.97
.73
784,000
16,094
454,744
1,608,678
1/ Less than 1/2 of 1 cent.
2/ Not included in group or grand totals.
1,898,487
1,701,242
1,223,625
1,843,607
1,464,006
2,778
3,000
41,526
21,983
4,770
36,471
154,733
1,515,794
1,870,767
1,264,163
1,724,658
1,005,051
1,757,640
1,257,834
1,227,052
1,317,606
1,552,411
160,281
.37
2,270,563
1,954,356
2,172,726
3,622,796
2,018,970
1,386,638
1,354,509
1,653,024
1,814,530
1,921,592
725
.45
.02
$2,710,099 $17.26
1,240,345
7.94
2,917,454 19.02
1,916,914 12.97
1,863,899 12.65
2,685
65,357
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—COST PAYMENTS
185
AND PER CAPITA, BY MAJOR FUNCTIONS: 1937—Continued
XI.—RECREATION
X.—LIBRARIES
XEI. —MISCELLANEOUS
Total
Per
capita
Total
Per
capita
Pensions
Per
capita
Per
capita
All
other
Per
capita
$30,872
61,909
107,440
31,895
78,485
$0.20
.40
.70
.22
.53
125,672
16,492
110,298
181,341
37,137
.86
.11
.76
1.29
.27
.73
.40
.57
.12
.23
OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
$51,307 $0.33
108,585
.70
228,224 1.49
25,737
.17
232,807
1.58
$579,741 $3.69
32,232
.21
$149,374
45,829
192,236
48,294
150,281
$0.95
.29
1.25
.33
1.02
$442,138
185,734
385,112
124,756
189,038
$2.82
1.19
2.51
.84
1.28
99,889
45,047
89,975
74,470
84,325
.69
.31
.62
.53
.61
118,338
122,037
219,698
273,655
72,129
.81
.85
1.52
1.95
.52
137,458
163,313
61,943
699,369
257,063
.95
1.13
.43
4.98
1.85
74,753
111,961
43,011
98,841
42,864
.54
.86
.33
.80
.35
213,536
369,483
111,478
91,289
83,570
1.54
2.85
.86
.74
.68
158,628
302,588
81,099
238,465
64,036
1.14
2.33
.63
1.92
.52
35,233
112,917
39,553
60,709
70,487
.29
.94
.33
.51
.60
53,080
99,865
82,571
56,565
69,507
.43
.48
.59
60,060
82,591
263,300
114,231
175,087
.49
.69
2.21
.97
1.49
64,560
67,254
42,278
80,369
60,136
.55
.58
.37
156,763
179,358
68,185
215,349
87,814
1.33
1.54
.59
1.88
.78
35,411
109,663
166,496
303,298
145,372
.30
.94
1.44
2.65
1.29
37,954
9,052
49,039
37,950
73,050
90,890
74,234
167,124
21,202
1.49
.19
1.68
.66
1.01
116,106
108,050
106,626
72,853
100,715
1.04
14,382
25,518
105,516
36,911
54,687
20,547
195,667
119,846
72,355
101,722
71,913
1.81
1.11
.67
.95
.68
39,331
42,540
158,204
60,109
69,389
.36
.39
1.47
.56
.65
121,553
81,949
109,215
173,171
1.15
.77
1.04
1.68
170,821
24,156
78,771
153,748
1.61
.23
.75
1.49
22,105
35,340
97,257
127,543
142,040
.95
1.25
1.40
311,814
154,364
123,988
168,450
3.04
1.51
1.22
1.68
36,845
33,863
15,345
86,518
90,836
31,214
74,126
82,503
87,171
79,686
58,866
36,405
3,158
2t>4932 O—40 -
184,702
72,452
109,710
.30
.71
.78
.58
.36
72,338
368,342
.66
.93
166,396
1.12
27,059
.19
236,401
161,826
1.64
1.15
157,137
431,740
1.13
3.33
11,249
37,455
.09
.30
101,820
51,509
74,449
15,390
28,730
1.22
.03
17,007
12,795
40,936
14,374
2,831
.14
.11
.34
.12
7,871
7,961
49,789
85,930
58,555
.07
.07
.43
.75
.52
57,010
18,349
34,356
16,529
3,504
.51
.17
.31
.15
.03
100,339
50,575
27,045
1,872
3,708
.93
.47
.25
.02
.03
24,192
2,235
64,931
122,889
.23
.02
.62
1.19
48,197
9,475
60,617
118,523
.47
.09
.60
1.18
144,432
3,803
31,474
32,600
55,906
78,207
170,327
41,181
1.60
.39
.36
.33
.15
.86
201,180
City numbe
u
Contributions to
publicservice
enterprises
TABLE 1 8 . — P E R C E N T DISTRIBUTION OF COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, BY MAJOR FUNCTIONS: 1 9 3 7
(See t e x t d i s c u s s i o n , p . 1 7 6 )
II.—PUBLIC SAFETY
I.—General
admin i s trative,
legislat i v e , and
judicial
Police
department
Fire
department
All
other
X I I . —MISCELLANEOUS
HI.—
Highways
IV.—Sanitation
and
waste
removal
V. —Conservat i o n of
health
VI.—Hospitals
VII.—
Charities
VIII.—
Correction
EC.—
Schools
X.—Libraries
XI.—Recreation
Pensions
Grand total
All
other
3.0
1.2
1.7
1.8
8.3
9.1
5.7
10.0
8.3
8.5
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 1 1 1 .
Philadelphia, Pa.
D e t r o i t , Mich.
Los A n g e l e s , C a l i f . —
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
7.4
10.3
10.7
7.6
9.7
7.9
10.4
9.4
10.5
14.2
12.3
8.8
9.2
15.2
4.3
4.5
5.1
6.0
7.3
5.9
6.5
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, W i s .
B u f f a l o , N. Y.
6.0
7.0
13.9
9.6
5.9
6.6
7.2
11.8
8.8
7.8
9.7
10.1
8.3
6.9
7.9
5.7
5.4
9.3
6.7
5.6
5.6
Group I
Group II —
Group III-
Contributions
to
publicservice
enterprises
5.1
6.7
18.7
13.2
10.0
1.3
1.1
26.8
29.5
39.0
1.0
1.6
1.6
2.8
2.8
3.3
4.9
3.6
3.3
.8
1.6
1.5
3.2
1.4
3.0
2.2
4.4
5.4
2.1
1.8
3.3
1.7
2.7
3.9
2.8
5.2
4.4
5.1
3.4
4.0
4.4
5.5
5.5
5.2
2.6
5.6
3.0
1.3
.6
6.3
1.3
1.1
1.9
.8
.9
1.0
.8
1.4
.7
4.6
4.2
4.3
4.4
1.0
1.5
.3
2.7
0.2
2.3
.5
.3
2.9
.2
1.9
1.4
3.4
2.9
1.9
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.8
.3
1.0
0.5
.8
2.3
3.3
.9
.9
1.1
GROUP I.—CITIBS HAVING A POPULATION OF 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 AND OVER
10
11
12
13
14
0.6
1.0
3.7
5.8
1.8
5.0
5.8
7.8
5.8
5.3
5.5
4.4
5.8
2.4
4.1
2.6
8.2
4.6
7.6
3.3
4.8
6.7
4.7
4.5
2.5
5.0
1.1
1.3
1.9
2.1
1.6
1.8
4.8
8.3
5.4
5.2
8.4
24.4
19.6
1.8
9.7
14.0
17.2
7.9
1.9
.9
1.2
24.8
24.1
34.9
32.0
32.1
29.5
29.8
1.5
1.9
1.4
1.7
1.5
1.1
1.3
4.8
5.8
2.5
5.5
10.7
7.1
5.1
14.0
21.2
10.8
12.8
9.2
17.7
25.2
1.1
1.8
2.0
.9
5.0
1.0
1.0
24.2
25.5
31.5
24.9
27.9
25.7
25.3
1.5
2.0
1.7
1.2
1.3
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.0
1.5
1.8
1.0
.2
.9
27.6
£5.8
31.7
27.3
34.0
32.4
33.4
27.2
2.0
1.5
1.7
1.8
2.3
1.6
GROUP I I . — C I T I S S HAVING A POPULATION OF 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 5 0 0 , 0 0 0
17
18
19
Minneapolis, Minn.— •
New Orleans, La.
Cincinnati, Ohio
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, Mo.
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.—
Rochester, N. Y.
5.9
15.5
8.9
8.1
13.1
10.3
6.5
6.9
5.0
9.9
6.5
10.2
8.9
8.3
8.4
4.8
4.2
8.2
5.4
6.0
5.6
8.0
10.9
4.6
3.5
.7
10.5
6.5
2.7
8.8
13.2
6.8
6.2
3.7
5.8
4.7
3.6
5.0
5.7
1.8
1.1
2.4
1.2
1.5
1.4
1.8
7.7
7.4
7.4
5.9
5.5
4.9
31.4
1.0
13.7
15.6
2.2
3.2
12.1
23.6
3.1
£.4
1.7
1.9
5.5
3.0
2.8
5.3
2.0
Jersey City, N. J.
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, K y . —
Portland, Oreg.
11.1
9.7
7.4
9.4
2.2
1.3
2.3
1.6
14.8
4.6
7.8
2.8
8.5
3.6
8.4
7.2
1.3
1.5
1.8
.7
23.9
36.7
36.4
29.2
POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, O h i o Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.Akron, Ohio
Memphis, T e n n . —
7.1
5.1
4.2
7.3
4.9
4.7
5.2
5.4
5.1
5.2
1.4
1.3
1.7
1.0
1.2
1.5
1.8
2.2
1.8
3.4
0.1
.4
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.-
6.9
6.3
5.0
4.8
4.8
4.7
3.7
8.7
4.8
4.7
1.3
4.3
3.9
Fort Worth, T e x . —
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, C o n n . —
San Diego, Calif.Long Beach, Calif.
Nashville, T e n n . —
Springfield, Mass..
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.-
5.0
6.0
3.7
5.1
7.5
6.5
6.7
4.1
5.0
5.3
2.4
1.9
1.8
1.8
2.0
1.3
3.1
1.3
1.0
1.6
5.6
6.1
7.1
7.0
5.0
6.6
6.1
11.3
4.3
4.2
1.8
1.3
1.9
1.8
2.3
3.7
2.2
2.2
1.9
1.3
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers," N. Y
Paterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.
1/ Less than 1/20 of 1 perci
3.3
9.1
2.9
3.1
.2
9.5
.2
.7
11/)
1.3
2.2
.2
6.9
5.4
1.5
2.9
1.6
2.3
12.7
2.8
6.1
2.1
.1
3.5
.3
3.7
2.7
1.0
2.6
2.0
2.0
9.1
1.0
1.6
4.7
4.5
2.2
4.0
4.4
4.3
6.5
7.0
.2
30.0
3.4
2.7
9.2
2.3
4.7
.1
42.9
44.9
46.5
28.1
42.4
47.8
39.2
46.0
53.1
30.5
1.3
2.8
2.2
1.5
1.4
.9
2.4
1.9
1.9
1.8
(1/)
26.6
5.7
.5
22.9
8.2
.4
7.0
34.3
52.5
46.7
30.3
41.3
50.6
31.0
35.4
51.4
48.3
1.0
1.2
1.1
3.2
1.7
1.4
1.0
46.3
33.6
47.4
35.0
46.9
41.5
32.0
31.5
54.6
28.0
1.0
1.3
1.8
1.7
1.9
2.3
1.2
2.1
1.4
2.3
6.0
3.9
2.2
3.0
5.5
6.8
4.8
4.2
3.5
2.8
1.6
1.5
1.7
1.1
2.0
1.5
3.0
4.9
2.5
1.4
4.4
5.6
2.8
1.8
2.9
4.9
18.1
3.3
15.5
.1
.4
1.6
22.1
<i/>
1.3
.6
<i/>
.3
.1
.3
1.8
<i/>
1.0
0/)_
11.6
6.3
.7
.3
.1
.7
(i/>
2.3
50.5
47.8
48.9
33.6
39.0
31.1
28.3
32.1
34.5
35.4
3.9
4.7
2.7
2.9
3.0
3.5
1.7
2.5
3.6
3.6
1.3
2.7
2.7
1.9
3.9
2.7
3.9
1.6
1.2
8.5
4.9
4.3
1.0
3.1
1.8
4.2
1.4
2.7
.7
3.3
2.8
.1
.1
.6
.4
3.7
1.8
1.5
1.1
.3
.7
.3
.1
.6
.5
.7
.4
(A/)
1.7
5.6
1.0
2.9
10.1
1.3
1.3
1.6
1.8
.7
1.0
1.2
1.0
2.2
.9
.5
1.6
1.2
7.0
8.9
.7
3.5
3.1
4.0
1.4
6.5
5.0
3.3
4.6
2.1
4.8
2.3
5.3
1.5
2.8
.4
2.5
3.2
6.5
.2
1.3
1.9
.3
1.0
TABLE 18.—PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF COST PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, BY MAJOR FUNCTIONS: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
(See text discussion, p . 176)
II.—PUBLIC SAFETY
I.—General
administrative ,
Fire
l e g i s l a - Police
All
tive , and depart- departother
ment
ment
judicial
XII. —MISCELLANEOUS
IV.—San- V.—Conitation
III.—
serva- VI.—Hosand
pitals
Highways waste
tion of
health
removal
VII.—
Charities
VIII.—
DC.— X.—Li- XI.—RecCorrec- Schools
braries reation
tion
Pensions
GROUP I I I . — O I T I i S S HA.TING A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 — C o n t i n u e d
6.0
3.1
8.0
7.9
4.8
2.9
5.0
4.1
5.0
4.4
8.8
9.2
9.2
7.2
11.7
7.0
7.7
7.7
7.9
8.1
13.7
10.9
7.7
8.5
10.6
9.2
9.0
7.5
7.9
6.9
6.7
3.8
4.1
6.3
5,3
4.1
8.5
6.8
5.6
3.8
1.5
5.5
3.8
5.9
5.1
3.8
6.4
1.6
6.4
4.6
3.1
1.7
1.4
2.4
1.9
1.4
1.7
1.7
1.5
1.6
7.3
5.3
6.0
2.9
6.3
12.9
3.4
4.8
6.7
8.6
9.7
8.2
9.2
7.4
10.8
10.5
9.0
10.6
4.6
11.1
9.6
11.9
13.8
8.2
10.7
6.8
9.9
6.8
7.9
7.9
8.7
6.1
8.9
4.5
11.5
4.6
4.6
5.1
8.4
3.1
6.6
6.4
6.0
3.4
2.8
1.7
1.2
1.4
1.7
2.0
1.7
1.3
1.5
5.9
4.4
4.7
2.9
4.4
5.4
9.E
7.3
4.7
7.2
6.4
8.2
10.6
7.2
7.6
7.6
7.5
11.9
12.5
9.6
9.8
5.9
6.2
5.1
3.1
4.5
4.5
7.7
6.8
10.4
7.4
10.2
4.5
4.3
8.3
5.1
7.2
6.9
21.0
6.4
2.1
1.2
3.2
1.7
1.2
2.0
1.5
1.1
1.6
Kansas City, Kana.Fort Wayne, Ind.—
Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J.—
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.Cambridge, Mass.—
New Bedford, Mass.Reading, Pa.
Znorville, Tenn.
Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind..
Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.Tampa, Fla.
Somerville, Mass
El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.
Lynn, Mass.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.
Lowell, Mass.
Honolulu, Hawaii 2/1/ Less than 1/20 of 1 percent.
2/ Not included in group or grand totals.
3.0
4.1
(1/)
51.8
51.4
35.9
50.2
43.2
60.6
48.6
26.5
28.4
28.9
1.3
4.3
.9
1.7
1.6
2.1
1.9
.9
1.2
1.2
2.0
3.8
1.8
1.6
1.6
5.0
5.1
1.5
3.3
1.7
2.2
3.1
5.7
3.2
3.9
1.1
3.1
3.6
4.7
2.9
.1
.1
52.9
41.0
34.8
50.6
47.0
23.9
52.2
50.7
45.9
1.5
1.2
2.1
3.5
2.2
.5
3.5
1.2
1.7
5.0
.7
5.2
2.8
3.3
4.0
4.0
2.5
3.1
3.5
3.5
3.0
2.8
3.1
.8
1.4
5.3
1.9
40.8
27.0
51.2
45.7
29.3
33.5
47.2
31.3
24,4
.7
1.5
1.6
2.7
1.6
1.8
2.2
1.1
.7
2.5
2.1
4.1
4.0
3.3
2.0
3.6
2.6
1.5
2.4
2.9
1.2
2.9
2.9
6.3
4,3
2.3
3.4
0.2
2.7
.4
1.7
.5
5.4
5.3
3.7
8.5
2.6
1.9
.1
12.1
17.6
U/)
7.9
.4
.3
31.3
20.9
29.6
2.6
8.5
.1
3.2
1.3
9.8
2.0
1.5
.5
2.2
2.1
1-7
1.8
1.5
0.4
.7
1.3
33.5
.4
.4
25.8
15.8
1.4
.1
.1
.1
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—COST PAYMENTS
189
TABLE 19
Interest payments on general government debt 5 during 1937 are shown in
table 19. These payments are segregated as to those made on bonded indebtedness, on short-term loans, and on special assessment debt. They are exclusive
of payments in error later repaid to the cities, and they are exclusive also of
Interest payments which balance amounts previously received as accrued Interest
on the obligations when Issued. Interest payments are discussed in a general
way in the introductory part of this section on cost payments.
INTEREST PAYMENTS ON GENERAL GOVERNMENT DEBT.—Payments of interest in the amount
of #222,582,157 were made in 1937 on debt Incurred for general governmental
purposes. Of this amount, $198,568,577, or 89.2 percent, was paid on bonded
indebtedness, and $14,765,257, or approximately 7 percent, was paid on shortterm loans; the remainder represents interest payments on special assessment
debt. Comparative figures for recent years are not available because of the
fact that the Bureau did not segregate interest payments as between general
government debt and public-service enterprise debt.
SPECIAL INTEREST PAYMENTS BY MASSACHUSETTS CITIES.—The Commonwealth of Massachusetts has established for the benefit of a number of cities and towns a metropolitan district in and about Boston for the purchase and improvement of
parks and for the construction and maintenance of sewers and waterworks. The
cities benefited are required, in addition to sharing the costs of operating
and maintaining such properties, to make payments to the State to reimburse it
for interest on loans made to finance the construction or acquisition of these
Improvements. Similar payments of Interest are made to the State on the advances by it in financing the cost of grade crossing elimination, and such interest payments by the cities are included in table 19.
TABLE 20
The payments for capital outlays by the major functions shown In table 20
comprise the amounts paid by the 94 cities for the acquisition and construction
of more or less permanent properties and public improvements, including additions to those previously acquired or constructed. They are exclusive of payments offset by receipts from the public on outlay account, the most important
of which are derived from sales of real property and from Insurance adjustments.
These excluded payments and the counterbalancing receipts are classified as
noncost payments and nonrevenues, both of which are excluded from the scope of
this report.
THE REPORTING OF OUTLAYS AND THE EXCLUSION OF DEBT RETIREMENT.— Capital outlays
are reported by the Bureau as a cost payment in the year the expenditure is
made. This procedure is followed rather than classifying as a cost payment the
amount paid directly for maturing bonds or placed in a sinking fund for the retirement of indebtedness incurred for outlays. Debt retirement is recorded as
a noncost payment, and duplication in cost payments—to the extent that outlays
are financed from Incurrence of debt—is thereby eliminated.
PAYMENTS FOR CAPITAL OUTLAYS.—Capital outlays, totaling $372,922,543, constituted 14.2 percent of total expenditures for general governmental purposes In
1937. The largest outlay was $118,619,311 for highways. Schools were next in
importance with a total of $81,898,903.
The item "All other" under "Public
safety" represents in large part capital outlays for flood control in Los Angeles and New Orleans. The item "All other" under "Highways" constitutes for the
most part bridge and tunnel construction in New York, Chicago, and Pittsburgh.
5/ For debt of public-service enterprises, see part III.
TABLE 19.—COST PAYMENTS^/ FOR INTEREST:
PAYMENTS FOR INTEREST ON SHORT
TERM LOANS O F —
PAYMENTS FOR INTEREST ON BONDED DEBT O F —
Other governmental units
City corporation
School district,
general
Grand total-
Group I
Group I I —
Group III—
$222,582,157
$149,515,021
$420,047
143,245,260
32,280,003
47,056,894
94,662,717
20,847,471
34,004,833
119,089
234,780
66,178
1937
$24,830,283
9,037,934
3,460,404
9,396,661
$1,908,227
18,895,423
5,729,038
205,822
PAYMENTS FOR INTEREST ON SPECIAL
ASSESSMENT DEBT O F —
City corporation
City corporation
School
district
Other
governmental
units
9,268,512
$4,829,113
$667,632
$5,720,118
$2,534,126
344,307
320,662
2,663
3,574,598
955,208
1,190,312
1,172,902
402,907
958,317
8,180,406
249,240
838,866
:, 549,834
72,328
206,951
Contingent
general
Payable
only from
special
Other
governmental
units—
contingent
general
800,903
7,965
185,211
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
^ ^
a
,
'
*
°r^'
j
$43,414,168
27,635,699
17,244,915
14,157,110
6,003,892
5,723,152
3,210,702
$33,601,506
5,355,280
14,720,702
13,674,547
1,826,296
3,429,712
3,056,292
5,412,347
4,412,604
5,866,702
2,491,794
5,402,757
3,723,105
2,111,838
2,454,090
2,463,400
5,208,775
1,315,510
3,991,082
$1,649,361
$1,910,060
2,409,952
$95,089
24,000
2,996,874
718,884
130,410
$11,877,752
196,947
1,180,722
716,763
$5,158,744
2,583,383
12,438
5,550
$4,428,923
100,479
$3,004,557
15,888
20,432
$307,399
1,344
2,100
37,125
$145,752
772
172,941
647,760
17,820
9,590
337,556
12,829
351,943
871,754
2,852,461
$1,172,902
37,704
1,139,005
931,773
257,786
238
14,634
1,256
13,500
7,391
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o —
Newark. N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.Rochester, N. Y . —
Jersey City, N. J.-
$2,506,731
3,673,495
3,380,499
5,541,672
2,781,701
1,663,213
1,325,608
2,659,428
3,354,081
$2,123,989
1,865,976
2,096,429
4,544,518
969,588
669,176
636,755
1,897,051
2,651,947
$219,280
$268,348
557,244
912,804
456,529
438,627
$107,863
994,570
tan
nca
994^623
677,580
369,415
231,715
431,106
612,671
$34,201
2?9
2,531
1,042
112,172
5,622
5,275
71,812
$47 ,-901
11.579
$9,000
118
$234,219
143,866
195,865
55,879
9,741
7,810
17,651
24,822
24
25
26
Houston, T e x . —
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
2,074,336
1,643,S07
1,675,432
1,154,089
1,638,893
599,060
9,712
4,120
2,524
513,636
9,658
794
23,804
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, O h i o Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.-
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
fcl,474,989
1,694,677
631,409
858,609
558,850
1,254,772
1,695,416
1,093,482
$908,971
1,081,038
130,598
223,580
509,417
1,252,781
1,438,872
1,009,677
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.-
1,711,231
966,833
1,646,583
1,116,764
1,099,718
1,226,747
751,165
656,537
945,242
1,574,843
737,050
365,591
1,055,247
389,113
416,768
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, O h i o — —
Grand Rapids, Mich..'
Fort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.
277,382
1,416,936
477,199
542,593
1,015,777
790,556
786,732
575,226
258,170
1,389,029
321,694
315,830
708,258
738,708
355,537
575,109
308,913
580,432
565,144
351,035
695,231
657,201
556,022
379,313
111,440
177,196
561,146
341,530
467,200
652,701
240,707
90,028
San Diego, Calif.Long Beach, Calif.'
Nashville, T e n n . —
Springfield, Mass.'
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.—
Des Moines, I o w a —
Scranton, Pa.
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.—
Chattanooga, Tenn.
See footnotes at end of table.
356,380
1,398,057
831,762
500,945
710,788
1,193,771
872,382
735,953 I1
•398,087
600,813
500,811
356,464
49,025
4,355
#45,078
1,991
645
7,812
1,523,515
155,581
1,221,478
831,762
279,109
668,291
1,189,498
839,198
660,022
?139,192
4,357
$28,739
8,469
255,899
75,993
$174,510
13,206
3,246
71,740
24,120
51,380
63,775
335,475
403,796
20,119
278,951
107,725
620
8,390
317,062
239,769
39,212
27,907
114,197
151,463
296,139
30,910
75,241
10,398
58
11,380
$954
$50,894
339,060
3,688
88,447
197,473
399,602
3,998
9,505
6,042
4,500
314,432
254,613
34,108
10,208
57,271
185,685
$226,058
145
1,806
4,273
28,935
1,673
13,821
119,308
30,850
40,691
4,249
75,931
35,980
TABLE 1 9 . — C O S T PAYMENTS^/ FOR INTEREST:
1937—Continued
PAYMENTS FOR INTEREST ON SHORT
TERM LOANS OF—
PAYMENTS FOR INTEREST ON BONDED DEBT OF—
City
Other governmental u n i t s
corporation
School d i s
trict,
general
PAYMENTS FOR INTEREST ON SPECIAL
ASSESSMENT DEBT O F —
City corporation
City corporation
School
district
Other
governmental
units
Contingent
general
Payable
only from
special
assessments
Other
governmental
unitscontingent
general
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
$332,989
135,436
1,147,648
507,827
565,539
343,171
153,601
276,327
402,133
$161,449
27,616
1,126,032
247,663
561,590
144,281
111,848
260,191
339,505
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
278,914
475,966
971,877
185,041
218,848
193,615
1,626,014
259,719
511,759
255,909
159,630
941,877
28,419
94,402
98,166
1,231,963
• 109,790
208,075
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
'
288,606
709,301
181,307
327,936
194,151
261,125
454,527
358,199
507 895 '
173,'911
288,606
513,437
133,487
302,230
67,213
204,163
441,316
189,735
437,840
150,390
303,225
217,068
$89,751
107,820
$55,585
$1,195
$14,531
17,275
4,341
2,510
$1,666
231,563
1,701
41
$2,248
3,525
104,300
38,228
20,407
293,411
23,526
122,690
14,181
64,755
7,994
2,371
14,720
35,320
268,216
146,749
252,157
174,046
$1,080
17,191
26,699
10,986
$24,425
74,142
16,136
28,671
23,005
586
30,000
8,006
1,756
13,220
18,790
1,565
$10,478
33,957
837
21,502
$184
14,869
41,535
1,615
12,790
110,502
223
1,525
57,516
38,737
1,747
21,121
509
91,618
142,118
39,868
11,315
12,494
70 055
23*521
17,094
1,896
5,554
8,298
1/ The payments reported are the gross payments for interest on city debts less (l) amounts paid in error and (2) amounts paid which balance
original issue of debt obligations.
2/ Not included in group or grand totals.
86,157
receipts from accrued interest on
PART I I : GENERAL GOVERNMENT—COST PAYMENTS
193
TABLE 2 0 . — C O S T PAYMENTS FOR CAPITAL OUTLAYS, BY MAJOR FUNCTIONS:
1937
(See t e x t d i s c u s s i o n , p . 189)
All
Grand t o t a l .
Group I
Group I I
Group I I I
functions
General a d ministrative,
legislative,
and j u d i c i a l
PUBLIC SAFETY
Police department
Fire •department
$372,922,543
$10,875,371
$3,894,443
$3,239,787
$7,325,660
278,154,869
37,685,351
57,082,323
6,756,618
3,117,066
1,001,687
2,367,904
524,464
1,002,075
1,344,159
900,695
994,933
4,644,646
1,666,155
1,014,859
$69,420
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, Pa.
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$127,648,854
38,021,685
14,517,297
11,654,065
25,516,764
6,299,627
8,989,070
$3,287,518
550,262
69,209
42,354
140,851
26,898
176,656
$51,262
316,180
48,148
78,132
283,760
24,161
469,607
$261,110
60,702
35,024
78,825
198,859
22,369
14,651
5,111,787
5,484,345
10,009,111
5,285,253
6,925,508
3,212,210
9,479,293
8,850
1,516,767
135,856
185,432
495,567
61,021
59,377
33,819
510,604
119,586
55,958
28,199
99,432
249,056
108,433
35,655
50,178
383,754
86,902
3,000
4,697
6 ,851
2 444
4,495 ,129
57
66 617
1 481
2 570
43
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
15
16
17
18
21
22
Minneapolis, Minn.
New Orleans, La.
Cincinnati, Ohio
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, Mo.
Seattle, Wash.
$5,180,355
3,707,411
4,015,247
1,961,115
5,700,353
1,374,640
$35,362
14,528
29,103
455,976
2,398,025
49,775
$55,741
13,649
27,342
94,557
126,832
32,396
$47,830
13,291
120,939
46,965
25,765
67,221
$14,898
1,176,327
3,257
Indianapolis, Ind.
Rochester, N. Y.
Jersey City, N. J.
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
1,063,312
3,112,518
3,761,789
4,926,840
2,259,916
621,855
7,827
17,578
26,946
43,005
272,632
45,587
84,981
36,934
41,353
51,136
15,503
193,817
53,727
156,296
$3,105
1,507
3,407
34,565
22,994
63,010
182,126
1,460
1,223
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0
29
30
31
Columbus, Ohio
T o l e d o , Ohio
Oakland, C a l i f . ~
Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
$1,988,335
1,546,032
1,048,617
2,317,695
1,723,130
$2,886
3,942
4,431
13,900
$16,579
23,553
23,589
1,289
13,822
$22,028
9,268
38,087
45,034
26,730
32
33
34
35
36
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.Akron, Ohio
Memphis, T e n n . —
1,690,875
2,532,101
210,824
1,886,509
1,039,056
1,629
1,243
506
4,214
9,466
33,614
64,065
2,024
13,302
17,330
46,201
43,380
39
40
41
-Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y . —
Dayton, O h i o — - —
3,315,631
993,608
595,729
620,636
1,193,642
20,469
1,581
713
6,859
18,815
10,760
74,740
87,919
13,806
18,549
684
570
25,037
2,675
12,897
42
43
44
45
46
Oklahoma City, Okla.Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.—
2,199,314
828,425
1,075,959
231,329
511,716
530,286
5,464
2,074
25,844
15,173
13,447
12,724
28,938
3,151
12,636
1,388
63,349
10,399
4,495
1,918
47
48
Fort Worth, T a x . —
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, C o n n . —
San Diego, Calif.Long Beach, Calif.-
2,696,907
1,220,372
36,252
509,857
473,723
2,120,073
7,544
3,222
8,785
9,934
1,669
139,151
15,225
4,500
30,885
32,791
1,085
9,990
2,418
2,039
46,518
14,955
2,053
15,583
1,094
69
7,650
990
305
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
194
TABLE 2 0 . — C O S T PAYMENTS FOR CAPITAL OUTLAYS, BY MAJOR FUNCTIONS:
1937—Continued
(See t e x t d i s c u s s i o n , p . 1 8 9 )
All
functions
General a d ministrative,
legislative,
and j u d i c i a l
PUBLIC SAFETY
Police department
Fire
department
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S HAYING A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 — C o n t i n u e d
11,067,598
1,088,393
699,665
217,980
692,807
$3,705
8,297
2,942
5,319
1,842
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.
1,444,515
214,492
600,443
679,246
333,716
2,882
2,613
795
5,500
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.'
Kansas City, Kans.
581,629
432,191
232,715
753,873
1,288,070
Fort Wayne, Ind.'
Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth-, N. J.'
Wichita, Kans.--
210,276
262,343
216,090
636,858
338,457
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.Cambridge, Mass.—
New Bedford, Mass,
Reading, Pa.
Nashville, T e n n . —
Springfield, Mass.
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.Des Moines, I o w a —
$1,225
26,441
12,145
9,136
12,169
271
4,127
$9,710
23,469
236
29,110
8,530
11,937
1,456
6,809
2,606
25,987
24,211
135,744
6,590
39,036
4,066
15,676
50,179
17,863
2,662
350
1,949
11,532
8,519
9,000
11,912
1,949
2,075
21,506
9,793
18,737
550,689
90,145
890,690
206,990
1,105,803
5,939
9,382
2,655
2,397
2,605
13,820
9,127
4,040
1,766
10,439
5,856
6,097
16,078
Knoxville, Tenn.Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.~
Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
374,215
821,394
374,115
250,297
865,418
2,941
1,164
747
250
5,220
10,195
6,759
27,090
30,092
1,570
2,320
Gary, Ind.
Canton, OhioWilmington, D e l . Tampa, Fla.
267,088
128,167
217,157
459,519
2,945
1,410
3,252
29,662
22,550
10,281
6,311
2,023
Somerville, Mass.
El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.Lynn, M a s s . — — -
265,108
347,393
640,525
755,935
855
228
1,549
10,476
33,876
7,282
1,921
18,993
17,843
16,445
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.
Lowell, Mass.
417,189
469,200
817,590
169,992
1,790
7,554
4,907
720
879
14,318
14,748
4,484
836
9,180
20,906
Honolulu, Hawaii l/-
1,559,543
1/ Not included in group or grand totals.
4,525
71,803
4,673
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—COST PAYMENTS
195
TABLE 2 0 . — C O S T PAYMENTS FOR CAPITAL OUTLAYS, B Y MAJOR FUNCTIONS: 1937 — C o n t i n u e d
(See text discussion, p. 189)
SANITATION AND WASTE REMOVAL
S e w e r s and
sewage d i s posal
Roadways
Grand t o t a l
Group I
Group I I —
Group III-
Conservat i o n of
health
Waste c o l l e c t i o n and
disposal
$87,701,182
$30,918,129
$65,026,457
$3,308,045
$958,452
$1,272,467
66,228,747
8,700,165
12,772,270
27,720,285
1,135,356
2,062,488
45,150,814
7,071,977
12,803,666
2,404,397
403,112
500,536
402,763
302,433
253,256
1,125,323
30,985
116,159
$1,457,565
$232,087
131,149
214,043
52,403
29,840
113,548
116,728
3,375
15,126
$1,064,024
17,538
2,594
8,411
11,336
2,131
1,139
32,152
520
6,835
GROUP I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 AND OVER
New Y o r k , N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, Pa.—
D e t r o i t , Mich.
Los A n g e l e s , C a l i f . '
Cleveland, OhioSt. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$36,124,607
9,474,504
2,021,099
3,012,622
3,079,620
961,901
576,672
$15,496,212
6,524,241
11,412
486,272
759,838
570,587
561,832
$11,117,333
12,267,726
220,245
4,973,910
560,238
3,825,403
1,068,121
1,590,875
523,085
3,151,417
1,353,148
1,893,349
822,452
1,643,396
799,448
476,799
1,015,427
17,762
468,238
275,051
257,166
751,653
579,815
463,452
1,096,090
1,671,645
446,055
6,109,128
21,849
3,497
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.New Orleans, La.
Cincinnati, Ohio
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, Mo.
Seattle, Wash.
$1,107,173
173,795
1,715,623
465,442
917,139
719,815
$561
8,670
728,467
95,064
Indianapolis, Ind.
Rochester, N. Y.~Jersey City, N. J.Houston, Tex.L o u i s v i l l e , Ky.
P o r t l a n d , Oreg.
69,618
1,230,003
282,398
1,126,020
528,848
364,291
6,378
27,047
19,808
57,794
50,445
4,259
136,863
$2,675,439
2,111,572
358,403
83,141
229,740
193,913
$8,418
9,693
79,631
45,786
334,995
15,961
260,494
135,860
880,274
22,854
22,451
899
5,565
$1,721
$700
18,515
258,769
5,207
6,671
2,939
4,608
1,420
5,671
9,867
1,031
2,106
8,361
1,700
1,004
1,803
1,325
$22,972
30,959
$5,309
17,797
15,000
16,407
10,006
$1,882
3,380
6,614
1,211
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0
Columbus, O h i o T o l e d o , Ohio
Oakland, C a l i f .
Denver, C o l o . - A t l a n t a , Ga.
$65,102
281,606
342,587
165,881
73,212
$137,632
27,639
30,954
19,339
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.--
691,666
250,820
23,617
584,692
504,454
63 180
13 961
Providence, R. I.San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nabr.
Syracuse, N. Y.-Dayton, Ohio
7 25,189
34,561
125,715
186,415
24,941
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.-
39,160
35,460
384,861
109,835
176,876
33,150
128,803
51,935
9,414
115,186
28,122
439,901
133,083
6,090
118,510
Fort Worth, Tex.Hartford, C o n n . —
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.San Diego, Calif..
395,296
100,053
24,478
289,097
23,389
8,004
39,772
51,292
1,006,683
7,559
421 030
27 197
93 694
99 711
17,046
$1,688,790
125,224
50,039
1,590,481
1,327,876
168,643
2,003,251
146,234
530,202
94,880
495,507
51,369
29,345
222,286
131,194
10,950
24,601
6,903
17,183
22,305
5,534
76,788
10,599
6,480
3,571
6,531
2,174
8,100
7,559
1,000
5,340
51,985
597
1,004
1,284
453
6,622
4,882
690
145
1,850
665
706
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
196
TABLE 20.—COST PAYMENTS FOR CAPITAL OUTLAYS, BY MAJOR FUNCTIONS: 1937—Continued
(See text discussion, p. 189)
u
City n
HIGHWAYS
SANITATION AND WASTE REMOVAL
CITY
Roadways
All
other
Sewers and
sewage d i s posal
Waste c o l l e c t i o n and
disposal
All
other
Conservat i o n of
health
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION 0? 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
$196,556
193,086
346,443
59,830
51,228
$427
7,542
179,476
10,237
960
$156,151
118,542
221,341
43,307
25,363
57
58
59 Salt Lake City, Utah—
60 Yonkers, N. Y.
61 Paterson, N. J.
393,915
417,124
11,514
430,813
270,851
8,814
2,118
7,400
238
120,618
9,879
34,890
89,606
5,586
62 Jacksonville, Fla.
63
64
65
66
39,086
83,534
179,080
184,974
326,165
5,671
49,044
50,048
43,875
41,275
15,004
67
68
69
70
71
437,411
51,760
72
73
74
75
76
93,463
300,202
24,229
652,172
101,104
77
78
79
80
81
31,169
7,436
126,485
6,525
125,593
52
53
54
55
56
63,032
82
83
84
85 Wilmington, Del.
86
52,604
14,665
32,740
43,434
38,190
17,040
12,979
11,968
63,180
141,625
20,619
195,768
3,963
2,854
9,740
139,879
1,835
1,038
67,295
108,222
27,752
23,827
359,287
91
238,410
229,626
685,744
54,026
9,127
10,056
990,760
89,039
Honolulu, Hawaii 1/
1/ Not included in group or grand t o t a l s .
1,372
1,499
$13,809
665
6,588
1,698
7,074
199,646
650
27,902
1,864
12,745
78,604
2,020
85,591
91,479
74,804
129,678
58,826
41,228
9,123
511
1,135
5,563
1,252
25,574
8,400
5,328
4,375
579
2,272
5,223
14,666
7,190
9,586
5,313
7,390
370
1,378
950
250
5,164
289
4,695
1,551
475
20,769
2,622
220
564
31,637
4,500
1,210
45,864
5,529
641
6,854
9,045
352
83
11,222
2,742
804
1,014
12,978
11,029
$660
214
925
1,883
22,540
133,250
53,861
87
88
89
90
93
94
$8,438
3,573
80,476
1,836
41,401
13,686
36,320
PART I I : GENERAL GOVERNMEOT—COST PAYMENTS
TABLE 20.—COST PAYMENTS FOR CAPITAL OUTLAYS, BY MAJOR FUNCTIONS:
197
1937—Continued
(See text discussion, p . 189)
Recreation
Correction
Hospitals
Miscellaneous
$19,643,862 Bl,315,897 Si,890,330 881,898,903 11,011,489 648,354,080 £4,287,
Grand t o t a l Group I
Group II—
Group I I I -
13,300,178
5,121,230
1,222,454
908,750
95,442
311,705
1,713,823 60,789,619
61,549
4,070,751
114,958 17,038,533
494,256
177,200
340,033
40,281,745 2,520,842
3,810,484
496,287
4,261,851 1,270,860
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N, Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, Pa.—
D e t r o i t , Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.'
Cleveland, Ohio
S t . Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$9,559,092
160,746
8,429
109,410
58,143
21,078
1,360,763
$78,578 ||1,169,838 |$18,503,466
49,035
9,819
3,783,607
382
30,797 11,725,510
121,853
1,144
1,755,306
69,027
7,566 15,222,309
14,530
52,948
239,945
1,277
43,526
844,187
$86,833 £29,079,870
86,271
3,787,757
206,448
114,882
14,518
241,602
7,003
271,290
225,068
3,569,548
253,318
431,878
152,105
305,908
812,192
49,103
18,013
1,208,684
1,077,479
2,659,468
1,399,599
940,841
1,191,664
237,554
356,207
103,292
1,079,532
454,261
349,705
193,652
373,699
500
116,525
161,630
13,033
42,279
27,435
349,967
$289,376
90,788
383,930
$392,943
30,665
18,490
249,875
1,041,428
89,960
469
3,175
65,446
479,101
4,664
708
13,630
10,519
16,922
96,442
258
134,366
7,066
143,131
21,391
26,636
7,988
1,517
800
16,231
$10,039
933,297
639,939
212,352
8,046
5,800
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.
Rochester, N. Y.
Jersey City, N. J . —
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
$12,985
63,936
104,224
124,960
16,563
246,193
14,085
2,990,865
1,212,965
313,588
20,866
$18,955
$11,735
1,798
3,310
2,445
3,550
12,787
22,769
20,226
14,976
1,093
2,784
1,430
$423,750
63,733
460,330
86,549
641,894
47,556
$83,468
495,582
492,413
182,372
1,040,730
132,569
3,273
2,906
58,270
9,303
3,000
2,806
346
13,500
3,601
52,378
179,628
247,120
1,118,194
64,568
3,239
927
39,053
$3,381
115,006
51,970
74,408
73,809
$5,160
6,094
2,020
319,645
8,681
1,884
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, O h i o —
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, M i n n . —
Birmingham, Ala.Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
Providence, R. I . —
San Antonio, T e x . —
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.Fort Worth, Tex.
$333
$2,145
§10,974
894,624
491,008
31,776
178,552
$1,776
2,516
3,911
48
,217
87,541
145,735
53,599
2,826
311,338
365
90
2,643
89,349
150,055
8,366
9,774
47,571
13,499
10,641
17,972
1,746,894
647,804
281,009
29,720
95,067
364,487
16,542
233,998
25,759
6,989
1,748,534
8,071
2,274
11,163
1,700
80,343
2,920
1,555
197,862
77,042
58,855
Hartford, Conn.
F l i n t , Mich.
New Haven, Conn.
San Diego, C a l i f . —
Long Beach, Calif.—
Nashville, Tenn.
Springfield, Mass.—
$426
772
71
2,306
12,624
129,841
1,450,427
491,456
127,585
16,429
12,215
3,513
479
2,804
1,880
959
10,431
34,988
258,379
3,280
37,443
56,588
129,437
53,076
52,527
30,606
13,340
10,080
1,069,602
130,395
38,820
20,923
23,928
197
632
1,080
531
45,231
992
23,866
33,060
424,107
21,386
8,897
336
6,845
1,797
99,252
39,189
33,321
46,579
50,310
22,161
160,120
108,866
102
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
198
TABLE 2 0 . — C O S T PAYMENTS FOR CAPITAL OUTLAYS, B Y MAJOR FUNCTIONS:
1937—Continued
(See text discussion, p. 189)
Correction
Hospitals
Recreation
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
$1,000
1,548
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
$86
$3,210
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J .
Jacksonville, F l a . Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
20,028
Trenton, N. J .
Chattanooga, Tenn.Kansas City, Kans.Fort Wayne, Ind.
Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J.—
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.
1,756
$546,687
21,750
47,402
1,010,168
111,044
$13,779
15,723
685
1,347
50,194
393,653
151,492
19,152
13,850
19,132
892
47,468
23,657
13,066
32,271
353,761
711,334
126,710
466
3,854
37,681
27,908
12,836
72,780
1
32,849
594,601
109,956
20,105
731
1,296
Cambridge, M a s s . —
New Bedford, Mass.
Reading, Pa.
7,275
424
Knoxville, Tenn.—
Peoria, 111.
112
48,193
Wilmington, D e l . Tampa, Fla.
Somerville, Mass.
El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.-
372,980
311,089
29,693
235,436
177,805
39,487
629
19,475
80,119
54,692
19,317
154,983
259,633
10,700
49,964
20,444
Lynn, Mass.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.Lowell, Mass.
1„373
17,801
485
20,729
2,120
2,661
6,027
961,057
212,953
South Bend, I n d . Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
108
9,971
Honolulu, Hawaii 1/—
1/ Not included in group or grand t o t a l s .
$7,276
4,620
81,949
3,608
16,521
87,813
311,601
9,090
8,100
6,000
30,899
1,842
29,210
9„048
8,606
12,275
28, 935
66,, 230
765
56,340
14,400
34,677
231,163
6,580
2,217
15,000
55,473
4,973
13,958
115,433
47,433
1,389
654
147,209
27,218
129,832
18,181
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—COST PAYMENTS
199
TABLE 21
Table 21 presents data relating to the methods by which the cities financed
their capital outlays and is as accurate as compilation from the individual
city records permitted. In some cases it was impossible to report anything except a total for bonds issued or current funds drawn upon. This is due to the
fact that capital Improvements frequently are not completed within the reporting year, and a variety of local funds may be drawn upon before the improvement
is completed, the source of all of which may have been unrecorded. Also, some
cities have a single capital fund known as the "building" fund, accumulated
from numerous sources. Furthermore, it is not always possible to identify the
designation of a bond issue with the purpose for which the proceeds were used.
For example, part of a "general Improvement bond" may have been used in connection with sewers, parks, or even a public-service enterprise.
CAPITAL OUTLAYS FINANCED BY ISSUANCE OF BONDS.—Of the total capital outlays for
general governmental purposes, approximately 42.5 percent were financed by proceeds from general obligation bonds, 6.3 percent from revenue bonds, and 3.2
percent from the issuance of special assessment bonds. Only 8 cities reported
the financing of capital outlays through the issuance of revenue bonds, and the
bulk of such Issues was in connection with the construction of the Lincoln Tunnel in New York and the sewer system of the Buffalo Sewer Authority.
CAPITAL OUTLAYS FINANCED FROM CURRENT REVENUES.—Cash resources in the general
fund financed 20.3 percent of the capital outlays for general governmental purposes, special assessments 13.9 percent, and grants and donations 13.7 percent.
The larger part of the latter item of current revenue consisted of P.W.A. grants
received under the Federal public works program.
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
200
TABLE 21.—METHOD OF FINANCING CAPITAL OUTLAYS: 1937
CURRENT REVENUE
Special
assessments
Grand t o t a l —
$372,004,302
278,079,386
37,254,700
56,670,216
Group I
Group I I —
Group III-
$ 1 5 8 , 1 8 9 , 5 6 9 023,305,352
tell,939,853
Special
assessments
Grants
and
donations
&75,624,954 $51,815,997 &51„128,572
113,072,655 ( 2 3 , 0 1 6 , 0 2 6 pLO, 9 6 1 , 8 5 4 4 5 , 6 7 0 , 7 7 6 ( 4 8 , 7 2 1 , 4 8 8 | 3 6 , 6 3 6 , 5 8 7
21,320,841
118,444 9,742,447 1,951,887 4,121,081
23,796,073
289,326
859,560 120,211,731 1 , 1 4 2 , 6 2 2 (10,370,904
GROUP I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 AND OVER
New Y o r k , N. Y.
$127,648,854
37,946,202
Chicago, 1 1 1 .
14,517,297
Philadelphia, P a . 11,654,065
D e t r o i t , Mich.
Los A n g e l e s , C a l i f . - j 2 5 , 5 1 6 , 7 6 4
6,299,627
Cleveland, Ohio8,989,070
S t . L o u i s , Mo.— •
B a l t i m o r e , Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
1
San F r a n c i s c o , C a l i f ,
W a s h i n g t o n , D. C —
Milwaukee, Wis.
B u f f a l o , N. Y.
5,111,787
5,484,345
10,009,111
5,285,253
6,925,508
3,212,210
9,479,293
$43,804,051 ($16,224,236 $6,700,000 &7,829,813 $44,416,596 ( $ 8 , 6 7 4 , 1 5 8
24,567 6,839,305 1 , 9 4 8 , 8 5 6 3 , 8 8 8 , 4 1 9
25,245,055
1,241,462
8,071,815
211,040 4,992,980
7,977,862
2,175,044
601,159
6,833,977
12,862,069
191,792 5,628,926
1,042,465
229,817
43,992
746,066
1,170,323
348,285
99,794
7,070,846
2,254,550
1,328,949
6,321,266
2,074,339
1,862,152
472,868
1,660,703
422,982
1,761,998
1,205,768
1,769,960
4,003,740
2,659,652
911,469
5,591,968
67,812
161,077
270,409
2„366,443
2,393,398
2,475,190
1,440,954
898,539
79,690
1,044,744
GROUP I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 5 0 0 , 0 0 0
M i n n e a p o l i s , Minn.—H
New O r l e a n s , L a . — — |
C i n c i n n a t i , Ohio
Newark, N. J .
K a n s a s C i t y , Mo.
1
Seattle, Wash.—
$4,756,635
3,707,411
4,008,316
1,961,115
5,700,353
1,374,640
$4,365,327
7,641
543,018
1,642,572
4,114,472
156,560
Indianapolis, Ind.Rochester, N. Y . ~ Jersey City, N. J.Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
P o r t l a n d , Oreg.
1,063,312
3,112,518
3,761,789
4,926,840
2,259,916
621,855
374,744
1,638,544
2,790,590
4,826,331
861,042
$1,687
71,188
$389,621
3,682,961
1,504,640 $1,663,758
318,543
158,227
150,847
1,059,118
421,339
703,905
30,479
100,509
884,194
496,291
$16,809
225,718
1,276,807
158,962
15,370
27,720
251,859
742,349
940,720
37,732
49,0£.6
476,948
30,909
$147,842
502,316
1,046,817
533,943
216,702
$183
149,092
72,2.\6
$677,391
894,624
1,800
699,498
212,674
147,284
58,383
313,165
239,764
230,509
230,935
227,685
297,012
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
$1,988,335
1,546,032
1,048,617
2,140,202
1,723,130
$1,162,919
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.'
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.—
1,690,875
2,297,459
210,824
1,886,509
1,039,056
1,020,007
1,403,303
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y . —
Dayton, Ohio
3,315,631
993,608
595,729
620,636
1,193,642
2,681,929
114,484
334,506
131,194
145,371
746,186
313,344
177,358
967,381
Oklahoma City, Okla
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.
Fort Worth, Tex.
2,199,314
828,425
1,075,959
231,350
511,716
2,696,907
886,297
697,486
805,072
17,264
78,522
414,384
635,139
35,035
179,493
111,987
414,583
1,162,536
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.--'
San Diego, Calif.Long Beach, Calif.
Nashville, T e n n . — •
1,220,372
36,252
509,857
473,723
2,120,073
1,067,598
850,968
107,425
11,774
508,104
361,811
1,955,426
549,764
Columbu3, O h i o Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
834,545
1,506,428
$146,234
1,284,082
483,243
$218,875
6,207
264,275
316,049
1,376
488,331
132,938
281,009
95,067
12,803
13,543
8,254
24,478
677,878
95,904
91,394
89,296
5,068
,119,987
253,725
111,912
164,647
317,745
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—COST PAYMENTS
201
TABLE 21.—METHOD OF FINANCING CAPITAL OUTLAYS: 1937—Continued
a
City n
1
BONDS
Total
CITY
General
Revenue
CURRENT REVENUE
Special
assessments
General
Special
assessments
Grants
and
donations
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
$1,088,393
699,665
217,980
Bridgeport, Conn.—
692,807
Des Moines, I o w a —
1,444,515
Scranton, Pa.
214,492
Salt Lake City, Utah!
$100,000
218,741
Yonkers, N. Y.
Peterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.'
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
600,443
679,246
333,716
531,629
432,191
336,772
472,016
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.Kansas City, Kans.Fort Wayne, I n d . —
Camden, N. J.
232,715
753,873
1,288,070
210,276
262,343
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J . ~
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.-
216,090
636,858
338,457
550,689
90,145
Cambridge, M a s s . —
New Bedford, Mass.
Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, Tenn.—
Peoria, 111.
890,690
206,990
1,105,803
374,215
821,394
Springfield, Mass.Tulsa, Okla.
South Bend, Ind.
Tacoma, Wash.—Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
374,115
250,297
865,418
267,088
128,167
419,283
604,291
$112,800
11,900
196,906
115,593
259,062
48,413
116,951
504,012
280,896
134,727
456,430
87,008
599,028
69,244
753,703
11,573
1,011,661
172,295
$4,000
33,860
$910,626
156,493
183,492
221,853
11,280
202,592
36,922
96,937
195,417
87,340
195,775
139,420
374,115
213,123
297,040
267,088
46,612
15,835
186,859
27,446
Lynn, Mass.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.
Lowell, Mass.
755,935
417,189
469,200
817,590
169,992
642,110
398,944
391,841
704,166
87,981
103,805
18,245
77,359
110,688
53,486
1/ Not included in group or grand totals.
24,681
2,732
66,765
91,637
74,654
4,523
31,612
216,090
37,830
92,163
550,689
79,079
Somerville, Mass.
El Paso, Tax.
Evansville, I n d . -
1,559,543
34,157
517,521
181,645
43,434
259,895
78,249
129,185
445,413
Honolulu, Hawaii 1/4
17,514
198,623
7,998
753,873
562,987
210,276
243,252
217,157
459,526
265,108
347,393
640,525
Wilmington, Del.Tampa, Fla.
$77,767
324,431
$34,488
1,347,962
89,990
19,091
11,066
40,050
652
3,082
6,150
178,440
506,597
28,145
138,199
4,791
78,604
95,119
77,025
190,762
162,791
10,020
2,736
28,525
202
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
SECTION C.
DEBT AND SPECIFIED ASSETS (Tables 22 to 26, inclusive)
The preceding analyses of revenues and cost payments have an intimate connection with the data presented in this section, which is a study of the trend
of indebtedness in the 94 cities during 1937 and of the status of cash and
specified assets of the administrative, sinking, public trust, and investment
funds of these cities.
When revenues are comfortably in excess of expenditures, the retirement of
debt may be accelerated, cash balances accumulated, and holdings of sinking and
investment funds increased. On the other hand, when local governments incur
expenses beyond the level of revenue available within that period, borrowing
may be resorted to, cash or investment resources drawn upon, or sinking funds
neglected. The nature of the expenditures usually determines whether the borrowing will be on a long-term or a short-term basis, and also is related to
other characteristics of the obligations issued. For example, current deficits
may be temporarily financed by short-term tax anticipation notes or funded by
long-term general obligation bonds; capital outlays for income-producing properties may be financed by revenue bonds; and cost payments for storm sewers,
paving,and sidewalks may be financed by special assessment bonds. Accordingly,
the fiscal operations of general government in 1937 as presented in the two
preceding sections are largely reflected in the data presented in this section
on debt and specified assets.
The classification of debt in the 1937 report has been changed from that
used in prior reports, as has the classification affecting revenues and cost
payments. The present classification applies some of the old terms differently
and introduces a few new terms. To aid in comparing items in the present debt
classification with those in the former, figure 3, presented on the following
page, shows the changes made in the 1937 debt classification as compared with
the one for 1936.
In this 1937 report all activities of public-service enterprises have been
segregated and are reported separately in part III.
DEFINITIONS. — At the close of this volume (see pages 323-327) may be found
definitions of the terms used in this report.
TREND OF INDEBTEDNESS. —Despite the heavy financial demands upon local government, the volume of gross indebtedness of the 94 cities has declined since
the beginning of the depression period, and at the close of 1937 it was approximately 14 percent less than in 1928. The decline in gross indebtedness, both
in volume and in per capita, is shown in the following comparisons:
Gross debt
1926
1928
1930
1932
1934
1936
1937
$5,299,000,000
6,207,000,000
6,080,000,000
5,823,000,000
5,797,000,000
5,448,000,000
5,359,000,000
Per capita
$157.23
177.19
166.79
154.31
154.23
144.66
142.24
A similar comparison for net indebtedness cannot be presented, owing to the
fact that in previous years sinking-fund assets for general governmental debt
were not segregated from such assets for public-service enterprise debt, and
'therefore net debt for general government alone was not computed.
A further- discussion of gross and net debt of the 94 cities in 1937, total
and per capita, is presented in table 22, with particulars as to character of
indebtedness and units of government issuing it.
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—DEBT AND SPECIFIED ASSETS
203
FIGURE 3 . — C H A R T COMPARING DEBT CLASSIFICATIONS FOR 1937 A N D FOR 1936
NOTE: Numbers following names of functions and activities show corresponding classification in the other year.
1957
1936
1 Gross debt at close of year 1
11 Classified by the governmental unit
by -which incurred 11
111 City corporation 111
112 School district 112
113 Other governmental units 113
12 Classified by character 1211, 122,
1231
121 General obligation bonds for:
1211
1211 C a p i t a l o u t l a y s 1211
1212 Funding bond a n t i c i p a tion notes 1211
1213 Funding current
expenses 1211
1214 Refunding 1211
122 Revenue bonds 1211C
123 Short-term obligations 1231
1231 Bond anticipation 1231
1232 Tax and revenue
anticipation 1231
1233 All other 1231
124 Special assessment obligations 122
1241 Long-term loans 122
12411 Contingent
general obligations 122
12412 Payable only
from special
assessments 122
1242 Short-term loans 122
12421 Contingent
general obligations 122
12422 Payable only
from special
assessments 122
2 Net debt 2
3 Increase during year 3
31 Gross bonded debt 31
32 Sinking-fund assets 32
33 Net debt 33
4 Bonded debt for general municipal
purposes by purpose of issue 4
41 General administrative, legislative
and judicial 41
42 Police and fire departments 42
43 Highways 44
44 Sewers and sewage disposal 43
45 Conservation of health 49A
46 Hospitals 45
47 Charities 45
48 Correction 45
49 Schools 46
49A Libraries 47
49B Recreation 48, 49
4931 Parks and playgrounds 49
49B2 All other 48, 49A
49C Miscellaneous 49A
49D Combined and unreported 49B
49D1 Bonded 49B1
49D2 Special assessment 49B2
1 Gross debt at close of year l a
11 Classified by the governmental unit
by which incurred 11
111 City corporation 111
112 School district 112
113 Other governmental units 113
12 Classified by character 121, 123,
124 a
121 Funded or fixed 121 a
1211 General purposes 121,
122
1212 Public-service enterprises and investment s b
12121 Revenueb
12122 Other than
revenueb
122 Special assessment bonds and
certificates 124
123 Floating 123 a
1231 General purposes 123
1232 Public-service enterprise sb
12321 Revenueb
12322 Other than
revenueb
13 Classified by creditor*1
131 The public4
132 City funds 4
14 Classified by purpose for which incurredb
141 General departmentsb
142 Public-service enterprises
and investments**
a/
ported
b/
c/
d/
2 Net debt at close of year 2
3 Increase during year 3
31 Funded or fixed debt 31
32 Sinking-fund assets 32
33 Net debt 33
4 Debt f o r general purposes c l a s s i f i e d by
purpose for which incurred 4
41 General government p r o p e r t i e s 41
42 P o l i c e and f i r e departments 42
43 Sewers and sewage d i s p o s a l 44
44 Highways 43
45 C h a r i t i e s , h o s p i t a l s , and c o r r e c t i o n s 46, 47, 48
46 Schools 49
47 L i b r a r i e s 49A
48 Art g a l l e r i e s and museums 49B2
49 Parks and playgrounds 49B1
49A Miscellaneous 49C, 45, 49B2
49B Combined and unreported 49D
49B1 Funded 49D1
49B2 Special assessments 49D2
Part of this item in 1936 consisted of public-service enterprise debt, which is separately rein 1937.
Not included in the 1937 classification, since public-service enterprises are separately reported,
In 1936 this item was included in 1211 but was indicated by a footnote.
Not included in 1937.
204
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
TABLE 22
The term "gross indebtedness," as used in table 22, is the designation of
the aggregate of all outstanding debt obligations, while the term "net indebtedness" is used as the designation of total funded debt less sinking-fund assets
accumulated for its amortization. Sinking-fund assets accumulated for the amortization of special assessment debt, where they could be identified as such,
were excluded from the calculation of net debt.
GROSS INDEBTEDNESS,—Of the gross indebtedness of $5,358,833,226 reported for
1937, approximately 77 percent was issued by city corporations, 10 percent by
school districts, and 13 percent by other governmental units. Included In the
data appearing under "Other governmental units" are portions of the debts of
the counties in which certain cities of groups I and II are located, the basis
of apportionment and the objects contemplated by such inclusion having been
discussed in part I of this volume. Also included are the debts, or a percentage of Indebtedness, of other independent units of municipal government, such
as park, sanitary, and improvement districts.
As Is indicated in table 22, per capita gross Indebtedness is relatively
larger for the cities in groups I and II than in group III, although it should
be noted that Miami has the highest per capita average of $291.33, a heritage
of the Florida "boom" days of the »20Ts. On the other hand, 4 of the 14 cities
in group I had a lower per capita gross debt than the average for the cities in
group III, while that of another city, St. Louis, was exactly the same.
GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS.—Of the gross indebtedness outstanding at the close
of 1937, approximately 87 percent was in the form of general obligation bonds,
I.e., bonds payable from recourse to general property taxes. Issues for capital
outlays were 56 percent of all general obligation bonds outstanding; 120 percent
were Issued to fund bond anticipation notes, mostly in New York, 7 percent for
the funding of deficits in current expenses, and 17 percent for refunding purposes. Attention is directed to general obligation bonds in the amount of
&2,565,300 reported as outstanding in Washington, D. C , for capital outlays.
This was an indebtedness created and authorized by the Congress in connection
with certain P.W.A. projects. The indebtedness is not evidenced by any formal
negotiable Instrument, but for lack of a better classification it is shown as
general obligation bonds. The city has no statutory authority to Incur indebtedness of any kind.
REVENUE BONDS.—Only 12 of the 94 cities reported outstanding in 1937 funded
obligations which the Bureau classifies as revenue bonds, and, in the aggregate
amount of $88,158,000, such Issues comprised less than 2 percent of gross outstanding indebtedness. Revenue bonds are classified by the Bureau as those obligations payable exclusively from the revenue of a specified Income-producing
property or system for the acquisition, construction, or Improvement of which
the obligations were issued. It is expressly understood that the obligation is
not a general debt of the municipality and that there is no recourse to any
taxing power for payment.
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT BONDS.—Special assessment debt constituted 4 percent of
outstanding gross indebtedness In 1937 and was made up almost entirely of funded obligations. These obligations Include all so-called bonds, certificates,
or other short-term obligations incurred with the understanding that they are
to be paid wholly or in part from the proceeds of special assessments levied
upon benefited properties. This type of indebtedness is segregated in table 22
to show that portion of special assessment debt which is a contingent general
obligation of the Issuing municipality, and also that portion payable exclusively from special assessments.
Special assessment obligations, payable exclusively from assessments to be
made against benefited properties, were much in favor during the early »20's
for financing paving, sidewalk, storm sewer, and similar improvements. They
were used extensively to finance Improvements in speculative subdivisions during the building and land boom. With the collapse of this boom, however, assessments levied in these subdivisions became uncollectible, and many of the
assessment bonds were thrown into default.
As a consequence, this type of
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—DEBT AND SPECIFIED ASSETS
205
obligation either came to be regarded with disfavor by investors or its distribution became restricted to the Immediate area of the originating municipality,
where the merits of the issue could be more readily investigated. Since 1930,
however, there has been a wider use of the type of special assessment bond which
is a contingent liability of the originating municipality. It will be noted
that approximately 80 percent of special assessment debt outstanding at the
close of 1937 was in the form of contingent general obligations.
SHORT-TERM INDEBTEDNESS.— Short-term Indebtedness, popularly called "floating
debt," was outstanding in the amount of $412,391,042 at the close of 1937 and
constituted almost 8 percent of the gross indebtedness of the 94 cities. This
group comprises for the most part temporary indebtedness evidenced by either
tax anticipation notes and interest-bearing warrants to be repaid from current
tax levies or levies of a succeeding year or by short-term bonds or notes to be
redeemed from the proceeds of long-term bonds. It also includes all final
judgments against the city that are outstanding at the close of the year.
In the earlier years of the depression the volume of floating indebtedness
reached huge proportions, owing to large deficits in current operations which
could not be funded. In recent years, however, municipalities have made a determined effort to avoid the practices which cause this fiscal situation, and
the larger part of floating indebtedness comprises temporary tax indebtedness
issued to cover current operating expenses occurring prior to receipts from
current levies.
NET DEBT.—The net indebtedness of the 94 cities was $3,903,791,182, or
$103.62 per capita, at the close of 1937. There was a decrease of $52,748,821
In the bonded indebtedness during the year, $19,812,756 of which was accomplished by a net reduction in sinking-fund assets. In connection with this decrease in total net indebtedness, it is to be noted that 28 of the cities reported an increase in net debt during the year.
The amount of decrease in bonded debt is set forth in table 22 In terms of
the par value of funded obligations outstanding at the close of the fiscal year
1937. In contrast, table 25 shows the amounts actually received from new Issues
and the amounts actually paid to retire debt during the fiscal year. The two
bases of compiling debt figures necessarily cause a difference in the net change
in funded debt as indicated in the two tables.
TABLE 23
The bonded indebtedness of the 94 cities and the purposes for which such
indebtedness was incurred are shown in table 23.
PURPOSE OF ISSUE.—The largest single purpose for which bonded Indebtedness
was incurred was for schools, which item accounted for approximately 24 percent
of the total bonded indebtedness. Highway Indebtedness was responsible for almost 19 percent of the total, and sewers and sewage disposal accounted for 13.6
percent. The smallest Indebtedness reported was for purposes of health conservation, an item reported by only five cities.
DIFFICULTY OF DISTRIBUTION.—The figures include all general obligations and
special assessment debt of a funded character. The classification by purpose
of issue is more or less imperfect for several cities because of methods used
by them in recording the purposes for which indebtedness was Issued. When Indebtedness was Incurred for a variety of purposes through the Issuance of "general Improvement" bonds, the amounts have been distributed so far as possible
under appropriate captions, and only when such distribution was Impossible were
such items tabulated as for "Combined or unreported purposes."
TABLE 2 2 . — G R O S S AND NET D E B T , TOTAL AND PER CAPITA;
GROSS DEBT BY UNIT OF GOVERNMENT AND BY CHARACTER; AND INCREASE DURING THE YEAR I N DEBT AND
SINKING-FUND A S S E T S : 1 9 3 7
GROSS DEBT AT CLOSE OF YEAR
C l a s s i f i e d by t h e governmantal u n i t by
which i s s u e d
(4
c
C l a s s i f i e d by c h a r a c t e r
CITY
Total
15
G e n e r a l o b l i g a t i o n bonds f o r —
Per
capita
City corporation
>»
•»»
o
School d i s trict
Other g o v e r n mental u n i t s
Capital outlays
Funding bond
anticipation
notes
Funding c u r rent
expenses
Refunding
Revenue
bonds
$5,358,833,226
#142.24
$4,123,210,448
$546,287,773
$689,335,005
$2,587,871,184
$932,057,234
$324,154,960
$797,604,600
$88,158,000
3,551,306,818
715,866,542
1,091,659,866
160.46
155.20
99.88
2,719,802,887
496,033,490
907,374,071
291,049,055
77,057,348
178,181,370
540,454,876
142,775,704
6,104,425
1,252,385,243
541,316,440
794,169,501
896,178,092
31,550,647
4,328,495
194,155,893
41,999,920
87,999,147
635,678,348
47,793,886
114,132,366
80,450,000
$895,991,092
$24,000,000
49,849,165
6,650,000
11,600,623
$36,120
325,661,738
$68,100,000
266,320,386
3,300,000
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 AND OVER
$1,224,508,712
614,179,648
430,259,183
293,805,321
134,056,831
124,447,035
82,929,000
$171.16
175.95
218.11
176.34
99.00
135.50
99.88
$1,156,408,712
226,948,184
357,395,683
286,857,744
38,478,326
83,770,206
79,413,000
B a l t i m o r e , Md.
B o s t o n , Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San F r a n c i s c o , C a l i f . '
Washington, D . C.
Milwaukee, W i s .
B u f f a l o , N. Y.
122,489,186
126,188,222
148,707,803
53,321,954
2,565,300
56,199,892
137,648,731
149.91
160.36
219.17
81.26
4.12
93.81
235.54
122,489,186
126,188,222
54,687,068
53,321,954
2,565,300
28,109,947
103,169,355
M i n n e a p o l i s , Minn.
New O r l e a n s , La.
Cincinnati, Ohio
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, Mo.
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.
Rochester, N. Y.
$65,391,347
78,038,152
73,185,428
100,145,657
63,057,696'
40,863,709
31,705,175
62,151,470
$135.89
165.69
159.06
224.04
152.83
109.23
85.21
186.36
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 1 1 1 .
Philadelphia, P a . —
D e t r o i t , Mich.
Los A n g e l e s , C a l i f . C l e v e l a n d , Ohio
S t . L o u i s , Mo.
9
10
11
12
13
14
$117,239,075
72,861,000
62,645,315
12,272,625
3,516,000
22,515,040
$68,100,000
269,992,389
2,500
6,947,577
32,933,190
28,404,204
71,505,695
88,089,945
34,479,376
$1,164,500
64,504,240
408,472,434
4,099,297
134,056,831
83,835,117
77,238,000
117,981,786
79,868,133
125,802,280
45,596,800
2,565,300
46,547,450
60,653,075
9,832,028
12,053,888
4,891,000
100
15,877,000
21,381,255
5,958,000
4,315,300
8,336,477
40,671,245
550,200
21,849,716
GROUP I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 5 0 0 , 0 0 0
$62,812,211
50,510,904
48,539,867
76,789,955
27,242,236
20,722,026
14,644,969
50,142,500
$6,538,248
12,946,841
21 316 000
8 851 210
9 937 000
$2,579,136
20j989,000
11,698,720
23,355,702
14,499,460
11,290,473
7,123,206
12,008,970
$49,187,371
49,201,918
61,209,595
70,778,307
58,104,356
28,161,911
24,034,924
36,608,380
$10,801,811
$7,110
29,345,037
3,646,332
22,313
3,269,104
1,272,255
5,073,165
16,639,940
$17,646,500
1,809,405
629,000
2,548,888
$5,166,000
23
26
Jersey City, N. J.Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
75,589,567
47,760,495
40,869,800
37,108,046
60,289,689
25,542,099
40,869,800
17,927,234
236.29
150.24
128.72
120.05
10,875,244
15,299,878
11,343,152
6,592,805
12,588,007
53,787,072
45,430,993
36,095,400
28,716,213
68,000
1,207,000
18,607,194
1,429,650
4,681,400
441,849
$2,928,000
$283,556
8,554,810
2,198,500
IP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
$32,072,949
39,089,249
12,480,756
19,545,900
13,012,800
29,626,000
44,567,873
23,633,508
$107.02
130.78
42.22
66.66
46.41
106.57
160.37
86.47
$24,413,783
25,017,887
2,655,825
12,043,900
13,012,800
29,626,000
44,567,873
23,633,508
$7,659,166
14,071,362
9,824,931
7,502,000
Akron, Ohio
•
idempuis, Term.
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.-
33,276,549
21,628,000
48,556,986
22,997,000
22,333,037
38,371,379
15,604,223
13,407,543
125.52
82.71
189.97
94.44
102.54
178.89
75.53
66.57
26,439,272
21,628,000
48,556,986
15,484,000
13,951,979
38,371,379
9,106,477
8,687,300
6,837,277
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, 7a.
Columbus, O h i o —
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.'
21,158,167
18,981,000
43,059,500
21,522,000
17,842,933
13,874,106
12,027,613
13,336,543
7,513,000
8,381,058
6,497,746
4,720,243
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.Fort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.
13,873,646
31,955,295
8,909,470
12,646,134
22,798,468
20,693,697
15,131,611
13,041,000
70.07
172.82
51.15
73.18
134.74
122.81
90.50
80.15
13,873,646
31,955,295
7,208,302
9,597,462
15,638,491
18,199,000
8,654,611
13,041,000
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
San Diego, C a l i f . —
Long Beach, Calif.Nashville, Tenn.
Springfield, Mass.Tul3a, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.—'
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
6,004,891
11,704,948
12,644,700
12,052,917
14,335,991
15,612,945
12,759,283
9,042,259
37.51
74.55
80.95
78.57
96.86
105.99
87.81
62.62
2,046,436
3,726,458
12,644,700
12,052,917
8,909,431
15,612,945
5,660,997
3,071,259
3,958,455
7,978,490
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
Salt Lake City, Utah
Yonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.
Kansas City, Kans.
9,065,000
31,615,750
17,242,829
62.86
225.02 I
124.05
71.78
144.37
186.94
158.65
126.98
66.76
5,148,000
31,615,750
17,242,829
6,373,293
18,739,173
24,247,621
19,688,025
15,682,321
4,698,136
3,917,000
9,969,650
18,739,173
24,247,621
19,688,025
15,682,321
8,237,671
$28,325,789
26,430,265
12,480,756
14,397,000
9,828,500
27,030,000
30,331,000
15,858,000
1,701,168
3,048,672
7,159,977
$2,494,697
6,477,000
750,000
1,225,000
2,596,000
7,936,870
2,732,000
965,289
245,000
919,943
1,305,691
5,082,500
16,724,450
13,160,664
6,731,270
13,623,250
16,180,109
17,638,473
11,144,558
6,861,193
2,466,000
8,121,008
1,688,000
8,532,000
905,000
71,000
4,354,000
338,074
2,031,252
103,000
11,714,453
1,604,704
3,525,940
2,269,000
1,848,248
730,000
74,000
1,650,000
7,500
53,500
95,200
2,754,787
522,317
700,000
2,739,564
513,000
6,693,500
13,692,409
10,884,945
8,807,660
7,522,000
7,098,286
5,971,000
1,886,500
920,000
400,000
5,997,391
11,648,877
11,485,500
5,426,560
2,233,844
4,990,000
30,413,794
2,940,328
8,322,426
20,480,468
19,119,600
12,217,000
11,091,000
$291,000
7,838,000
3,895,000
17,380
1,155,000
2,590,500
17,052
1,131,500
953,000
975,000
7-ZS-Z-lZZ
3,028,000
1,021,112
2,151,000
3,590,000
2,379,000
2,774,423
5,206,000
2,237,000
772,000
i:i:::""i
TABLE 22.—GROSS AND NET DEBT, TOTAL AND PER CAPITA; GROSS DEBT BY UNIT OF GOVERNMENT AND BY CHARACTER; AND INCREASE DURING THE YEAR IN DEBT AND
SINKING-FUND ASSETS: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
GROSS DEBT AT CLOSE OF YEAR
Classified by the governmental unit by
which, issued
Classified by character
CITY
%
Per
capita
Total
a
General obligation bonds f o r —
City corporation
School district
Other governmental units
O
Capital outlays
Funding bond
anticipation
notes
Funding current
expenses
Refunding
Revenue
bonds
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
Fort Wayne, I n d . - Camden, N. J .
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J.—
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.Cambridge, Mass.—
New Bedford, Mass.'
$2,883,045
25,925,477
11,279,451
12,220,586
8,424,892
3,261,200
6,603,679
12,091,000
8,607,047
$24.01
217.68
95.35
103.65
71.64
27.97
57.29
105.78
76.44
$650,045
25,925,477
5,927,522
12,220,586
5,489,632
2,524,000
6,603,679
12,091,000
8,607,047
$2,233,000
Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, Tenn. •
Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.-
11,365,100
21,902,600
5,082,992
4,629,109
4,660,345
31,522,385
5,427,657
10,415,492
6,327,650
101.66
198.03
46.29
42.24
43.07
291.33
50.26
96.89
59.36
3,824,100
21,902,600
2,458,621
2,148,109
2,872,065
25,748,641
2,088,657
4,756,154
6,327,650
7,541,000
Tampa, Fla.-r
Scenerville, Mass.
El Paso, Tex.
14,171,991
7,416,105
6,638,444
4,059,700
8,709,500
12,295,058
133.07
70.10
62.75
38.63
84.64
119.83
79.61
132.17
10,965,798
7,416,105
6,638,444
2,121,200
8,709,500
12,295,058
4,809.517
Evansville, Ind.Lynn, Mass.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.Lowell, Mass.
13,388,400
6,339,397
Honolulu, Hawaii 1/1/ Not included in group or grand totals.
5,351,929
2,410,560
737,200
851,840
2,461,000
1,781,474
5,773,744
3,339,000
5,659,338
$524,700
1,772,531
6,806
$2,635,045
14,378,505
9,235,377
7,458,900
3,624,338
2,043,500
3,244,000
8,626,000
4,488,735
10,012,600
10,922,000
3,131,987
4,442,800
3,400,714
21,309,466
4,890,000
8,118,548
5,949,650
13,388^400
6,339,397
8,558,827
2,709,000
4,049,458
2,536,500
5,248,500
7,490,867
4,929,517
6,568,400
2,429,730
7,002,309
6,288,809
3,206,193
1,938,500
3,303,000
$45,000
440,092
1,280,000
961,308
$203,000
11,254,000
1,123,908
3,446,000
1,899,082
1,148,700
$69,000
2,931,000
565,000
2,440,000
740,000
3,684,000
320,500
i20,731
358,297
643,860
1,373,400
859,000
365,000
3,329,726
1,155,000
3,520}000
1,412j500
3
7,230,005
165,000
183,000
8,712,272
175,000
220,000
378,000
17,000
369,000
4,738,000
110,000
1,077,000
662,200
341,000
861,000
654,629
1,725,000
2 2 . — G R O S S AND NET DEBT,
TOTAL AND PER CAPITA; GROSS DEBT BY UNIT OF GOVERNMENT AND BY CHARACTER; AND INCREASE DURING THE YEAR I N DEBT AND
SINKING-FUND A S S E T S : 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
DEBT AT CLOSE OF YEAR—Continued
NET DEBT 1/
INCREASE DURING THE YEAR I N — 2/
C l a s s i f i e d by c h a r a c t e r — C o n t i n u e d
Special assessment
Short-texm o b l i g a t i o n s
obligations
Long-teim l o a n s
Grand totalGroup I
Group I I —
Group H i -
Bond
anticipation
Tax and revenue a n t i c i pation
$20,668,306
•379,196,345
l l , 651,539
3,041,981
5,974,786
327,085,368
14,349,164
37,761,813
$10,600,000
$125,297,000
143,798,677
15,002,500
5,000,000
Contingent
general
obligations
Payable only
from special
assessments
#12,526,391
$170,209,005
$46,082,066
7,144,061
1,811,572
3,570,758
121,422,072
22,810,076
25,976,857
25,156,202
5,251,856
15,674,008
Shortterm
loans—
contingent
general
obligations
Per
capita
Gross bonded
debt 5/
Sinking-fund
assets
Net debt 1/
$305,135
$3,903,791,182
$103.62
-$52,748,821
-$19,812,756
-$32,936,065
305,135
1,431,579,848
588,745,028
883,466,306
109.87
127.64
80.83
-23,591,521
-10,473,807
-18,683,493
-13,549,194
-4,929,929
-1,333,633
-10,042,327
-5,543,878
-17,349,860
$95.89
109.21
123.35
170.30
93.38
105.31
94.91
117.57
107.40
195.61
76.92
3.94
74.32
213.06
$21,991,332
-11,065,652
3,016,500
-25,061,030
-1,645,394
-3,541,948
2,376,000
-2,878,927
-5,592,167
2,575
-3,294,800
-457,500
-5,672,910
8,232,400
-$6,936,482
18,251,523
3,219,768
-22,678,612
32,818
1,123,170
-593,690
900,010
-2,736,157
-1,348,293
-85,153
-931,018
-1,767,078
$28,927,814
-29,317,175
-203,268
-2,382,418
-1,678,212
-4,665,118
2,969,690
-3,778,937
-2,856,010
1,350,868
-3,209,647
-457,500
-4,741,892
9,999,478
$117.18
147.52
108.39
173.72
132.26
78.65
77.25
$431,453
701,667
-8,208,865
-1,349,114
4,023,654
-2,058,757
177,465
-$1,854,729
-310,124
-4,832,162
810,418
885,177
-95,390
324,928
$2,286,182
1,011,791
-3,376,703
-2,159,532
3,138,477
-1,963,367
-147,463
GROUP I.—CITIES HATING A POPULATION OF 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 AND OTER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, Pa.
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.—
Clereland, Ohio—
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.San Francisco, Calif.'
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, W i s .
B u f f a l o , N. Y
$99,320,000
$5,209,626
h/ 1 3 4 , 2 4 9
3,439
2,262,789
$25,156,202
3,294,576
16,463,213
192,000
30,443,089
974,068
1,767,154
1,051,539
1,167,000
4,114,313
20,750
8,843
128,215
1,050,000
$686 , 0 2 5 , 8 4 7
381 231,347
243, 332,919
283, 7 4 3 , 8 4 0
126, 4 4 9 , 9 3 0
96 , 7 1 4 , 7 5 0
78 807,459
96 ,065,194
84 , 5 1 6 , 4 2 4
132 723,865
50 474,700
2 ,455,065
,527,124
,511,384
GROUP II.—CITIES HATING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.New Orleans, La.
Cincinnati, Ohio
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, Mo.
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.See footnotes at end of table.
$5,402,165
$68,000
$4,647,620
$1,376,114
454,309
1,080,000
10,780,543
48,198
5,990,677
604,236
$20,000
$55,976,913
69,481,051
49,868,436
77,653,405
54,569,805
29,424,044
28,743,503
TABLE 2 2 . ' -GROSS AND NET DEBT,
TOTAL AND PER CAPITA; GROSS DEBT BY U N I T OF GOVERNMENT AND BY CHARACTER; AND INCREASE DURING THE YEAR I N DEBT AND
SINKING-FUND A S S E T S : 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
GROSS DEBT AT CLOSE OF YEAR—Continued
NET EEBT i /
INCREASE DURING THE YEAR I N — 2 /
C l a s s i f i e d by c h a r a c t e r — C o n t i n u e d
Short-term obligations
Special assessment
obligations
Long-term l o a n s
Bond
anticipation
Tax and r e v e nue a n t i c i pation
Contingent
general
obligations
Payable only
from s p e c i a l
assessments
Shortterm
loanscontingent
general
obligations
Per
capita
Gross bonded
debt 3 /
Sinking-fund
assets
$151.41
212.93
131.37
106.04
93.77
-$1,036,075
-1,748,503
-386,983
924,249
-1,943,998
$111,826
-258,915
82,950
3,521
202,571
-$1,147,901
-1,489,588
-469,933
920,728
-2,146,569
$24, 213,269
3 4 887,151
11,,451,663
14 887,863
11 ,948,037
2 8 048,979
24 378,682
19 ,852,510
27, 236,243
19 118,544
32 ,871,992
577,915
$80.79
116.72
38.74
50.78
42.61
100.90
87.72
72.64
102.74
73.11
128.61
84.51
-$1,825,728
-1,467,969
-613,911
193,000
722,500
74,250
-386,810
103,000
-1,167,320
57,738
917,800
-819,500
$1,548,644
-2,434,074
-20,985
-81,984
419,463
307,611
-303,884
-15,512
-588,142
-59,678
8,896
-323,755
-$3,374,372
966,105
-592,926
274,984
303,037
-233,361
-82,926
118,512
-579,178
117,416
908,904
-495,745
16,129,629
34,520,559
12,198,534
8,262,884
8,909,910
17,040,815
7,882,406
9,232,341
21,073,769
16,574,906
11,411,395
11,702,202
74.06
160.94
59.04
41.03
45.00
92.16
45.25
53.43
124.55
98.37
68.25
71.93
-848,546
3,546,498
-858,778
-1,124,919
-269,000
570,110
-356,064
-527,552
554,834
-880,950
-1,231,688
-904,000
464,308
-1,312,854
3,546,498
-1,160,529
-692,456
-376,393
-220J640
-454,538
-600,870
761,704
-821,166
-1,366,637
-922,025
Net debt
1/
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 — C o n t i n u e d
R o c h e s t e r , N. Y . J e r s e y C i t y , N. J
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, K y . ~
Portland, Oreg.—
$6,623,500
$2,279,650
694,331
$50,495,461
68,116,396
41,763,977
33,669,154
28,982,883
$302,470
124,852
$25,000
585,000
1,364,250
4,793,734
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
40
41
42
43
46
47
48
Columbus, Ohio
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, C a l i f . —
Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, M i n n . —
Birmingham, A l a . —
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
Providence, R. I.San Antonio, Tex.Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, O h i o —
Oklahoma City, Okla,
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.Fort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.
$96,754
$339,901
482,r.?l
$11,766
$3,123,703
294,633
742,500
72,800
$3,656,400
6,000,000
300,003
842,000
402,565
$25,508
1,710,000
2,629,500
714,000
1,828,369
555,000
211,809
1,350,000
239,484
1,282,000
2,312,775
90,147
4,529,646
1,950
508
359,752
410,000
1,951,200
289,000
300,000
1,517,000
844,097
2,989,250
7,045
188,045
9,486
301,751
-432,463
7 393
790^750
98,474
73,318
-206,870
-59,784
134,949
18,025
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
San Diego, Calif.
Long Beach, Calif.
Nashville, Tenn.
Springfield, Mass.
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
Peterson, N. J.
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
Jacksonville, Fla.Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.Kansas City, Kans.Fort Wayne, Ind.
Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J. —Wichita, Kans.
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.Cambridge, Mass.—
New Bedford, Mass.
Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, Tenn.—
Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.—
Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
84
85
Canton, OhioWilmington, D e l . Tampa, Fla.
Somerville, Mass.
El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.Lynn, Mass.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.Lowell, Mass.
Honolulu, Hawaii 5 / -
2,571
2,604,630
63,669
1,000,000
148,861
650,000
187,000
42,086
152,576
1,660,000
798,000
165
150,000
815,000
186,318
500,000
121,012
4,600
6,644
752,119
171,500
1,911,600
742,000
686,500
86,000
1,343,163
214,695
292,972
442,715
8,916
10,794
1,927,180
428,679
2,900,000
1,678,312
240,000
305,000
3,252
4,360
372,500
136,972
21,309
1,059,631
785,664
66,595
1,188,533
595,419
476,366
3,333,705
311,986
100,000
3,096,000
500,000
113,000
1,500,000
2,497,167
2,190
252,798
36,000
146,975
190,000
5,741,561
11,068,967
11,307,700
9,448,287
10,274,515
14,612,945
12,507,835
7,965,545
6,916,215
28,152,450
15,648,833
35.86
70.50
72.39
61.59
69.42
99.21
86.08
55.16
47.96
200.37
112.58
-367,192
-688,064
-687,500
-947,126
500,257
-627,408
-143,820
81,000
-206,000
371,750
-1,478,350
8,412,689
15,931,732
15,207,107
17,241,252
13,565,552
6,556,533
2,734,993
24,082,427
10,313,292
11,509,607
6,484,728
60.57
122.74
117.24
138.93
109.84
53.13
22.77
202.20
87.18
97.62
55.14
-147,605
-686,785
-468,136
-1,825,750
320,609
12,881
-290,900
-516,180
-312,000
-490,000
-421,266
3,201,501
5,426,486
6,883,612
6,040,105
10,243,584
19,530,171
3,452,487
4,297,204
3,241,944
29,409,627
5,341,104
27.46
47.07
60.22
53,64
91.62
176.58
31.44
39.21
29.96
271.81
49.45
-216,250
-659,000
-429,000
-159,000
-382,400
1,193,913
91,101
-307,950
-230,936
329,494
-261,000
6,454,498
4,835,990
11,176,734
4,082,400
5,620,708
3,986,448
5,508,547
11,332,613
7,730,486
11,730,864
3,842,230
60.04
45.37
104.95
38.59
53.13
37.93
53.53
110.45
75.86
115.80
38.33
70,237
-285,850
-433,353
177,400
-346,410
-371,000
-98,600
-670,741
-611,888
743,500
-265,170
6,238,122
1/ Net debt i s bonded debt l e s s sinking-fund assets.
2/ Minus sign (-) indicates decrease.
3 / Includes only general obligation and revenue bonds,
sents the excess of cash in private trust account over that in general treasury.
5/ Not included in group or grand t o t a l s .
-30,804
-70,163
-216,500
28,833
55,390
-114,969
154,833
-437,585
29,610
-34,575
712,893
-122,401
62,283
6,077
4,753
-379,179
27,361
-34,581
-6,251
-59,531
-136,251
45,185
-94,669
65,142
23,417
-277,432
175,900
38,007
-73,297
90,908
-99,522
-44,354
-95,486
3,691
-174,565
3,311
-5,563
-336,388
-617,901
-471,000
-947,126
471,424
-627,408
-199,210
195,969
-360,833
371,750
-1,040,765
-177,215
-652,210
-1,181,029
-1,703,349
258,326
6,804
-295,653
-137,001
-339,361
-455,419
-421,266
-209,999
-599,469
-292,749
-204,185
-287,731
1,128,771
91,101
-331,367
46,496
153,594
-299,007
143,534
-376,758
-333,831
177,400
-302,056
-275,514
-102,291
-496,176
-615,199
749,063
-265,170
-103,107
4 / This amount repre-
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
212
TABLE 23.—BONDED DEBT 1 / AT CLOSE OF YEAR, BY PURPOSE OF ISSUE: 1937
(See text discussion, p . 205)
General administrative, Police and
f i r e delegislative,
partments
and J u d i c i a l
Grand t o t a l
Group I
Group I I
Group I I I
Highways
Sewers and
sewage
disposal
$4,946,137,049
$147,224,658
$72,869,481
$917,247,042
$672,675,550
3,205,425,850
696,663,825
1,044,047,374
103,854,599
20,272,191
23,097,868
50,791,214
5,391,371
16,686,896
605,264,820
132,401,628
179,580,594
419,528,939
88,079,699
165,066,912
$111,068,760
63,355,930
92,971,576
8,723,875
17,784,284
16,709,000
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$1,088,611,712
465,171,345
415,122,434
288,801,882
134,056,831
122,184,246
82,929,000
$58,643,874
7,925,925
7,000
6,051,000
1,678,320
4,325,000
$14,217,620
2,007,000
11,224,646
3,638,278
3,034,750
1,101,500
1,472,000
$144,786,239
56,189,000
124,175,304
16,371,113
17,489,946
38,008,741
17fc510,000
122,489,186
95,745,133
148,707,803
51,554,800
2,565,300
55,012,142
132,474,036
3,177,100
1,819,333
4,101,140
4,800,000
2,029,697
3,007,000
938,200
4,170,000
35,867,500
38,535,800
84,121,499
8,978,600
3,577,244
7,748,663
1,362,000
2,588,523
6,092,000
17,139,078
44,548,147
14,320,000
5,528,634
5,211,000
1,027,500
24,200,868
14,079,365
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
$65,391,347
76,662,038
72,663,119
100,145,657
61,977,696
30,063,166
$85,150
509,000
2,461,125
4,419,931
6,517,536
2,106,167
Indianapolis, Ind.Rochester, N. Y . —
Jersey City, N. J.Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
31,656,977
59,871,820
74,592,766
47,635,643
40,844,800
35,158,796
890,000
139,825
1,730,657
1,243,400
169,400
$393,075
639,796
662,000
1,905,000
698,000
332,500
147,500
25,000
485,000
103,500
$10,605,925
9,813,620
25,293,337
17,831,931
12,874,737
7,849,993
$12,467,117
15,358,700
7,708,065
12,257,267
4,592,000
1,893,000
1,593,544
4,741,730
2,627,378
19,310,500
1,235,000
18,623,933
3,625,550
2,284,000
7,288,000
20,606,000
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
$31,733,048
38,498,708
12,480,756
19,545,900
13,012,800
$1,396,800
338,000
543,943
2,600,000
656,000
$1,026,480
965,000
20,921
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birraingham, Ala.Akron, Ohio
Memphis, T e n n . —
29,626,000
44,267,870
22,766,000
32,873,964
21,628,000
456,000
1,951,000
Providence, R. I.San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y . —
Dayton, Ohio
43,059,500
22,442,000
22,114,183
36,833,334
15,265,106
220,000
188,000
Oklahoma City, Okla.Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.--
13,407,543
9,344,000
31,671,811
8,907,520
12,645,626
Fort Worth, Tex.Hartford, Conn.-Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.-
22,438,716
19,849,600
14,842,316
12,741,000
Columbus, OhioToledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, C o l o . —
Atlanta, Ga.
457,000
86,000
7,050
20,000
289,750
4,000
50,400
1,145,000
1,325,000
1,101,800
$11,626,650
4,473,000
946,125
3,271,700
3,566,000
404,000
930,000
642,000
68,000
539,000
7,052,000
1,702,000
2,090,180
7,225,000
3,270,00*3
6,242,000
9,114,000
3,175,100
10,306,500
2,666,000
471,000
563,500
295,525
245,255
220,000
11,254,503
5,327,000
6,542,500
6,491,185
3,943,431
7,304,000
2,714,000
5,286,000
3,302,514
2,602,050
230,300
538,000
1,401,000
7,205,351
1,394,120
2,346,000
3,432,000
1,583,000
12,136,080
103,880
3,277,700
6,954,000
3,947,750
1,552,000
3,999,000
3,205,860
1,650,600
4,539,000
2,040,000
323,230
49,200
641,000
321,450
3,000
246,000
$6,121,003
6,070,000
1/ Includes general obligation, revenue, and long-term special assessment bonds.
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—DEBT AND SPECIFIED ASSETS
TABLE 23.—BONDED DEBT 1 / AT CLOSE OF YEAR, BY PURPOSE OF ISSUE:
1937—Continued
(See text discussion, p . 205)
General administrative, Police and
f i r e delegislative,
and j u d i c i a l partments
Highways
GROUP III.-—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
San Diego, Calif.—
Long Beach, Calif.Nashville, Tenn.
Springfield, Mass.Tulsa, Okla.
$6,004,891
11,702,377
12,644,700
9,448,287
14,214,726
Bridgeport, C o n n . —
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa,
Salt Lake City, Uta]
Yonkers, N. Y.
14,612,945
12,568,336
8,787,119
7,405,000
30,064,050
Paterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
17,055,664
9,969,650
18,239,173
23,976,609
18,873,025
Chattanooga, T e n n . —
Kansas City, K a n s . —
Fort Wayne, Ind.
Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
15,677,721
8,044,709
2,883,045
25,632,505
11,278,092
Elizabeth, N. J.Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.Cambridge, Mass.—
12,184,900
8,411,908
3,261,200
6,175,000
9,191,000
New Bedford, Mass..
Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, T e n n . —
Peoria, 111.
South Bend, I n d . —
6,928,735
11,125,100
21,902,600
4,641,020
4,607,800
Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.
3,600,714
30,733,469
5,423,297
9,577,827
6,327,650
Tampa, Fla.
Somerville, Mass.El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.—
Lynn, Mass.
13,442,827
4,082,400
6,326,458
4,059,700
5,613,500
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.'
Lowell, Mass.
11,622,197
7,999,517
11,888,400
3,842,230
$370,450
$39,000
120,000
381,000
36,400
644,000
$892,080
2,909,000
2,176,350
3,203,500
341,000
460,000
50,000
241,750
775,000
12,000
22,000
1,065,800
588,000
5,000
6,555
182,753
1,077,371
63,000
2,484,705
4,107,074
7,993,198
425,052
20,000
268,113
2,989,163
1,563,941
68,500
767,823
1,240,645
117,541
600,000
5,034,000
155,000
144,050
115,237
18,000
138,500
25,000
214,000
194,000
481,000
151,500
110,743
86,000
165,000
825,000
42,000
21,000
135,934
650,000
440,000
2,986,000
1,254,300
601,900
247,000
3,865,060
1,415,701
898,626
964,700
104,000
4,076,000
1,472,000
1,182,000
1,368,595
1,138,871
590,000
305,000
979,320
116,000
173,500
530,500
788,500
11,313,840
15,000
150,000
275,000
4,408,200
515,000
758,000
1,371,321
2,094,667
104,000
591,000
168,481
3,028,462
340,000
2,194,000
276,000
105,000
7,000
Honolulu, Hawaii S/~
1/ Includes general obligation, revenue, and long-term special assessment bonds.
2/ Not included in group or grand totals.
213
214
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
TABLE 23.—BONDED DEBT 1 / AT CLOSE OF YEAR, BY PURPOSE OF ISSUE:
1937—Continued
(See text discussion, p . 205)
Conservation of
health
Grand t o t a l -
$4,667,392
Group I
Group I I —
Group I I I -
4,602,392
Hospitals
$143,002,252 6106,364,509
95,341,927
38,344,396
9,315,929
49,704,136
29,069,333
27,591,040
$22,671,781
$1,187,332,345
B>26,090t290
18,442,382
3,462,239
767,160
705,575,016
156,047,170
325,710,159
21,863,911
1,092,500
3,133,879
$342,358,047
38,603,000
70,361,000
71,650,682
63,255,315
10,934,625
3,516,000
$12,485,473
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND MORE
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, Pa.
Detroit, Mich.
L O B Angeles, Calif.—
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.—
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif,
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
|4,351,077
$57,925,096
232,500
5,307,010
178,750
6,793,000
8,950,000
215,000
6,760,000
2,800,000
1,435,000
466,750
4,278,821
$5,363,609
593,913
710,100
8,792,722
5,099,368
6,590,000
$8,613,639
3,129,000
2,012,400
1,250,000
6,711,190
6,958,000
438,000
846,260
750,000
5,504,350
2,130,884
300,308
2,352,775
24,292,492 |
8,406,000 '
22,573,990 j
12,377,000
2,272,000
2,207,000
1,341,500
2,570,000
516,000
328,800
6,371,50C
30,875,365
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o , —
Seattle, Wash.
$1,214,746
Indianapolis, Ind.'
Rochester, N. Y . —
Jersey City, N. J..
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
2,259,436
1,455,950
12,857,178
1,421,100
1,735,000
5,345,669
7,878,825
2,439,330
1,737,162
$10,382,217
2,000
1,503,607
3,678,366
690,138
765,379
$17,542,924
6,431,000
15,476,528
19,853,507
21,316,000
8,851,210
872,179
323,000
9,937,000
15,121,500
12,925,052
10,875,244
11,124,400
6,592,805
1,246,507
3,833,898
6,300,000
915,738
1,207,000
200,000
$357,000
34,500
126,000
250,000
325,000
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
$178,000
Columbus, OhioToledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, C o l o . —
Atlanta, Ga.
2,000,000
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.-BinrLngham, Ala.Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
402,500
162,000
Providence, R. I.San Antonio, Tex.Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
850,000
92,000
904,000
100,000
642,000
85,470
10,000
215,000
Fort Worth, Tex.-Hartford, Conn.—
F l i n t , Vlch.
38,500
200,000
935,000
$7,319,265
15,920,575
10,515,321
7,502,000
4,560,500
$30,000
7,163,500
10,298,000
9,677,504
6,587,692
5,760,000
118,000
650,000
519,216
16,375,050
6,958,000
8,381,058
10,001,256
6,258,262
1
Oklahoma City, Okla.-|
Worcester, M a s s . —
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, O h i o —
Grand Rapids, Mich
New Haven, Conn.—
San Diego, Calif.-
$18,000
133,000
40,000
103,000
74,000
4,720,243
276,000
6,751,688
1,701,168
3,048,326
6,800,225
9,275,^00
6,287,000
323,000
3,958,455
1/ Includes general obligation, revenue, and long-term special assessment bonds.
400,000
118,845
112,000
15,000
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—DEBT AND SPECIFIED ASSETS
TABLE 23.—BONDED DEBT 1 / AT CLOSE OF YEAR, BY PURPOSE OF ISSUE:
215
1937—Continued
(See text discussion, p . 205)
Conservation of
health
Hospitals
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
Long Beach, Calif,Nashville, T e n n . —
Springfield, Mass.Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.—
$61,000
$50,000
$610,000
442,000
146,000
50,000
Des Moines, I o w a — - ~
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J.
$34,000
:, 684,000
307,000
213,160
$7,978,490
2,735,000
1,457,250
5,366,218
3,408,164
7,098,286
5,971,000
3,857,000
8,367,650
5,565,800
Jacksonville, Fla.Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.-
45,000
300,000
558,500
8,700
3,596,357
5,537,221
5,998,223
6,616,713
2,193,958
Kansas City, Kans.Fort Wayne, I n d . —
Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J . —
10,000
98,978
10,943
5,000
46,740
425,600
2,227,200
2,233,000
3,804,000
5,351,000
5,708,450
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.Cambridge, M a s s . —
New Bedford, Mass.
105,000
490,000
16,000
590,000
1,860,000
2,935,260
737,200
1,331,000
1,153,000
1,569,000
585,500
75,000
1,220,000
Somerville, Mass.
El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.Lynn, Mass.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.Lowell, Mass.
4,904
234,120
7,301,000
2,148,000
851,840
2,481,000
1,433,214
Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, Tenn.Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.
Tampa, Fla.
$64,000
166,000
5,582,789
3,259,000
4,839,273
931,000
3,204,827
1,877,000
2,251,458
1,938,500
1,585,500
195,000
2,000
1,500,000
1,412,500
1,738,980
3,190,000
1,374,900
506,000
Honolulu, Hawaii 2/-
1/ Includes general obligation, revenue, and long-term special assessment bonds.
2/ Not included in group or grand totals.
25,000
173,000
2,127
16,667
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
216
T A B L E 2 3 . — B O N D E D D E B T 1 / A T C L O S E OF Y E A R , B Y P U R P O S E O F I S S U E :
1937—Continued
(See text discussion, p. 205)
COMBINED AND UNREPORTED
Miscellaneous
Parks and
playgrounds
Grand total-'
Group I
Group I I —
Group III—
#353,193,136
$50,367,029
274,737,711
33,674,631
44,780,794
35,276,346
8,107,500
6,983,183
$195,:
General
obligation
Special
assessment
$892,948,108
$154,214,021
559,559,880
131,686,052
201,702,176
131,280,643
11,223,558
11,709,820
$44,924,650
535,000
10,326,383
34,950,623
20,207,066
1,340,528
8,617,000
$222,672,504
110,162,656
90,988,883
36,988,500
12,300
14,370,539
$99,320,000
25,156,202
1,840,000
792,000
2,690,920
503,000
5,502,250
15,671,000
16,159,155
129,601,934
37,811,557
27,855,964
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, Pa. — '
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$62,494,575
120,855,814
30,699,278
15,964,000
4,104,107
6,101,000
15,240,000
$10,455,309
1,500,000
3,858,000
4,768,265
1,678,400
947,000
372,000
268,550
3,000,000
5,832,585
3,876,000
9,616,000
3,069,715
4,404,557
1,333,000
1,541,764
966,000
5,838,441
102,800
2,734,407
44,194,886
GROUP I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 5 0 0 , 0 0 0
Minneapolis, Minn.New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
$4,279,684
67,500
9,404,350
7,451,974
351,989
791,000
Indianapolis, Ind.
Rochester, N. Y . «
Jersey City, N. J.
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
2,436,900
1,144,575
4,475,383
1,011,276
1,984,000
276,000
4,460,000
743,000
1,008,000
750,000
689,000
$555,054
21,050,000
2,266,510
3,750,812
1,769,000
1,168,277
$6,896,912
23,430,218
1,381,994
21,469,665
5,752,104
2,978,850
4,259,441
1,028,000
284,840
1,313,123
2,488,708
20,885,240
37,879,361
3,107,000
2,916,000
2,500,000
366,500
4,600,058
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, Ohio—
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.--Atlanta, Ga.
$262,600
2,032,500
454,446
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.Akron, Ohio
Memphis, T e n n . —
4,222,000
1,205,000
1,361,000
159,000
1,167,000
Providence, R. I.San Antonio, Tex.Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y . —
Dayton, Ohio
1,854,000
921,500
1,586,600
971,825
80,000
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.—
3,283,000
250,000
207,100
414,500
Fort Worth, Tex.Hartford, Conn.Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.-
1,580,131
24,000
418,000
2,397,000
l/
735,000
1,138,000
625,000
105,000
660,000
838,000
1,200,000
$2,310,000
434,000
$637,300
7,582,000
1,140,000
50,000
2,978,500
235,000
320,000
446,000
22,000
1,580,000
2,596,000
10,797,870
4,851,000
8,041,772
4,862,000
584,000
2,815,000
22,500
1,065,476
4,000
4,105,000
1,838,000
5,426,263
1,944,000
200,000
566,393
286,000
171,600
71,000
573,000
3,994,749
4,904,652
2,269,000
134,000
1,550,000
208,000
$806,950
294,633
1,707,200
3,085,000
2,830,000
1,034,316
2,303,000
Includes general obligation, revenue, and long-term special assessment bonds.
714,000
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—DEBT AND SPECIFIED ASSETS
TABLE 23.—BONDED DEBT 1 / AT CLOSE OF YEAR, BY PURPOSE OF ISSUE:
217
1937—Continued
(See text discussion, p . 205)
RECREATION
o
City
25
COMBINED AND UNREPORTED
Miscellaneous
CITY
Parks and
playgrounds
All other
General
obligation
Special
assessment
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 — C o n t i n u e d
$739,375
2,771,237
1,053,500
85,000
896,000
$60,000
57,000
Bridgeport, Conn.
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
832,042
368,400
81,300
41,739
210,125
Paterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
101,000
27,940
651,168
182,260
Chattanooga, Tenn.Kansas City, Kans.Fort Wayne, Ind.
Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
281,000
121,670
297,045
433,000
493,738
300,000
255,000
Elizabeth, N. J.Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.'
Cambridge, Mass.—
145,280
697,227
945,000
211,000
940,500
5,115
155,000
44,000
New Bedford, Mass.Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, Tenn.
Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.
207,000
335,300
238,000
San Diego, Calif.—
Long Beach, Calif.Nashville, Tenn.
Springfield, Mass.Tulse, Okla.
$157,500
$207,450
1,629,000
10,500
639,480
941,689
876,202
120,000
Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.-
2,260,654
964,000
55,500
551,150
137,000
80,000
Tampa, Fla.
Somerville, Mass..
El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.Lynn, Mass.
241,000
185,000
458,000
325,000
100,000
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.Lowell, Mass.
254,226
838,850
270,500
27,230
130,000
1,335,941
284,500
508,500
1,048,788
323,200
3,352,287
409,008
3,416,000
2,388,375
2,042,000
1,140,000
7,245,160
8,663,586
983,000
5,379,713
6,184,636
10,357,500
$33,000
8,050,900
1,743,244
214,695
14,504,000
380,352
42,526
440,000
3,094,000
734,471
570,300
2,J76,000
138,735
77,400
75,000
81,205
580,000
390,000
15,991,005
5,280
1,090,000
17,000
2,793,352
86,000
14,615
75,000
670,000
3,079,014
93,297
805,000
378,000
62,000
30,000
101,000
100,000
282,500
3,268,800
1,373,400
1,344,000
662,200
555,000
979,748
50,000
3,278,526
2,524,000
4,245,000
550,000
Honolulu, Hawaii 2/-
1/ Includes general obligation, revenue, and long-term special assessment bonds.
2/ Not included in group or grand totals.
1,789,004
218
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
TABLE 24
Bonded indebtedness classified by rate of Interest paid is shown in table
24. Of the fifteen specified rates, four rates predominated, being paid in the
aggregate on 63.4 percent of all funded indebtedness. As expressed in approximate percent of total bonded debt, these rates were, in order of importance: 4
percent interest, 23 percent of total; 4$ percent, 18 percent of total; 4i percent, 15 percent of total; and 5 percent, 7 percent of total.
NOMINAL AND EFFECTIVE BATES OF INTEREST. — B y nominal rate of Interest is meant
the rate percent stated in the obligation itself, and by effective rate is meant
the net interest cost incurred in issuing the obligation after adjustment for
premium or discount. When an obligation is sold at par, the effective rate is,
of course, the nominal rate.
There are many elements that determine the rates of interest that cities
pay for the use of money, one of the principal ones being the condition of the
money market at the time money is borrowed. Thus, a city may find its cost of
borrowing subject to great variance from time to time, but such fluctuations
will not necessarily be evident in the nominal interest rates that the obligations bear. For example, a municipality may wish to offer a large block of 4percent bonds because of certain local considerations—perhaps because they already have been voted or otherwise authorized. If comparable obligations are
quoted in the investment markets at a price substantially below par, the proceeds accruing to the city naturally will be substantially less than the amount
of indebtedness created, and the effective rate will exceed 4 percent. Conversely, a high premium quoted for comparable obligations will bring proceeds
much greater than the debt incurred, resulting in an effective interest rate of
less than 4 percent. Consequently, since the Interest rates shown in table 24
are nominal rather than effective rates, they do not necessarily measure the
credit rating of the various cities.
AVERAGE RATE OF INTEREST.—The average rate of interest for each city, shown
in the last column of table 24, needs explanation as to method of computation.
These figures, which are the average interest rates borne by funded obligations
of cities at the end of the fiscal year 1937, are obtained by the use of the
formula | y, where r is the nominal rate of Interest and d is the amount of
interest-bearing debt at that rate. Noninterest-bearing debt and also indebtedness for which no interest rates are reported are excluded from the computations.
The averag3 rate for the cities as a whole was 4.1 percent, the highest individual average being 5.1 percent and the lowest being 2.4 percent. With respect to geographic divisions, it appears that municipalities in the northeastern section, especially New England, generally are able to market obligations
at interest rates lower than cities in most other areas, this circumstance reflecting the favorable aspects of greater wealth concentration.
N0N3NTEREST-BEARING BONDED DEBT. —The items included under this column comprise for the most part bonds that have matured or have been called but have
not been presented for payment; they are, of course, no longer interest-bearing.
For example, Chicago has &5,000,000 outstanding of a sanitary district issue
which is due and called but not presented. Retirement is provided for by cash
in a sinking fund. In the case of Milwaukee, Cleveland, and Akron, different
circumstances prevail. These cities in a time of cash shortage issued "baby
bonds'* (Milwaukee) or "notes" (Cleveland and Akron), which were noninterestbearing.
In effect, these obligations were scrip; Milwaukee used its "baby
bonds" to pay a percentage of municipal employees' wages, receiving them in return for payment of taxes or other Indebtedness due the city.
TABLE 25
The amount of indebtedness issued and retired in 1937 is shown in table 25.
There was a net decrease of #52,691,574 in the bonded indebtedness of the 94
cities. General obligation bonds retired exceeded the amount Issued by $90,580,257; revenue bonds Issued exceeded the amount retired by $37,888,633; special
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—DEBT AND SPECIFIED ASSETS
219
assessment obligations retired exceeded by $15,168,990 the amount issued; and
short-term indebtedness was retired In amount exceeding by $49,241,239 the
amount issued.
For an explanation of the differing data as to the amount of decrease in
bonded debt reported, as shown In tables 22 and 25, see the discussion of the
former table.
ISSUE OF DEBT.—The transactions relating to debt here reported are the net
amounts received from the proceeds of the obligations issued, that is, the par
value of the obligation plus premiums and less discounts.
The receipts from
this source in 1937 amounted to $1,110,498,464, approximately 65 percent of
which was derived from short-term loans. This kind of temporary indebtedness
has no particular bearing upon the debt structure of the cities except in those
cases where the rate of retirement is considerably below the rate of issue, resulting in an unwieldy accumulation of unfunded Indebtedness. When the backlog
of floating Indebtedness reaches the point where current receipts are not available in an amount sufficient to retire the loans as originally anticipated, the
debt structure is affected, since it probably will be necessary to convert such
indebtedness into long-term obligations. Normally, however, short-term loans
are simply a fiscal convenience employed temporarily to finance current operations until the taxes levied for such purposes are actually received.
RETIREMENT OF DEBT.—The transactions relating to debt here reported are the
net amounts paid, that is, the par value of the obligations plus premiums and
less discounts. The total amount paid to redeem obligations was $1,227,600,267.
It is to be noted that only in the case of revenue bonds was the amount paid to
redeem such obligations less than the amount received from new Issues. The
amount paid to redeem short-term loans was well in excess of the proceeds received from new loans, suggesting that the use of this type of financing was
restricted to sound fiscal practices during 1937.
TABLE 2 4 . — B O N D E D DEBT 1 /
Group I
Group I I —
Group I I I -
AT CLOSE OF YEAR,
BY RATE OF I N T E R E S T :
percent
percent
3
percent
1937
3*
percent
3*
percent
percent
#4,729,845,978
$35,854»742
$34,145,315
$71,413,207
$64,663,633
$147,478,951
$103,327,893
$298,873,875
$65,726,116
3,058,847,576
668,601,893
1,002,396,509
5,275,264
9,349,929
21,229,549
14,607,560
5,915,866
13,621,889
42,956,200
7,776,795
20,680,212
36,427,555
13,732,500
14,503,578
111,168,575
8,638,622
27,671,754
83,536,912
10,644,458
9,146,523
252,563,526
11,368,709
34,941,640
32,249,646
22,821,300
10,655,170
$63,368,910
30,571,000
$39,588,694
$149,112,759
39,973,000
$7,478,924
25,848,623
10,494,595
988,000
3,500,000
17,438,000
3,093,096
409,808
6,961,000
3,483,572
2,558,000
1,610,000
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 1 1 1 . Philadelphia, P a . —
D e t r o i t , Mich.
Los A n g e l e s , C a l i f . C l e v e l a n d , Ohio
S t . L o u i s , Mo.
B a l t i m o r e , Md.—
B o s t o n , Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San F r a n c i s c o , C a l i f . '
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, W i s .
B u f f a l o , N. Y.
$989,291,712
440,015,143
415,122,434
285,507,306
134,055,831
105,721,033
82,929,000
122,297,186
95,745,133
147,733,735
51,554,800
2,565,300
54,883,927
131,424,036
$10,875,000
$888,414
1,800,000
$15,475,000
3,515,290
$854,160
849,000
4,405,100
6.150,000
3,319,460
4,888,000
191,000
6,454,000
5,514,000
7,290,400
14,267,000
2,900,000
1,971,000
10,774,095
575,000
1,542,000
1,326,375
3,625,000
2,117,000
1,000,000
359,100
4,000,000
2,586,850
21,920,530
12,204,233
3,234,300
600,800
3,856,000
3,589,000
105,000
4,472,000
2,713,150
$2,361,000
327,000
1,289,247
3,060,332
1,228,000
$2,211,000
1,970,000
720,084
9,400,000
1,444,000
1,550,730
223,000
930,835
5,647,381
GROUP I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 5 0 0 , 0 0 0
M i n n e a p o l i s , Minn.New O r l e a n s , L a . —
Cincinnati, Ohio—
Newark, N . J .
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, W a s h . — —
$59,989,182
72,014,418
66,672,442
100,145,657
61,373,460
30,063,166
$1,646,000
$645,000
$2,332,150
2,305,170
753,770
1,818,913
Indianapolis, Ind.
Rochester, N. Y . —
Jersey City, N. JV
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
P o r t l a n d , Oreg.
31.656.977
53,248,320
74.592,766
47', 635j643
40,844,800
30,365,062
2.174.030
2,58z',b45
2,408,500
li?17j096
2|800^000
$476,000
$2,097,200
2,060,000
4,984,300
$646,727
1,471,000
283,850
1,843,200
5,630,258
1,260,000
152 932
559^300
1,087,000
1,849,000
1,655,000
200,000
4,789,045
1,178,000
1,245,000
190,000
15,000
1,537,400
250,000
25,000
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
29
30
31
Columbus, O h i o —
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, C o l o . —
Atlanta, Ga.
$28,609,345
38,204,075
12,480,756
15,147,000
12,940,000
32
33
34
35
36
Dallas, Tex.
S t . Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, T e n n . —
29,626,000
38,267,870
21,056,000
30,244,464
20,914,000
38
39
40
41
Providence, R. I.San Antonio, Tex. Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. T.
Dayton, Ohio
43,059,500
22,442,000
17,842,933
34,520,559
14,537,317
42
43
44
45
46
Oklahoma City, Okla.Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, M i c h . —
13,407,543
9,344,000
31,671,811
8,497,520
10,694,426
47
48
49
50
51
Fort Worth, Tex.—
Hartford, Conn.
F l i n t , Mich.
New Haven, C o n n . —
San Diego, Calif.-
22,438,716
19,849,600
13,325,316
12,741,000
6,004,891
52
53
54
55
56
Long Beach, Calif.Nashville, Tenn.
Springfield, Mass.Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, C o n n . —
11,702,377
12,555,700
9,448,287
14,214,726
14,612,945
57
58
59
60
61
Des Moines, IowaScranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, U t a h —
Yonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J.
12,568,336
8,035,000
7,233,500
28,152,450
17,055,664
62
63
64
65
Jacksonville, Fla.Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, 7a.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.Kansas City, Kans.-
9,127,650
17,552,673
23,976,609
18,787,025
14,334,558
7,633,193
l/ Includes only general obligation and revenue bonds
$3,287,000
$291,000
7,621,870
$2,677,000
750,000
392,000
1,240,000
1,195,000
$1,553,156
1,188,500
618,000
1,217,000
622,000
365,000
$742,000
558,720
$263,000
1,249,000
224,000
3,000,000
360,000
1,788,000
513,000
3,586,000
327,000
380,000
105,000
386,200
1,028,000
374,887
290,000
940,500
371,000
,200,000
350,000
858,300
500,000
103,000
.,650,600
116,316
187,500
662,000
80,000
800,000
1,164,000
500,000
783,126
240,000
1,440,200
6,164,000
1,095,144
290,000
2,652,500
1,415,000
9,934,924
347,516
1,494,079
1,305,000
1,193,000
570,000
181,000
90,000
260,000
3,809,368
7,577,000
1,348,000
2,673,000
466,506
1,505 , 500
3,000,000
2,253,000
531,000
310,788
44,000
425,000
759,000
245,500
41,000
290,000
259,000
197,300
106,000
985,000
649,000
268,800
394,000
178,000
64,000
1,000,000
15,000
354,000
30,000
1,429,616
1,423,307
154,000
682,300
310,000
570,000
186,000
70,000
779,000
1,100,000
536,000
277,000
200,000
1,504,500
85,000
662,000
100,000
846,000
110,400
2,883,052
21,000
71,500
1,290,000
7,529,000
1,180,000
2,026,000
1,038,000
20,514,500
5,594,000
120,000
60,000
243,000
$6,639,548
4,839,770
265,000
2,500,000
2,000
717,000
738,000
298,000
2,313,000
147,000
$1,601,800
577,600
765,000
25,000
3,044,240
519,000
4,147,000
7,000
1,777,000
1,625,480
141,000
2,062,000
1,920,100
487,000
386,275
2,563,250
2,269,000
3,225,723
1,012,700
247,000
TABLE 24.—BONDED DEBT 1 / AT CLOSE OF YEAR, BY RATE OF INTEREST:
2
percent
2*
percent
8*
percent
percent
1937—Continued
3
percent
si
percent
percent
3t
percent
GKOUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
Fort Wayne, Ind.Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J . Wichita, Kane.
$2,883,045
25,632,505
10,799,377
12*184,900
6,484,728
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.Cambridge, Mass.—
New Bedford, Mass.
Reading, Pa.
3,261,200
6,175,000
9,191,000
6,928,735
10,752,600
Khoxville, Tenn.—
Peoria, 111.
South Bend, I n d . —
Taooma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
21,836,005
3,452,487
4,607,800
3,600,714
30,511,469
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.'
Tampa, Fla.
5,423,297
8,982,408
6,327,650
13,406,827
Somervllle, Mass.
El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.Lynn, Mass.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.
Lowell, Mass.
Honolulu, Hawaii 2 / -
•105,000
$200,000
•304,799
256,329
90,610
400,000
620,000
962,000
607,000
69,000
220,000
65,000
329,500
285,438
•100,000
2,070,000
•2,660,000
63,000
256,303
44,000
66,000
•314,000
289,744
332,000
778,000
2,301,500
448,000
262,000
243,000
160,000
1,500,000
187,000
364,000
500,000
320,500
225,000
1,867,343
528,000
107,000
359,000
392,000
11,475,222
7,809,517
11,888,400
3,842,230
471,500
120,000
1,000,000
94,000
1/ Includes only general obligation and revenue bonds.
2/ Not included in group or grand totals.
•200,000
37,000
200,000
106,000
4,082,400
6,326,458
4,059,700
5,613,500
6,288,809
280,367
•435,000
40,000
225,000
246,000
100,000
1,409,000
10,000
383,000
375,000
1,520,000
737,000
100,000
945,000
46,500
48,000
290,000
21,000
746,000
75,000
242,000
832,000
461,100
18,000
390,000
66,000
80,000
1,200,000
TABLE 24.—BONDED DEBT 1 / AT CLOSE OF YEAR, BY RATE OF INTEREST: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
Grand t o t a l Group I
Group I I - Group I I I -
4fc
percent
percent
5
percent
$714,701,482
#845,107,803
$143,312,342
$350,793,886
$10,994,935
$55,253,541
$670,624,200
$16,685,706
$11,026,759
506,052,082
78,872,156
129,777,244
418,330,085
182,405,061
244,372,657
50,240,508
40,573,668
52,498,166
119,854,944
68,139,034
162,799,908
1,623,848
4,354,587
5,016,500
20,643,499
6,346,774
28,263,268
547,959,912
47,738,134
74,926,154
10,345,500
3,928,545
2,411,661
9,787,499
25,818
1,213,442
$6,585,000
$5,861,193
9,200
percent
percent
Other reported
rates
Rates not
reported
Nonlnterest
bearing
percent
GROUP I.—CITIES BAYING A POPDLATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Franoisco, Calif.'
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$276,086,107
23,279,750
49,023,518
7,583,227
15,562,451
9, If0,000
16,302,000
66,524,815
8,141,846
34,358,368
$108,816,541
68,464,554
112,115,826
17,911,779
27,016,386
18,363,000
2,485,000
6,962,000
7,575,180
21,592,000
21,672,604
5,355,215
$9,051,000
$325,000
15,934,695
767,812
20,179,200
3,895,047
6,522,947
44,655,633
5,933,441
7,015,000
2,591,725
150,000
11,484,356
884,000
5,258,800
20,739,000
4,934,436
1,656,288
$970,228
181,000
472,620
$3,188,000
6,856,321
10,393,500
$24,257,000
13,964,000
2/ 415,113,234
2,607,000
7,385,257
9,846,200
36,000
13,247,000
3,760,500
787,564
1,414,420
76,300
6,944,072
1,173,000
7,205
102,800
1,528,817
3,601,400
57,938,821
GROUP II.—CITIES BAYING A PQPDIATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o —
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, Mo.--Seattle, Wash.
$4,106,525
1,532,000
7,278,776
22,636,351
6,874,000
5,901,304
$6,080,962
26,723,200
15,890,401
23,705,483
23,440,236
9,815,855
$2,384,358
9,163,000
2,366,824
2,972,134
1,663,000
4,120,479
$5,092,689
9,728,604
5,809,522
1,556,340
6,234,000
4,103,265
Indianapolis, Ind.Rochester, N. Y . —
Jersey City, N. J.Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
2,975,180
7,489,500
7,842,940
2,239,000
7,204,000
2,792,580
10,942,239
7,844,517
23,977,646
11,976,659
8,506,400
13,501,463
3,595,452
1,120,650
3,744,000
7,628,978
2,506,388
5,805,000
8,708,572
14,282,193
1,000,000
3,312,461
See footnotes at end of table.
1,814,793
$35,000
$93,357
3,982,000
637,580
1,268,000
163,784
54,000
$13,523,396
214,000
4,477,020
5,957,502
125,000
3,613,774
87,702
243,120
239,700
,021,000
105,867
1,356,782
12,434,048
2,024,000
2,240,500
20,000
66,101
$1,200,545
13,704
1,000
2,728,000
684,150
1,772,112
$11,114
TABLE 2 4 . — B O N D E D DEBT 1 / AT CLOSE OF YEAR,
4i
City
No.
percent
4f
percent
percent
BY RATE OF INTEREST:
5
percent
5&
percent
1937—Continued
percent
Other r e p o r t e d
rates
Rates not
reported
Noninterest
bearing
Average
rate
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPUIATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
$5,812,497
9,364,120
2,077,825
6,040,000
5,847,500
$572,528
2,719,100
165,000
4,821,000
7,037,000
448,000
1,600,508
1,716,000
12,531,000
7,640,000
7,411,000
10,313,717
7,692,000
2,876,000
Providence, R. I.San Antonio, Tex.•
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y . —
Dayton, Ohio
4,950,000
4,459,000
3,138,000
1,846,980
1,429,852
2,375,000
4,493,000
6,857,712
1,023,000
4,600,635
42
43
44
45
46
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.-
1,098,370
55,000
5,132,000
625,736
2,104,000
4,493,504
3,923,536
12,875,000
1,128,896
2,891,500
1,970,000
1,387,560
747,800
47
48
49
50
51
Fort Worth, Tex.Hartford, C o n n . —
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.—
San D i e g o , C a l i f . -
2,077,000
3,325,000
2,055,000
5,288,000
6,596,020
2,754,000
3,307,000
3,625,000
1,865,637
52
53
54
55
56
Long B e a c h , C a l i f . '
Nashville, Tenn.—
S p r i n g f i e l d , Mass.T u l s a , Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.Dec Moines lev*?——
755,480
1,171,000
348,000
644,830
4,795,000
2,461,300
728,872
3,168,000
159,000
3,168,000
2,552,000
4,187,112
58
59
60
61
62
63
Scranton, Pa.
S a l t Lake C i t y , U t a h Y o n k e r s , N. Y.
P a t e r s o n , N. J .
Jacksonville, Fla.
A l b a n y , N. Y.
5.964.000
l|500,000
4,527,000
2,194,000
571,000
401,000
4,784,000
11,608,820
286,000
2,600,000
27
28
29
30
31
Columbus, OhioToledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, C o l o . —
Atlanta, Ga.
$790,200
6,475,870
32
33
34
35
36
Dallas, Tex,
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.Akron, Ohio
Memphis, T e n n . —
37
38
39
40
41
5,602,000
$3,981,556
3,938,585
9,734,931
1,562,000
2,868,500
1,965,000
5,121,615
2,385,000
2,001,500
1,833,000
7,936,000
5,944,867
4,424,000
640,802
2,295,256
9,882,000
2,939,691
415,589
1,024,280
$174,000
1,670,750
$1,107,500
1,274,720
238,000
35,000
1,089,000
500,000
$3,012,560
390,340
500,000
1,253,000
4.3
4.2
4.9
4.1
4.0
39,500
3,271,000
356,000
1,349,212
789,000
4.3
3.6
4.6
4.7
4.5
1,134,175
1,753,081
205,000
9,830
72,000
163,476
2,957,500
1,537,292
14,244,141
772,420
15,000
100,680
50,000
295,860
107,941
5,165,000
115,000
2,201,272
$921-289
800,000
40,000
1,738,747
1 , 9 9 5 000
1,111,000
70 000
537 000
3,145,060
342,000
393,224
275,000
120,250
106,958
15,000
4,164,719
305,000
3,909,000
935,000
2,783,777
6,227,791
3,726,700
207,500
3,107,952
2,303,000
1,876,220
197,000
2,895,500
7,448,950
115,086
4,755,971
72,000
3.6
4.7
4.6
3.1
4.5
5,000
5,000
2,007,109
730,000
1,385,000
8,000
74,000
888,971
35,000
72,160
82,000
2,206,008
301,000
210,000
857,150
571,000
1,019,000
50,000
802,834
95,000
2,535,000
451,776
1,200,000
400,000
3,371,000
1,427,000
1,785,500
1,000
16,787
$298,945
9,904
4.4
2.4
4.3
4.6
4.3
4.3
3.8
4.7
4.3
4.9
4.7
4.4
3.2
4.7
4.3
4.4
4.1
4.5
4.4
4.6
5,1
3.6
8
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.Kansas City, Kans.Fort Wayne, Ind.
Camden, N. J.
1,914,000
721,000
672,000
7,667,000
14,789,109
10,864,750
4,113,000
1,240,270
1,255,000
4,030,205
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J.Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.
5,759,870
2,424,250
2,145,645
49,000
646,000
1,262,000
2,925,800
1,036,519
1,190,250
1,502,000
Cambridge, Mass.
New Bedford, Mass.Reading, Pa.
Khoxville, Tenn.
Peoria, 1 1 1 . —
537,000
279,000
3,409,000
975,500
335,000
749,000
9,692,000
755,040
1,617,147
1,226,000
3,164,000
598,834
140,000
77,000
14,000
3,484,000
2,522,800
545,000
2,315,000
1,133,000
2,006,442
650,000
99,000
2,206,000
922,297
88,610
688,000
4,185,150
658,000
361,000
638,000
518,000
837,000
30,000
1,986,000
240,000
217,000
1,549,625
1,936,667
1,722,000
291,700
281,000
456,455
2,250,000
1,765,000
193,000
South Bend, Ind.Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
GSary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
495,000
1,519,214
Wilmington, D e l . —
Tampa, Fla.
Somerville, Mass.EL Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.—
559,000
Lynn, Mass.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.Lowell, Mass.
250,000
3,036,000
603,885
2,452,000
71,000
Honolulu, Hawaii 3_/-
1/ Includes only general obligation and revenue bonds.
2 / Not segregated, only average rate for entire debt obtainable.
3 / Not included in group or grand t o t a l s .
147,000
370,000
774,000
24,000
2,312,000
823,000
2,210,000
1,844,062
545,100
2,423,000
1,610,000
610,000
905,500
378,000
13,000
341,902
149,000
152,000
775,507
488,000
472,000
291,000
965,000
3,721,041
209,800
361,500
16,179,496
41,000
2,998,180
515,500
8,808,843
639,000
1,000
46,000
55,000
57,000
121,000
10,000
143,897
1,168,000
150,000
2,126,500
1,075,000
60,000
1,146,450
160,000
235,000
1,853,985
200,000
1,833,914
1,093,300
172,740
300,000
460,000
4,000
45,000
40,000
108,652
839,950
1,445,000
188,735
532,600
730,464
3,174,392
63,000
44,581
721,950
1,083,000
412,000
2,996,500
20,000
1,118,358
335,680
101,945
35,000
716,658
299,400
14,066
565,000
7,130,771
928,900
500,000
550,000
25,000
273,716
5,000
TABLE 25.—ISSUE AND RETIBEMENT OF DEBT: 1937
City number
(See text discussion, p . 218)
ISSUED
RETIRED
CITY
Total
$1,110,496,464
P
TT
874,512,704
79,540,567 j
156,445,193
Revenue
bonds
Short-term
loans
Special a s s e s sment
obligations
Total
$279,041,179
$73,842,229
$730,476,862
$27,138,194
$1,227,600,267
185,848,230
36,977,275
56,215,674
72,820,229
775,000
247,000
593,410,797
40,557,973
96,508,092
22,433,448
1,230,319
3,474,427
939,209,367
103,520,806
184,870,094
General
bonds
Revenue
bonds
Short-term
loans
Special a s sessment
obligations
$369,621,436
$35,953,546
$779,718,101
$42,307,184
246,852,024
47,861,420
74,907,992
35,536,000
321,800
95,746
629,527,620
49,682,494
100,507,987
27,293,723
5,655,092
9,358,369
$524,585,056
141,848,646
32,520,078
86,909,018
5,526,716
22,933,848
5,364,000
$57,472,362
36,474,815
11,792,000
67,762,099
5,526,716
11,526,008
5,364,000
$35,536,000
$419,966,694
101,997,121
20,728,078
9,879,921
$11,610,000
3,376,710
9,169,415
2,238,425
3,935,927
56,067,499
14,518,658
11,378,526
1,000,000
8,961,708
23,659,687
3,853,927
12,084,167
10,549,925
3,776,800
1,000,000
8,878,010
10,791,195
General
bonds
GROUP I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 AND OVER
$551,182,404
100,334,546
33,637,153
48,705,208
3,945,047
16,930,971
7,755,355
$50,530,901
26,028,778
14,849,803
40,505,208
3,945,047
7,992,852
7,755,355
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San F r a n c i s c o , C a l i f . W a s h i n g t o n , D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
B u f f a l o , N. Y .
975,000
51,996,371
14,522,519
8,048,279
542,500
4,406,695
31,530,656
975,000
6,497,439
10,574,768
548,279
542,500
3,205,445
11,896,855
15
16
17
18
19
20
M i n n e a p o l i s , Minn.•
New O r l e a n s , L a . - Cincinnati, Ohio—
Newark, N. J .
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
$ 7 , 3 6 4 , 2 5 2 ||
9,243 ,303
3,711 ,321
3 , 5 6 4 , 2 1 1 ||
1 0 , 4 6 7 850
8,826 ,029
$6,011,938
7,092,444
1,754,882
3,564,211
6,487,890
50,000
$1,200,260
2,150,859
1,522,309
21
22
23
Indianapolis, Ind.
Rochester, N. Y . —
Jersey City, N. J.
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
P o r t l a n d , Orog.
5,887 043
9 , 5 3 0 454
4 , 4 4 9 101
5 , 2 5 7 , 0 9 2 ||
5,525 251
5 , 7 1 4 660 | |
1,980,989
5,250,804
1,526,626
1,682,240
1,575,251
New Y o r k , N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
11
12
$63,486,503
2,200,000
7,133,726
$417,915,000
74,281,201
18,787,350
5,000,000
$19,250,000
24,567
7,124,489
1,813,630
45,498,932
3,602,500
7,500,000
345,251
1,000,000
1,201,250
12,500,075
43,741,774
3,602,500
7,601,726
9,266,998
82,000
241,558
366,233
46,899
12,793,492
36,799
75,000
$1,200,000
8,364,466
1,527,418
1,445,000
5,633,744
7,661,800
$1,007,340
878,000
1,387,707
4,562,045
3,679,596
2,675,000
3,996,800
5,078,711
1,005,500
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
$775,000
$152,054
3,979,960
8,776,029
$7,782,937
15,678,949
12,878,753
6,340,172
8,180,342
9,770,557
$5,575,597
6,114,683
9,963,628
4,895,172
2,429,426
2,108,757
3,906,054
4.279.650
2,922,475
2,799,852
3,950,000
5,070,525
5,645,356
11,840,765
6,954,119
5,519,223
4,647,551
8,282,082
i , 767,442
6,273,220
3,274,523
2,844,223
650,751
1,943,998
434,130
644,135
$321,800
117,172
1,259,373
i
GROUP I I I . — CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, O h i o —
Toledo, Ohio
29
30
31
32
33
45
46
55
56
4,983,507
3,811,300
613,911
1,747,000
3,385,628
1,825,728
2,340,490
613,911
557,000
1,719,500
201,503
1,248,000
3,024,762
1,171,830
5,115,438
2,202,588
7,012,528
1,785,003
1,165,750
4,851,120
697,000
3,231,828
1,181,262
6,974,317
5,262,700
51,099
4,700,021
330,782
10,389,500
5,870,867
1,100,434
10,693,608
2,326,088
2,751,500
819,500
848,546
4,174,981
1,444,978
2,157,119
1,435,839
2,898,138
2,603,195
741,019
294,633
Oakland, C a l i f . 73,765
28,964
2,302,237
1,470,810
Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.-
827,404
2,470,964
753,639
2,442,000
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.'
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, T e n n . —
1,220,181
4,665,813
2,056,399
5,090,315
1,239,000
1,220,181
4,464,310
803,272
2,065,553
1,239,000
Providence, R. I.San Antonio, Tex.Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
10,643,617
5,262,700
51,099
13,293,773
1,293,268
3,669,300
Oklahoma City, Okla.Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapida, Mich.--
11,403,034
3,305,840
1,302,970
1,736,834
1,322,356
676,989
8,300
9,666,200
1,983,484
625,981
1,124,919
11,910,754
3,259,943
2,281,275
745,929
1,124,919
1,998,000
640,000
1,029,064
535,852
1,360,935
450,986
,772,664
641,900
369,000
300,000
2.378.318
1,345,594
1,964,479
1,504,000
367,192
704,446
1,330,950
1,231,688
904,000
367,192
811,708
1,497,601
806,500
8,841,653
1,869,846
2,127,408
840,743
777,500
1,550,208
983,843
1,127,408
807,820
1,000,000
32,923
688,600
1,074,744
3,806,867
1,478,450
514,951
2,211,785
519,000
677,044
2,106,250
1,478,350
312,780
1,386,285
41,000
310,000
1,244,617
100
90,171
500,000
918,072
2,426,188
789,060
922,169
440,900
2,842,629
768,072
2,080,750
501,934
627,803
395,900
2,386,180
150,000
305,000
4,130
32 ,074
45,000
329,449
8,300
Fort Worth, Tex.—
Hartford, Conn.
F l i n t , Mich,
New Haven, Conn.—
San Diego, C a l i f . -
3,133,599
1,092,886
369,000
300,000
Long Beach, C a l i f . Nashville, Tenn.
Springfield, Mass.Tulsa, Okla.
811,708
90,709
7,093,926
2,223,281
1,501,093
855,227
Bridgeport, C o n n . —
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, P a . Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J .
Jacksonville, Fla.
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, V a . — — —
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.Kansas City, Kans.Fort Wayne, I n d . —
Camden, N. J.
2,142,900
3,951,954
187,000
294,721
1,721,535
599,936
1,070,000
1,048,381
789,869
133,769
1,789,000
,736,323
586,200
90,709
604,276
1,484,100
501,090
664,280
610,734
471,000
2,482,698
165,175
701,535
299,936
255,000
836,381
646,544
105,769
1,789,000 I
857,429
376,286
6,489,650
739,181
1,000,003
190,947
266,459
1,660,000
1,469,256
187,000
29,546
1,000,000
112,800
11,900
100,000
20,000
300,000
815,000
117,474
28,000
212,000
25,851
688,064
1,601,564
855,542
1,190,000
64,564
6,080
262,318
906,000
3,086,300
603,741
7,638,000
5,051,367
173,388
5,350,000
2,000
599,588
694,400
473,834
78,500
1,168,627
407,276
9,912,754
2,619,943
1,118,211
100,077
134,000
110,000
1,673,872
14,644
344,791
600,000
809,537
7,291,445
886,003
128,600
87,700
456,000
112,000
325,500
40,438
282,996
262,292
TABLE 2 5 . — I S S U E AND RETIREMENT OF DEBT:
1937—Continued
(See t e x t d i s c u s s i o n , p . 218)
u
City n
ISSUED
RETIRED
CITY
Total
General
bonds
Revenue
bonds
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S EkYim
Short-term
loans
$202,521
278,341
809,141
$202,521
244,225
362,057
$34,116
10,794
2,640,880
400,840
2,240,040
Cambridge, M a s s . —
New Bedford, Mass.
Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, T e n n . —
Peoria, 111.
6,903,426
5,308,509
790,000
1,570,061
1,126,097
1,003,423
950,587
250,000
1,570,061
322,619
5,900,003
4,357,922
540,000
South Bend, Ind.
Taooma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.Canton, Ohio
1,241,492
2,777,463
492,000
1,523,810
2,279,535
Wilmington, Del.Tampa, Fla.
Samervilie, Mass.
El Paao, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.-
155,128
610,540
6,293,340
475,003
227,347
155,128
15,026
724,340
163,017
227,347
Lynn, Mass.
TJtica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.
Lowell, Mass.
5,369,875
4,824,927
888,638
5,435,152
4,675,005
625,875
890,975
175,638
1,435,152
417,080
1/ Not included in group or grand totals.
Total
General
bonds
Revenue
bonds
Short-term
loans
A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 — C o n t i n u e d
Erie, Pa.
E l i z a b e t h , N. J . —
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.-
Honolulu, Hawaii 1/
Special a s sessment
obligations
$137,000
683,100
110,000
$720,415
860,132
1,206,760
216,250
4,130,979
$512,000
734,000
782,613
213,250
1,059,000
7,661,082
5,611,833
1,369,400
1,993,393
1,609,309
1,429,000
1,109,000
632,400
458,087
229,399
1,241,492
360,928
492,000
837,665
329,694
1,533,772
2,549,477
766,155
2,282,460
307,950
216,936
2,072,364
261,000
612,863
485,514
5,569,000
311,986
435,850
1,177,505
5,389,640
722,533
596,000
435,850
558,379
546,000
456,664
574,000
4,744,000
3,910,000
713,000
4,000,000
4,257,925
5,491,749
5,469,234
1,386,888
3,191,500
4,978,285
723,600
1,559,683
786,888
691,500
681,170
$436,290
530,904
$138,549
120,982
1,727
$3,000
3,071,979
6,200,000
4,502,833
700,000
1,533,393
803,178
14,000
4,000
52,746
22,000
21,744
1,302,836
191,113
505,155
1,405,065
619,126
4,823,689
213,123
4,765,000
3,810,000
600,000
2,500,000
4,297,115
Special a s sessment
obligations
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT— DEBT AND SPECIFIED ASSETS
229
TABLE 26
Table 26 shows, for each city, specified assets at the close of 1937 held
in sinking, public trust, and investment funds as recorded on the books of the
several divisions of government of the municipality, regardless of whether the
funds were administered by the principal financial officer or by separate boards
or commissions; it shows, also, the cash held by the general administrative
funds at the close of the year. All cash on hand at the close of the year, except that which is held in private trust funds, is shown in the appropriate
four columns.
BASIS OF VALUATION.—The valuations shown as the investments of the various
funds are the book values.
The figures for real property may represent its
cost to the fund or its valuation at a recent appraisal. The data for securities are usually carried on the records of the fund at their full value, profits
and losses being recorded only when the securities are disposed of; but if for
any city they were reported at cost or at their market value on the last day of
the fiscal year, those valuations were used in compiling the table.
CASH AM) OTHER SPECIFIED ASSETS AT CLOSE OF 1937.-Of the $2,066,919,823 held as
cash or other assets in various funds of the 94 cities, approximately 40 percent was held In sinking funds and approximately 35 percent.in public trust
funds. Of the total holdings reported by the 94 cities, 57 percent constituted
Investments in city securities and almost 25 percent was in the form of cash.
ASSETS IN SINKING FUNDS.—The sinking funds maintained by cities and their independent divisions are of two distinct classes: those with, and those without,
investments; the distinction depends largely upon the method of distributing
the loads to be carried by these funds. The sinking funds with investments are
established and maintained primarily for the redemption of long-term bonds at
maturity, the purpose of converting a part of the cash accumulation into securities being to increase the earning power of the funds.
The sinking funds
without securities are maintained primarily for the amortization of debt obligations by purchase prior to maturity, or for the redemption of serial bonds,
the purpose of the funds usually being accomplished without the accumulation of
assets in large amounts.
Assets in sinking funds of the 94 cities totaled $829,502,222 at the close
of 1937, of which amount 76.3 percent was in the form of holdings of city securities, 7.3 percent in other investments, and 16.2 percent in cash. The composition of sinking-fund assets will, over a period of years, naturally reflect
important changes in the methods of municipal financing.
In past years the
"term" bond was in popular use, and necessarily required the establishment and
maintenance of extensive sinking funds. Because of the fact that many unfortunate things could and did happen to dissipate sinking-fund assets before they
were actually needed to retire term bonds at maturity, the serial bond with its
annual maturities has been regarded in recent years as a more favorable instrument of municipal borrowing. As outstanding term bonds are retired in the future, the need of large accumulations of sinking-fund assets will be reduced
correspondingly.
ASSETS IN PUBLIC TRUST FUNDS.—Public trust funds are established by cities
and their independent divisions for the purpose of conserving and administering
moneys and other forms of wealth derived from donations, bequests, or other
sources, under such conditions that the recipient becomes a trustee charged
with the administration of the fund, including the disbursement of its principal
or the income derived from the principal, for designated public purposes. The
usual purposes for which these funds are created are the support of educational
activities in schools and libraries, of health and hospital services, care of
the poor, and pensions for employees of the cities and independent divisions.
At the close of 1937 the 94 cities reported holdings of $731,209,901 in
public trust funds, of which amount 63.7 percent constituted holdings of city
securities; 34.2 percent was in other investments; and only 2.1 percent was in
cash. Most donations and bequests provide that only the Income from the fund
shall be expended, which accounts for the negligible amount of cash held in
public trust funds.
230
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
ASSETS IN INVESTMENT FUNDS AND MISCELLANEOUS INVESTMENTS.—Although the term "investment fund" Is seldom employed by city officials, it seems to be an appropriate designation for funds of the class here described. Under this heading
are shown all assets of funds other than sinking and public trust funds and all
interest-bearing securities and investments other than those of the funds mentioned. The value of real property incidentally acquired and yielding little
or no income is included as miscellaneous investment.
In some Instances the assets consist of real property held for securing
rents or for the profit that may result from an increase in value. In other
cases they consist of bonds or mortgages received in exchange for real property
and held as Investments awaiting maturity or a favorable market.
Assets held in investment funds, together with miscellaneous investments,
totaled #145,187,257 at the close of 1937, of which amount 56.5 percent consisted of city securities; 36.4 percent of other investments; 5.2 percent of
real property; and 1.9 percent of cash.
In most cities reporting investment funds or other investment holdings the
Invested assets are comparatively small, and in some instances they are held
only temporarily while awaiting a favorable opportunity for the cities to dispose of them, at which time the proceeds are turned over to the general treasury. In some cities permanent funds have been created for the purpose of carrying their own fire risks on municipal buildings, usually setting aside each
year in a fund, from which fire losses may be paid as they occur, an amount
equal to the premiums generally charged by fire Insurance companies for such
coverage. Some of these Insurance funds are built up by annual appropriations
until the assets reach a prescribed amount, and In most cases they are profitably Invested; accordingly, they are here classed as investment funds. Funds
provided for the purchase, construction, or equipment of buildings or other
permanent properties of the municipality which are Invested during the period
of accumulation are also treated as investment funds.
CASH IN GENERAL TREASURY AND GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE FUNDS.-General administrative
funds, as the term is used here, are all funds administered by the city and its
independent divisions of government, except the sinking, public trust, investment, and private trust funds. The cash shown in table 26 as belonging to the
general treasury and general administrative funds at the close of the year are
presented in two columns In order to show separately the amounts held in private trust accounts.
Of the cash in the amount of $361,020,143 held under this heading, almost
94 percent was, in accordance with the foregoing explanation, "free cash" to be
drawn upon by the general treasury and general administrative departments.
CITIES WITH LARGEST AMOUNTS OF ASSETS.—As a general rule, the cities with tne
heaviest bonded Indebtedness are likely to have the largest amount of sinkingfund assets, although the composition of the debt will control to some extent
the necessity of maintaining sinking funds and therefore may cause significant
variations. Assets in public trust funds, while generally larger in the more
populous cities, have an irregular pattern, because the concentration of wealth
in any given city has a greater bearing upon the probabilities of substantial
donations and bequests than does the population factor. Assets in other funds
reflect no specific pattern of circumstances among the cities; they are controlled by temporary fiscal circumstances and vary greatly from time to time.
The cities with the larger fiscal operations are, of course, more likely to
have larger cash reserves or more readily convertible assets to draw upon for
emergency requirements than do the smaller municipalities.
TABLE 26.—AMOUNT OF SPECIFIED ASSETS AT CLOSE OF YEAR: 1937
ASSETS IN PUBLIC TRUST FUNDS
ASSETS IN SINKING FUNDS
Aggregate
Grand totalGroup I
Group II
Group III
is, 066, 919, 883
-
— —
1,637,800,822
184,496,978
244,622,023
City securities (par
value)
Other investments
City securities (par
value)
$829,502,522
$135,207,444
$633,286,628
161,008,450
#731,209,901
$15,706,080
$465,647,840
627,527,383
80,522,157
121,452,982
90,010,695
15,956,219
29,240,530
516,037,435
48,046,202
69,202,991
21,479,253
16,519,736
23,009,461
655,453,344
43,230,018
32,526,539
10,883,231
2,237,460
2,585,389
445,954,386
11,154,553
8,538,901
$330,417,154
89,737,782
85,412,354
3,167,894
18,273,044
731,997
9,202,486
$1,903,985
3,545,553
845,274
150,596
203,135
109,675
180,155
$328,040,169
41,138,774
16,032,720
2,627,671
5,450,357
226,000
3,955,000
19,947,389
54,558,528
2,063,531
18,672,927
11,027,849
12,000,459
239,950
128,923
2,656,558
318,047
244,179
368,076
79,625
149,450
8,924,900
27,288,390
1,166,971
3,656,600
254
603
280
080
460 487
5,963 573
$516,219
113,432
476,275
109,505
67,647
95,272
$1,685,500
1,398,000
2,103,703
363,464
48,000
3,800,305
613 282
1 6 1 917
132,285
57,917
323,935
830
16,483
327,660
1,072,175
172,500
10,000
434,906
GROUP I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, Pa.
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
—
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.'
Washington, D. C.
M.lwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$737,218,580
257,253,150
258,242,782
29,189,929
63,562,054
16,684,644
29,349,542
$303,265,865
58,783,796
171,789,515
2,023,121
7,606,901
9,006,283
4,121,541
$3,459,336
52,970,093
1,964,128
1,273,149
7,606,901
1,556,219
2,385,541
#299,806,529
18,677
167,810,387
436,590
#5,795,026
2,015,000
313,382
7,127,564
800,000
322,500
936,000
49,687,551
75,713,130
33,055,323
28,117,027
18,617,647
25,252,330
15,857,133
26,231,992
11,228,709
15,009,870
1,080,100
110,235
10,356,803
6,912,652
97,858
1,077,450
7,070,740
1,080,100
110,235
2,694,001
6,664,944
23,773,797
5,916,000
7,939,130
2,360,337
4,235,259
2,161,053
247,708
5,501,749
7,446,834
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.'
New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
$21,735,298
12,992,273
36,273,093
27,789,053
12,726,445
13,417,804
$4,012,269
2,533,367
16,804,006
22,i92,252
6,803,655
639,122
$605,847
2,513,367
1,185,169
753,415
3,243,227
216,743
$2,726,208
20,000
13,876,214
20,118,586
186,428
331,234
Indianapolis, Ind.'
Rochester, N. Y.-~
Jersey City, N. J.
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
6,138,485
6,046,579
16,805,126
9,423,805
11,223,621
9,925,396
2,913,474
2,752,859
6,476,370
5,871,666
7,175,646
2,047,471
1,377,764
494,359
1,046,205
2,953,266
1,006,171
560,686
59,460
753,500
5,430,165
2,680,157
411,000
1,453,250
$680,214
1,742,623
1,620,251
3,374,000
91,145
1,476,250
1,505,000
$12,406
4,260
13,009
1,124
1,421 8 6 8
238,243
5,758,475
33,535
192 0 7 3
1,003,197 ||
2,613 404 ||
66,000
TABLE 26.—AMOUNT OF SPECIFIED ASSETS AT CLOSE OF YEAR: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
City number
ASSETS IN SINKING FUNDS
CITY
Aggregate
Total
Cash
City securities (par
value)
ASSETS IN PUBLIC TRUST FUNDS
Other investments
Total
Cash
City securities (par
value)
Other investments
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0
38
39
40
41
42
$392,236
Columbus, O h i o —
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
$5,621,338
4,568,551
5,035,141
5,479,905
2,314,707
$4,396,076
3,316,924
1,029,093
259,137
997,463
$2,283,858
1,643,911
1,029,093
163,137
469,463
$1,719,982
1,673,013
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.Akron, Ohio
Memphis, T e r m . —
4,175,307
17,258,355
3,887,218
4,708,033
6,673,185
1,577,021
13,889,188
1,203,490
2,661,685
2,081,228
1,096,521
523,536
249,953
292,625
436,605
480,500
9,717,503
1,000
2,335,158
259,000
3,648,149
952,537
33,902
1,385,623
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, O h i o —
Oklahoma City, Okla.-
17,383,472
2,406,410
4,227,241
8,589,541
4,357,627
7,443,919
10,187,508
1,864,085
3,241,293
241,216
1,693,085
1,407,488
9,946,292
171,000
1,583,055
250 750
2,338,783
5,144,659
546,758
1,301,281
1,792,025
1,704,216
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.Fort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
3,527,736
16,774,385
1,517,821
3,916,018
1,526,476
5,667,748
434,090
14,630,996
779,123
2,188,217
1,364,947
3,274,694
107,090
2,022,246
551,339
480,316
394,613
15,583
327,000
9,672,750
227,784
1,530,200
285,500
1,027,000
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.—
San Diego, Calif.Long Beach, Calif.
Nashville, T e n n . —
Springfield, Mass.
3,890,046
3,595,959
3,177,738
2,255,090
3,404,798
1.266,702
1,913,921
1,038,798
263,330
633,410
1,270,531
54,568
209,760
263,330
633,410
1,162,531
1,858,364
547,000
Tulsa, Okla.
—
Bridgeport, Conn.
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
5.699,144
1,226,014
1,803,235
975,289
2,624,918
1,641,542
3,940,211
60,501
69 455
317 285
60,501
58,672
267,285
96,000
528,000
10,000
50,000
--
2 ,139 162
2 936 000
177,701
684,834
2,232,111
282,038
$516,583
684,066
43,780
2,946,625
189,138
$26,681
27,047
43,780
76,356
8,538
$18,000
75,630
$471,902
581,389
297,900
126,000
2,572,369
54,600
81,563
1,069,751
160,784
352,254
33,745
33,063
27,159
15,626
38,332
470
8,500
227,500
40,000
815,092
145,158
247,332
9,275
5,858,801
14,744
225,547
17,729
154,407
116,388
226,720
14,114
20,076
4,438
68,105
116,388
5,345,788
2,502,805
627,741
166,735
122,881
88,535
27,601
3,439
44,857
66,590
24,000
82,000
286,293
630
98,675
13,291
4,302
24,200
33,000
2,500
2,414,270
575,940
130,296
75,524
106,796
347,525
5,444
307,081
27,992
1,333,683
1,160,847
18,257
385,488
77,099
13,562
38,872
137,099
2,813
59,545
19,457
14,430
1,229,811
1,023,748
15,444
264,743
40,855
210,311
85,60?
634,165
584,792
296,032
1,104,541 |
210,311
22,09?
86,307
156,195
14,607
15,750
61,200
16,787
196,080
200,908
77,650
63,510
351,778
227,689
281,425
1,011,141
37,510
16,466
3,931
20,125
140
523,539
23,865
93,399
851,894
295,497
1,200
1,365
72,385
126,812
13,173
97,025
257,380
480,570
584,942
129,035
22,912
258,737
126,066
918,987
24,966
2,912
49,113
5,252
102,125
8,535
98,550
105,100
101,565
3,200
301,098
100,096
71,329
131,250
826
8,459
15,096
34,253
3,168
208,844
4,353,918
306,640
155,401
20,919
210,830
7,098
296
769,005
1,076,696
148,052
1,550,078
486,085
348,594
285,948
148,052
163,473
334,458
310,000
1,323,005
140,000
63,600
11,627
675,293
93,513
575,920
5,860
59,699
748,514
2,307,388
56,499
2,514
13,476
1,000
175,000
591,500
2,200
571,000
1,702,412
New Bedford, Mass.Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, Tenn.
Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.
888,630
509,016
2,305,829
32,540
284,016
47,896
76,000
12,500
2,132,633
780,090
212,500
125,300
310,596
298,596
Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.-
358,770
1,101,842
82,193
2,527,910
1,491,660
268,570
1,076,244
78,426
688,468
99,268
3,767
1,358,872
807,450
Tampa, Fla.
Somerville, Mass.El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, I n d . ~
lynn, Mass.
2,248,650
546,936
1,701,714
705,750
73,252
104,953
423,750
73,252
282,000
242,890
79,031
157,536
182,916
79,031
5,249
Honolulu, Hawaii
\J
71,685
223,037
75,711
94,239
330,201
Chattanooga, Tenn.Kansas City, Kans.Fort Wayne, Ind.
Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
\J-
Not included in group or grand totals.
50,687
185,415
815,521
1,059,000
60,000
110,411
790,748
25,598
59,974
127,772
1,424
2,071
37,425
6,564
485
1,397,900
180,116
706,850
7,517,205
1,237,263
150,000
89,189
47,300
35,924
2,071
254,386
53,864
12,421
8,931
349,430
98,570
193,297
267,024
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.Lowell, Mass.
29,948
500
84,995
1,000
87,200
20,619
5,323
14,842
10,796
14,036
1,406,831
714,961
1,620,941
8,769,502
1,564,287
Elizabeth, N. J.—
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.Cambridge, M a s s . —
25,000
5,628
45,000
75,567
11,451
144,837
11,796
101,236
Peterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.'
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. Y.
34,500
11,936
80,048
26,000
5,000
34,175
126,523
71,780
74,114
311,061
496,339
17,500
21,014
628,057
24,944
100,137
20,000
85,000
30,044
13,100
404,667
201,089
22,264
711,762
7,032
128,082
174,825
3,738,421
299,542
155,105
T A B L E 2 6 . — A M O U N T OF S P E C I F I E D A S S E T S A T C L O S E OF Y E A R :
1937—Continued
CASH IN GENERAL TREASURY AND
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE FUNDS
ASSETS IN INVESTMENT FUNDS AND MISCELLANEOUS INVESTMENTS
City securities (par
value)
Grand total—
Group I
Group I I —
Group I I I -
Real property
Other investments
Exclusive of
amounts held
in private
trust accounts
Amounts held
in private
trust
accounts
$145,187,257
12,714,051
$82,010,299
$7,582,788
$52,880,119
$337,926,173
104,573,157
18,406,393
22,207,707
1,101,690
410,723
1,201,638
76,256,352
3,410,868
2,"343,079
1,393,554
5,091,769
1,097,465
25,821,561
9,493,033
17,565,525
230,719,415
40,269,583
66,937,175
19,527,523
2,068,827
1,497,620
$543,863
219,168
32,192
3,963,348
852,738
3,809,823
1,210,379
$94,701,159
42,132,365
1/ 134,249
16,845,583
29,255,775
1/ 2,320,699
14,001,481
$8,274,523
253,662
7,296
2,627,865
5,558,474
666,019
1,122
76,097
8,363,331
1,244,249
364,450
478,953
5,027,420
2,673,815
1,562,562
13,641,826
7,849,228
7,443,083
391,212
2,676,274
31,349
514,772
36,480
366,763
824,748
$56,368
249,093
2,819,556
444,400
1,107,071
3,668,878
$4,443,116
4,165,121
2,379,449
3,162,087
4,062,635
2,091,586
$813,906
161,577
58,309
121,129
110,118
128,783
379,276
317.713
147,379
143,478
154,225
5,602
2,216,884
2,227,971
8,698,854
3,045,754
2,070,795
1,705,331
2,000
29,717
60,655
170,834
1,081
410,718
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
11
12
13
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.'
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$559,879
66,345,545
1,167,866
4,525,466
2,867,860
8,601,044
2,022,912
$16,016
150,190
$66,126,377
965,264
44,359
336,903
11,783
1,970,763
4,454,318
35,000
$20,220
562,118
765,750
469,905
8,363,331
2,308,747
2,137,093
5,203,509
1,310
163,739
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
16
17
18
19
20
Minneapolis, Minn.'
New Orleans, La.-—
Cincinnati, O h i o —
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
$59,753
1,871,605
4,022,049
889,505
1,289,550
4,594,740
$2,448
212
5,189
43,866
162,479
172,314
$943
949,300
1,197,304
401,239
20,000
3,456
Indianapolis, Ind.Rochester, N. Y . —
Jersey City, N. J.Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
392,845
874,115
147,379
143,478
972,902
3,148,472
13,569
9,402
547,000
23
24
25
26
1,244
291,626
$673,000
818,677
;,850,000
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, O h i o —
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ge.
$15,986
219,046
33,675
568,560
$5,986
91,123
$18,000
$10,000
109,923
33,675
568,560
$692,693
348,515
3,928,593
1,680,774
1,128,106
534,629
205,000
2,268,624
64,427
67,000
1,595,601
2,085,354
221,264
1,617,810
4,459,345
1,213,474
295,856
484,547
4,617,219
1,683,437
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.-Birmingham, Ala.Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
921,112
205,000
2,300,632
76,284
95,500
Providence, R. I.San Antonio, Tex.Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
94,615
231,514
275,854
3,813,589
181,000
231,514
7,192
3,813,589
32,579
431,676
32,579
226,732
Oklahoma City, Okla.'
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.-<
Fort Worth, Tex.Hartford, C o n n . —
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.—
San Diego, Calif..
25,508
28,500
336,803
511,343
837,822
1,132,320
7,330
498
302,720
11,944
Long Beach, Calif.Nashville, Tenn.
Springfield, Mass.Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.—
302,139
75,944
7,027
10,813
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J.
169,158
85,329
774,178
493,837
51,929
Jacksonville, Fla.Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.Kansas City, Kans.1/ Overdraft.
$6,500
722,569
2,182,872
556,100
1,065,048
528,707
873,694
324,473
510,845
535,102
1,120,376
161,529
1,683,729
1,176,336
384,272
402,992
75,944
7,027
94,034
440
1,296,288
1,672,495
1,182,542
1,548,622
88,768
97,908
85,329
680,144
14,397
51,929
936,878
235,687
1,210,965
1/ 99,114
1,137,063
176,648
372,714
1/ 121,012
605,052
435,572
360,417
5,000
5,000
297,421
9,075
2,500
2,500
52 192
158 556
5 000
T A B L E 2 6 . — A M O U N T OF S P E C I F I E D A S S E T S A T C L O S E O F Y E A R :
1937—Continued
CASH IN GENERAL TREASURY AND
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE FUNDS
ASSETS IN INVESTMENT FUNDS AND MISCELLANEOUS INVESTMENTS
City securities (par
value)
Real property
Other investments
Exclusive of
amounts held
in private
trust accounts
Amounts held
in private
trust
accounts
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
Fort Wayne, Ind.Camden, N. J.
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J.•
Wichita, K a n s . —
$173,796
130,809
497,412
24,469
1/ $296
30,059
$86,000
49,283
42,116
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.Cambridge, Mass.-'
New Bedford, Mass
Reading, Pa.
239,900
26,660
32,000
Knoxville, Tenn.Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
291,012
126,768
304,153
486,028
731,052
1,882
145
55,400
4,840
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.'
Tarapa, Fla.
120,732
Somerville, Mass.'
El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.Lynn, Mass.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.—
V/atsrbury, Conn
Lowell, M a s s . —
Honolulu, Hawaii 2 / ~
1/ Overdraft.
2/ Not Included in group or grand totals.
$88,094
7,500
$1,687
161,875
1,615
18,138
15,339
3,789
2,033
44,225
432
13,855
233,730
14,190
304,153
5,644
123,419
165,550
1,414,044
249,002
376,992
831,634
19,291
101,441
34,150
13,315
17,000
3,162
512,182
613,814
376,548
249,475
214,257
466,325
3,013
1,927
$632,472
2,151,103
773,303
1,683,542
1,773,892
338,163
298,843
1,034,484
415,570
378,245
13,855
54,163
18,404
$74,026
425,237
24,469
247,548
141,308
798,990
166,002
588,545
35,525
319
11,633
117,502
576,912
35,525
319
1,723
601
20,850
1,096,141
70,782
912,646
1,420,900
986
19,844
564,380
879,204
1,452,084
164,728
15,509
2,242
672
2,062,890
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—ASSESSED VALUATION AND TAX LEVIES
SECTION D.
237
ASSESSED VALUATION AND TAX LEVIES (Tables 27 and 28)
The assessed valuation of property in the 94 cities subject to general
property taxes for city corporation purposes in 1937 was $56,716,868,383, or
|1,505 per capita. These valuations for the cities are those upon which the
levies were made that produced the current property tax revenue for their fiscal years ended in 1937.
The dates that these assessments were made varied among the cities, running
from some date in 1935 for 6 cities and in 1936 for 64 cities to some date in
1937 for 24 cities. In presenting the assessed valuations upon a uniform basis,
comparison may be made of the taxes levied for the year with collections on
that levy, which are presented in table 3. In prior years, it was the practice
of the Bureau to report the latest assessment that had been made in any city at
the time the report for a given year was being prepared, regardless of the fiscal year for which the levy on this valuation was to be made. Because of the
revised procedure for the present report, the assessed valuations for 1937 in
46 cities are the same as those presented in the 1936 report.
The total valuation consisted of $47,645,779,149 real property, which includes land and improvements to land; $8,453,659,209 personal property, which
Includes both tangible and intangible personal property; and $617,430,025 other
property, which includes largely the valuation of railroads and other types of
public utility property which, in some States, is not segregated as between
real and personal.
The valuation of property within these cities subject to taxes for State
purposes was $38,241,955,698; for county purposes, $11,211,721,614; and for the
purposes of other civil divisions, $3,087,156,368. Table 27 presents separately the assessed valuations and tax levies of the city corporations and each independent unit levying general property taxes. As explained in part I of this
study, data for counties containing municipalities with a population of over
300,000 are apportioned to the respective figures of the city corporation.
The valuations shown are not the full or market value of all property in
the cities, because the basis of assessment in many cities or other local assessing units varies from 100 percent of such value. A tabulation showing the
value of all property in the cities, furthermore, would require inclusion of
the assessed valuation of property that is exempt from general property taxes.
A tabulation of the valuation of property exempt from the general property tax
in the 94 cities is not included in this report.
The total levies for all purposes for 1937 upon the assessed valuations
of the 94 cities was $1,821,257,638, or $48.34 per capita.
Of this total,
$1,703,094,855 was for city purposes, including the city corporation and independent overlapping districts practically coextensive with the cities, such as
schools, parks, and those counties in which are located the cities having over
300,000 population. Of the remainder of the total levies, $46,284,338 was for
State purposes, $63,851,501 was for county purposes, and $8,026,944 was for
purposes of other civil divisions.
The foregoing data as to assessed valuation and tax levies are discussed in
detail below.
DEFINITIONS. —Definitions of the terms used in this report may be found on
pages 323-327.
ASSESSED VALUATION OF PROPERTY SUBJECT TO GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES
Assessed valuations have been subjected in recent years to a variety of influences, such as
the deflation of speculative property values, the partial recovery from severely depressed valuations, the elimination of real property from the tax roll
through homestead and other exemptions, and the active resumption of building
construction in some areas. The assessed valuation of property subject to general property taxes for city purposes (in the 94 cities) declined $296,064,000
during 1937, although the comparison must be qualified because of revision in
compilation procedure stated earlier. The erratic trend of assessed valuations
for city purposes, both in volume and per capita, is indicated In the following
figures:
238
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
Year
Assessed valuation (In thousands)
Per capita
1926
1927
1928
1929
1930
1931
1932
1933
1934
1935
1936
1937
$57,248,000
63,328,000
66,109,000
68,195,000
71,339,000
71,252,000
66,187,000
60,778,000
57,296,000
56,328,000
57,013,000
56,717,000
$1,699
1,855
1,887
1,908
1,957
1,921
1,754
1,622
1,524
1,497
1,514
1,505
As indicated "by these figures, the depression period brought a sharp readjustment downward in property valuations, most of which occurred In 1932,
1933, and 1934. By 1935, assessed valuations had declined $15,011,000,000 or
21 percent, from the peak reported in 1930. The decline was even more severe
on a per capita basis, the figure for 1935 being 23.5 percent less than for 1930.
TAX LEVIES.—Despite the need for revenue by the 94 cities during 'She depression years, the total levy (of the general property tax) for city purposes declined sharply from a high of $2,029,837,666 in 1931 to a low of $1,656,950,707
in 1934. As may be seen from the table presented below, the levy is still well
below that of the years 1926 through 1932, especially when considered on a per
capita basis:
Year
Tax levy
Per capita
1926
1927
1928
1929
1930
1931
1932
1933
1934
1935
1936
1937
$1,576,405,048
1,723,537,173
1,805,147,552
1,896,063,374
1,986,260,310
2,029,837,666
1,930,680,935
1,703,849,197
1,656,950,707
1,662,096,101
1,692,573,500
1,703,094,855
$46.77
50.48
51.53
53.06
54.49
54.73
51.16
45.46
44.08
44.17
44.94
45.21
Assessed valuations reached their peak in 1930, tax levies the next year. Total
valuations in 1937 were almost back to the 1926 level, while the levies In 1937
exceeded the total for 1926 although less than for 1927. A return to the levies
of pre-depresslon years may be slow, because of the resistance to tax increases.
It is easier for a city to change its assessed valuation than its tax rate. The
pressure of organized property owners, the effect of tax limitation laws, the
problem of tax delinquency, additional revenue from state aid, and resort to
new sources of revenue—such as the city sales tax used in New York, city motor
vehicle fuel taxes, and the like—are among the factors leading to moderation in
expansion of the tax burden on property. The Increased share of the local relief burden borne by the States and the Federal Government has been of great
Importance In helping to lessen the need for revenue by the cities.
TABLE 27
The valuations shown in table 27 are those of property subject to the general property tax by the 94 cities and also of property within their jurisdiction taxed by the States, counties, and other civil divisions. Of the total
valuation for city purposes, $56,716,868,383, 84 percent consisted of real property; 14.9 percent was personal property; and the remaining 1.2 percent comprised other property not segregated as between real and personal. The trend
of assessed valuations in the 94 cities has been considered in the opening discussion of this section.
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—ASSESSED VALUATION AND TAX LEVIES
239
ASSESSED VALUATION OF PROPERTY.— In some cities the valuation taxed by the
city corporation differs from that taxed by the State, county, or other civil
divisions. This is due to statutory provisions affecting the types of local
property to be taxed, to differing assessments of the same property "by two units
of assessment, or to geographical factors—some independent divisions containing less than the total city area, for example.
The extent to which personal property is taxed varies among cities. Cities
in the State of New York, for example, are not taxed at all on personalty hut
only on real property. The classification of property belonging to railroads,
telephone and telegraph companies, and similar corporations varies. In some
States such property, including the value of franchises, is classified by the
State as real and in some as personal. In other states part of the assessed
valuation of such property is classified as real and part as personal. In still
other States this class of property is assessed as a whole and given a separate
classification. In such cases the valuation is apportioned among the local
taxing units and is reported here in the column "All other."
BASIS OF ASSESSMENT.—The basis of assessment as provided by law in many of
the States is at "cash," "full," "true," or "market" value; in some States, assessment is at a stated percentage of such value; and in other States, no basis
Is prescribed. Provision relating to the basis for assessment of personal
property may vary also from that applied to real property. In Alabama, for example, the legal basis is 60 percent, and, in Washington, 50 percent, of cash
value; in Minnesota, real property is classified and assessed at values from 20
percent to 40 percent, and personal property is divided into five classes with
assessment at 25 percent to 100 percent. As a result, the reported valuation
of cities in States not prescribing 100 percent of cash value is not comparable
with that of cities in states having a legal basis of 100 percent unless such
variations are recognized and adjustments made in the analysis. The Bureau,
however, does not report the legal basis of assessment in the cities.
In addition to the absence of data as to the legal basis of assessment in
these cities, the Bureau has discontinued its presentation of data on the actual
basis of assessment in practice. This basis in several cities and independent
governmental units is only a percentage of the full cash value. In .some cases
either real or personal property is assessed at a percentage of cash value and
the other at full value. As examples: In California, while the legal basis is
100 percent, assessed valuations are in practice approximately 50 percent of
cash value; in Chicago, the assessed valuation of both real and personal property is 37 percent of the cash value, as recognized by court decision; in New
Orleans, the basis of assessment for city and school purposes is authorized to
be 85 percent of the valuation for state and levee district purposes; in Florida, assessments used as a basis for the imposition of city or other local taxes
are reported as varying for all types of property from approximately 20 percent
to 50 percent of cash value; and in the cities of Texas, the reported basis of
assessment of both real and personal property ranges from 40 percent to 75 percent for the levies for city and other units of government. In order to obtain
for any number of cities comparability of assessed valuation and tax burden
data, these variations in basis of assessing in actual practice must be considered.
TAX LEVIES AND RATES.—The total and per capita levy, and the rate per $1,000
of assessed valuation, are shown in table 27 for each city, its independent
subdivisions, if any, and for the State, county, and other civil divisions. It
will be observed that for the cities in California, Delaware, Illinois, Michigan,
Ohio, Oklahoma, and Rhode Island there is no entry on the table for "Government
of State." In these 7 states there was no levy of the general property tax for
State purposes. For the cities in Pennsylvania and Virginia, which also levy
no general property tax for state purposes, the item "Government of State" reflects a State tax in small amounts on selected property.1 Total levies upon
the assessed valuations for all State and local governmental units reported in
this study were $1,821,257,638, of which amount $1,703,094,855, or 93 percent,
1/ C_f. Financial Statistics £f States; 1937.
240
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
was for city corporation purposes. The remaining 7 percent of the total of all
levies was for county, State, and other civil division purposes. The trend of
tax levies for city purposes was discussed previously.
The tax rate of property tax levy per $1,000 of assessed valuation for each
unit of government levying a tax within the city is given in table 27. The
rates vary for each separate levy, usually being the largest for the city, or
the city corporation and school district combined, followed by that for the
county, and then that for the state, and finally, that for other civil divisions.
Because of the variation in most cities of the assessed valuations against
which the taxes at the stated rates are levied, the "total tax rate per $1,000"
for each city is not reported. The total rate for each city corporation, however, is reported either as a definite amount or an average rate. Because of
the variations in assessed valuations and tax rates, it is impracticable to report the average tax rate per $1,000 for all cities.
More or less importance is placed upon the tax rate by those interested in
analyzing statistics relating to the tax burden of cities. The tax rate, however, is merely a quotient of the tax levy divided by the assessed valuation,
expressed in terms of the rate per $100 or $1,000 of the valuation.
Whether
the rate will be relatively high or low, therefore, depends upon the quantitative value of the factors entering into the computation—the rate will vary
inversely with either the levy or the valuation. It is for this reason that
the rate is commonly found to be unusually high in those cities assessing property at a low ratio of full value.
BANK STOCK TAX LEVIES.—Taxes on bank stock are reported in table 27-A, with
the valuation, rate, and levy for 1937. In the cities of New Jersey, property
in the form of bank stock is taxed, for city and county purposes, at a special
rate based on the valuation of the stock. Similarly, in Baltimore, the city
levied taxes at special rates on property in the form of corporation shares of
banks, and of trust, surety, guarantee and fidelity, and fire and marine insurance companies, and in the form of savings banks deposits.2
TABLE 27-A.—BANK STOCK TAX LEVIES: 1937
Tax r a t a
per
$ 1 , 0 0 0 of
valuation
CITY, AND DIVISION OF GOVERMvIENT OR CLASSES
OF PROPERTY
B a l t i m o r e , Md.:
City corporation
B a n k s , t r u s t c o m p a n i e s , and
corporation shares
S a v i n g s bank d e p o s i t s
Per
capita
$1,435,866
$0.02
1.00
.49
$294,803,833
A/S4.12
81,494,500
213,309,333
10.00
814,945
399,955
Camden-, N. J.:
City corporation—bank stockCounty—bank stock
1,333,867
1,333,867
3.75
3.75
i,002
i,002
Elizabeth, N. J.:
City corporation—bank stockCounty—bank stock
367,733
367,733
3.75
3.75
1,379
1,379
Jersey City, N. J.:
City corporation—bank stockCounty—bank stock
4,954,400
4,954,400
3.75
3.75
18,579
18,579
Newark, N. J.:
City corporation—bank stockCounty—bank stock
17,144,266
17,144,266
3.75
3.75
64,291
64,291
.14
.14
Paterson, N. J.:
City corporation—bank stockCounty—bank stock
4,131,733
4,131,733
3.75
3.75
15,494
15,494
.11
.11
Trenton, N. J.:
City corporation—bank stockCounty—bank stock
1,530,110
1,530,110
3.75
3.75
15,738
5,738
1 / Average r a t e .
2 / Cf. S e c t i o n A on t h i s p o i n t , p . 5 0 ,
other
supra.
PART II: GENERAL GOVERMEOT— ASSESSED VALUATION AND TAX LEVIES
241
POLL TAX LEVIES.—Taxes upon polls, or capitation taxes, are reported in table
27-B with the rate and levy for 1937. As Indicated in the discussion of poll
taxes in Section A, Revenues,3 the receipts from poll taxes are insignificant
compared with the total revenues of the cities, but are an important source of
Income to some cities. It should be repeated, also, that poll taxes shown for
Connecticut cities are Imposed by the State and locally collected, the Bureau
classifying the portion of the yield retained as a local revenue, while the portion remitted to the state is reported in the State report as a grant from minor
civil divisions.4
In reports before 1925, data concerning poll taxes were included in the
table of assessed valuations and tax levies, but for 1925 and subsequent years
the material was separately reported in a text table. In 1937, only 40 cities
located in 13 States reported using this tax, compared with 48 cities in 1932,
and the total levy declined 18 percent, from $5,023,453 to $4,118,578.
TABLE 2 7 - B . — POLL TAX LEVIES: 1937
CITY, AND DIVISION OF
GOVERNMENT
Rate
of
levy
C H Y , AND DIVISION OF
GOVERNMENT
$4,118,578
Birmingham, Ala.:
City corporationBridgeport , Conn.:
City corporationHartford, Conn.:
City corporationNew Haven, Conn.:
City corporationWaterbury, Conn.:
City corporationWilmington, Del.:
County
Jacksonville, Fla.:
School district —
Miami, Fla.:
School d i s t r i c t Tampa, Fla.:
School d i s t r i c t Atlanta, Ga.:
City corporationState
Evansville, Ind.:
City corporationSchool d i s t r i c t State
County
Fort Wayne, Ind.:
City corporationSchool d i s t r i c t State
County
Gary, Ind.:
School d i s t r i c t State
Indianapolis, Ind.:
City corporationCounty
State
South Bend, Ind.:
City corporationSchool d i s t r i c t State
County
Boston, Mass.:
City corporationCambridge, Mass.:
City corporation-Fall River, Mass.:
City corporationLowell, Mass.:
City corporation--
$1.50
19,705
3.00
191,800
3.00
288,000
3.00
246,198
3.00
161,397
.25
6,000
1.00
30,523
1.00
18,111
1.00
23,905
3.00
1.00
117,249
35,410
1.00
1.00
1.50
.50
20,143
20,143
30,215
10,071
2.00
1.00
1.50
1.50
41,602
20,801
31,201
31,201
1.25
1.50
16,321
19,585
.50
1.00
1.50
25,859
51,718
77,577
.50
1.00
1.50
11,060
22,121
33,181
11,060
.50
473,770
2.00
Lynn, Mass.:
City corporation-'
New Bedford, Mass.:
City corporationSome rville, Mass.:
City corporationSpringfield , Mass.:
City corporationWorcester, Mass.:
City corporation—
Patarson, N. J.:
City corporationErie, Pa.:
County
Reading, Pa.:
School d i s t r i c t County
Scranton, Pa.:
City corporation-School d i s t r i c t Providence, R. I.:
City corporationChattanooga, Tenn.:
County-—
Knoxville, Tenn.:
County
Memphis, Tenn.:
County
Nashville, Tenn.:
County
Dallas, Tex.:
State
County
• —
El Paso, Tex.:
State
County
Fort Worth, Tex.:
State
County
Houston, Tex.:
State
San Antonio, Tex.:
State
Norfolk, Va.:
City corporation—
State
Richmond, Va.:
City corporation—
State
Rate
of
levy
$2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
1.00
(A/>
2.00
(2/)
1.00
2.50
1.00
2.00
1.00
2.00
2.00
1.50
.25
1.50
.25
1.50
.25
1.50
1.50
.50
1.00
1.50
1.00
66,274
2.00
66,616
2.00
Honolulu, Hawaii:
City corporation-
(3/)
53,886
2.CO
1/ Occupation taxes levied on a valuation of $6,255,660, at the rate of $7.50 per $1, COO.
2/ Occupation taxes levied on a valuation of $7,804,125, at the rate of $7.00 per $1,000.
3/ Not reported.
4/ Not included in total.
3/ P. 51, supra.
4/ Cf. Financial Statistics of States: 1937.
TABLE 27.—ASSESSED VALUATION AND TAX LEVIES, TOTAL AND PER CAPITA:
1937
ASSESSED VALUATION OF PROPERTY
CITY AND DIVISION OF GOVERNMENT
Per
oapita
Grand
total-
Per
capita
$1,821,257,638
$48.34
1,703,094,855
46,284,338
63,851,501
8,026,944
45.21
1.23
1.69
Rate p e r
$1,000
of
assessed
valuation
$56,716,868,383
38,241,955,698
11,211,721,614
3,087,156,368
$47,645,779,149
32,082,056,443
8,950,601,870
2,449,905,984
$8,453,659,209
5,673,162,559
2,092,372,781
636,374,424
$617,430,025
486,736,696
168,746,963
875,960
$1,505
1,015
298
GROUP I
Government of city
Government of State
Government of other civil divisions-
37,482,661,064
24,175,077,643
1,304,570,003
32,500,425,606
21,737,682,768
1,093,310,069
4,736,882,846
2,297,938,164
211,259,934
245,352,612
139,456,711
1 ,694
1 092
1,168,274,966
1,153,365,661
10,189,681
4,719,624
52.79
52.11
.46
GROUP II
Government of city
Government of State
Government of other civil divi3ions-
6,224,035,432
5,710,392,754
505,861,680
4,712,168,373
3,983,683,711
385,627,700
1,310,712,189
1,525,554,173
120,233,980
201,154,870
201,154,870
1 349
1 238
228,119,176
210,825,589
16,433,673
859,914
49.46
45.71
3.56
13,010,171,887
8,356,485,301
11,211,721,614
1,276,724,685
10,433,185,170
6,360,689,964
8,950,601,870
970,968,215
2,406,064,174
1,849,670,222
2,092,372,781
304,880,510
170,922,543
146,125,115
168,746,963
875,960
1 190
765
1 026
424,863,496
338,903,605
19,660,984
63,851,501
2,447,406
38.87
31.01
1.80
5.84
160,000,000
160,000,000
160,000,000
138,749,427
138,749,427
138,749,427
21,250,573
21,250,573
21,250,573
585
585
585
5,760,000
2,880,000
1,040,000
1,840,000
21.08
10.54
3.81
6.73
1,093,310,069
1,093,310,069
1,093,310,069
1,093,310,069
609,407,409
609.407,409
609,407,409
211,259,934
1 , iJOV
1,257
1,257
963
65,694,091
60,974,467
21,321,433
21,011,802
18,041,226
4,713,624
48.51
45.03
1,702,717,478
1,702,717,478
1,702,717,478
1,304,570,003
15.52
15.32
3.49
2/10.60
2/ 3.62
980,422,121
694,388,503
286,033,618
30,989,745
30,989,745
47.23
47.23
2/31.61
Government
Government
Government
Government
GROUP I I I Government
Government
Government
Government
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
city
State
county
other civil divisions-
city
State
county
other civil
divisions-
a
ALABAMA.
BIRMINGHAM
Government o f c i t y
Government o f S t a t e —
Government o f c o u n t y -
$18.00
6.50
11.50
CALIFORNIA iJ
LOS ANGELES
Government of city
City corporation
County
School district
Government of Metropolitan water districtSAN FRANCISCO
Government o f c i t y -
2/l2.87
OAKLAND
Government of city
City corporationSchool districtUtility districtGoveriment of c o u n t y -
212,116,300
212,116,300
212,116,300
212,116,300
45,146,403
45,146,403
40,632,289
45,146,403
870
870
855
870
12,406,447
9,376,897
4,938,977
3,779,293
658,627
3,029,550
41.97
31.72
16.71
12.79
2.23
10.25
2/19.20
2/14.69
2/ 2.61
2/11.78
SAN DIEGO
Government of city
City corporationSohool district—
Government of county-
110,180,160
110,180,160
110,180,160
38,885,755
38,885,755
38,885,755
931
931
931
6,756,098
4,593,660
2,813,670
1,779,990
2,162,438
42.20
28.69
17.57
11.12
13.51
2/18.88
2/11.94
2/14.51
LONG BEACH
Government of city
City corporation
School district
Government of county
Government of Metropolitan water distriot-
154,236,294
115,022,878
115,022,878
115,022,878
53,887,636
43,607,777
43,607,777
30,153,427
1,326
1,010
1,010
925
7,838,119
5,161,649
2,848,120
2,313,529
2,139,318
537,152
49.92
32.88
18.14
14.74
13.63
3.42
2/13.68
2/14.60
2/13.49
3.70
272,453,190
272,453,190
272,453,190
90,679,180
90,679,180
90,679,180
1,239
1,239
1,239
12,854,886
11,765,489
6,282,190
5,483,299
1,089,397
43.84
40.13
21.43
18.70
3.72
17.30
15.10
3.00
HARTFORD
Government of city
City corporation
Metropolitan districtGovernment of State
Government of county
311,413,248
311,413,248
311,413,248
311,413,248
40,911,545
40,911,545
40,911,545
40,911,545
2,091
2,091
2,091
2,091
9,402,975
8,987,404
8,851,648
135,756
223,951
191,620
55.80
53.34
52.53
.81
1.33
1.14
2/25.12
.39
.64
.54
NEW HAVEN
Government o f c i t y
City corporation
Improvement districtsGovernment of State
Government of county
265,781,386
3/ 13,275,086
265,781,386
265,781,386
42,629,632
(3/)
42,629,632
42,629,632
1,896
(4/)
1,896
1,896
8,363,603
8,041,038
8,015,813
25,225
193,126
129,439
51.41
49.42
49.27
(4/)
1.19
.80
2/25.99
2 / 1.90
.63
.42
BRIDGEPORT
Government of city
Government of State
Government of county
192,518,356
192,518,356
192,518,356
40,094,944
40,094,944
40,094,944
1,579
1,579
1,579
6,931,873
6,710,873
126,000
95,000
47.06
45.56
.86
.64
2/28.85
.54
.31
WATERBURY
Government of city
Government of State
Government of county—
132,046,980
132,046,980
132,046,980
32,787,338
32,787,338
32,787,338
1,627
1,627
1,627
5,192,350
4,983,902
127,078
81,370
51.26
49.20
1.25
.80
30.24
.77
.49
COLORADO
DENVER
Government of city
City corporationSchool district—
Government of State —
CONNECTICUT
See footnotes on page 256.
TABLE 27.—ASSESSED VALUATION AND TAX LEVIES, TOTAL AND PER CAPITA:
1937—-Continued
ASSESSED VALUATION OF PROPERTY
Per
capita
Rate p e r
$1,000
of
assessed
valuation
$2,972,382
2,464,018
508,364
$27.88
23.12
4.77
i/$16.20
21,453,384
21,453,384
34.44
34.44
2/12.05
3,105,320
2,246,451
1,214,416
1,032,035
168,623
690,246
22.36
16.17
8.74
7.43
1.21
4.97
2/16.88
2/18.13
1 / 1.98
14.88
5,415,828
4,377,948
3,394,906
983,042
156,513
786,379
18,500
38,244
38,244
50.05
40.46
31.38
9.09
1.45
7.27
.35
.35
2/24.49
2/25.70
2/ 2.02
2/20.56
1.00
1.00
1.00
4,587,192
3,543,102
2,426,527
1,116,575
82 652
961,438
43.07
33.27
22.78
10.48
.78
9.03
2/27.35
2/33.14
2 / P. = 24
2/28.54
10,905,533
6,627,960
1,292,484
2,985,089
38.89
CITY AND DIVISION OF GOVERNMENT
Per
capita
DELAWARE 1/
WILMINGTONGovernment of city
Government of county—
$1,427
1,363
$152,145,650
145,246,903
$152,145,650
145,246,903
1,780,268,924
1,144,457,153
$635,811,771
71,950,520
56,920,149
85,339,877
46,400,000
62,470,080
47,170,149
36,650,000
36,650,000
9,480,440
6,750,000
45,689,877
6,750,000
138,609,410
38,244,160
77,495,130
38,244,160
18,500,000
38,244,160
38,244,160
121,018,344
32,173,490
26,197,110
32,173,490
3 / 18,500,000
32,173,490
32,173,490
17,591,066
5,194,710
50,422,060
5,194,710
(3/)
5,194,710
5,194,710
88,707,487
33,692,747
36,863,167
33,692,747
79,582,960
29,980,210
25,07y,y4U
29,980,210
9,124,527
2,831,979
10,902,669
2,831,979
880,558
880,553
880,558
370,791,329
258,496,900
258,496,900
238,926,816
163,403,800
163,403,800
101,693,033
64,921,620
64,921,620
30,171,480
30,171,480
30,171,480
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
WASHINGTON
Government of city-
JACKSONVILLE
Government of city
City corporationSchool districtGovernment of S t a t e —
Government of countyMI AMI
Government of city
City corporation
School district
Government of State
Government of county
Government of drainage district
Government of navigation district
Government of flood control districtTAMPA
Government of city
City corporation—
School district—
Government of S t a t e —
Government o f county—
ATLANTA
Government of city
Government of State
Government of county--
$3,000,000
3,000,000
3,000,000
518
410
614
334
875,960
875,960
875,960
1,281
353
716
353
(i/)
875,960
875,960
353
353
833
316
1,322
922
922
(i/)
23.64
4.61
10.65
2/17.88
5.00
2/11.55
ILLINOIS U
CHICAGO
Government of city
City corporation
County
School district
Park districts
Sanitary district
Forest preserve district-
1,956,928,663
1,956,923,663
1,956,923,663
1,956,928,663
1,956,928,663
1,956,928,663
473,682,656
473,682,656
473,682,656
473,682,656
473,682,656
473,682,656
104,001,612
104,001,612
104,001,612
104,001,612
104,001,612
104,001,612
561
561
561
561
561
561
186,300,197
186,300,197
72,211,095
12,334,622
66,143,417
20,546,250
13,304,119
1,760,694
53.37
53.37
20.69
3.53
18.95
5.89
3.81
.50
78,335,065
78,335,065
78,335,065
78,335,065
78,335,065
78,335,065
20,583,780
20,583,780
20,583,780
20,583,780
20,583,780
20,583,780
1,828,235
1,828,235
1,828,235
1,828,235
1,828,235
1,828,235
713
713
713
713
713
713
3,587,747
3,344,908
1,261,195
1,370,864
164,504
313,340
235,005
242,839
32.68
30.46
11.49
12.49
1.50
2.85
2.14
2.21
16.10
17.50
2.10
4.00
3.00
3.10
INDIANAPOLIS
Government of city
City corporation
County
School d i s t r i c t
Government of State
Government of township-
505,861,680
505,861,680
505,861,680
505,861,680
505,861,680
120,233,980
120,233,980
120,233,980
120,233,980
120,233,980
1,359
1,359
1,359
1,359
1,359
15,024,041
13,405,334
5,766,823
2,225,791
5,412,720
758,793
859,914
40.38
36.03
15.50
5.98
14.55
2.04
2.31
11.40
4.40
10.70
1.50
2/ 1.70
FORT WAYNE
Government of city
City corporation
School district
Government of State
Government of county
Government of township-
147,005,550
147,005,550
151,276,910
151,276,910
147,005,550
35,164,520
35,164,520
35,164,520
35,164,520
35,164,520
1,224
1,224
1,260
1,260
1,224
3,492,523
2,341,798
908,494
1,433,304
226,915
594,518
329,292
29.08
19.50
7.56
11.93
1.89
4.95
2.74
6.18
9.75
1.50
3.93
2.24
SOUTH BEND
.
Government of city
City corporation
School district
Government of State
Government of county
Government of township-
128,171,820
128,171,820
130,253,860
130,263,860
128,171,820
35,141,070
35.141,070
35,141,070
35,141,070
35,141,070
1,169
1,169
1,189
1,189
1,169
3,151,899
2,223,781
852,343
1,371,438
195,395
534,082
198,641
28.76
20.29
7.78
12.51
1.78
4.87
1.81
6.65
10.70
1.50
4.10
2/ 1.55
GARYGovernment of city
City corporation
School district
Government of State
Government of county
Government of township—
128,058,400
128,058,400
128,058,400
128,058,400
128,058,400
35,115,075
35,115,075
35,115,075
35,115,075
35,115,075
1,186
1,186
1,186
1,186
1,186
4,251,538
2,906,925
1,370,225
1,536,700
192,088
563,456
589,069
39.37
26.92
12.69
14.23
1.78
5.22
5.45
10.70
12.00
1.50
4.40
4.60
IE ORIA.
Government of city
City corporation—
School district
Park district
Sanitary districtTown
Government of county—
See footnotes on page 256.
4,271,360
4,271,360
2,092,040
2,092,040
36.90
6.30
33.80
10.50
6.80
5
TABLE 27.—ASSESSED VALUATION AND TAX LEVIES, TOTAL AND PER CAPITA:
1937—Continued
ISED VALUATION OF PROPERTY
CITY AND DIVISION OF GOVERNMENT
Per
capita
Per
capita
Rate p e r
•1,000
of
assessed
valuation
INDIANA—Continued
EVANSVILLE—
Government o f c i t y
City corporation
School d i s t r i c t
Government of S t a t e
Government o f c o u n t y
Government o f t o w n s h i p -
$1,099
1,099
1,118
1,118
1,099
$3,504,108
?,194,705
1,120,455
1,074,250
176,272
693,337
439,794
$33.34
20.88
10.66
10.22
1.68
6.60
4.18
1,126
1,126
1,124
1,126
7,602,738
5,744,685
2,818,925
2,925,760
503,775
1,354,278
52.32
39.54
19.40
20.14
3.47
9.32
32,016,023
32,016,023
16,159,421
32,016,023
32,016,023
759
759
(4/)
759
759
4,598,412
3,226,598
1,600,058
1,441,723
184,817
222,831
1,148,983
37.26
26.15
12.97
11.68
(4/)
1.81
9.31
87,265,730
87,265,730
87,265,730
87,265,730
87.265.730
47,893,787
47,893,787
27,153,994
47,893,787
47,893,787
1,149
1,149
973
1,149
1,149
4,314,339
3,251,140
1,277,162
1,762,304
211,674
248,411
814,788
36.69
27.65
10.86
14.99
1.80
2.11
6.93
2 / 9.45
2/13.04
1.85
2 / 1.84
2 / 6.03
302,765,264
306,633,958
306,633,958
116,138,057
123,108,877
344,819,543
1,319
1,354
2,052
12,386,592
10,730,573
8,968,785
1,761,788
1,658,019
39.02
33.80
28.25
5.55
5.22
2/21.41
2 / 4.10
2/ 2.55
$115,510,780
115,510,780
117,514,780
117,514,780
115,510,780
$81,868,645
81,868,645
81,868,645
81,868,645
81,868,645
$33,642,135
33,642,135
33,642,135
33,642,135
33,642,135
DES MOINES
Government of city
City corporationSchool d i s t r i c t Government of S t a t e Government of county-
163,629,450
163,629,450
163,361,195
163,629,450
113,301,645
113,301,645
113,301,645
113,301,645
40,605,898
40,605,898
40,337,643
40,605,898
KANSAS CITY
Government of city
City corporation
School district
Drainage district
Government of State
Government of county
93,707,494
93,707,494
33,899,391
93,707,494
93,707,494
61,691,471
61,691,471
17,739,970
61,691,471
61,691,471
135,159,517
135,159,517
114,419,724
135,159,517
418,903,321
429,742,835
651,453,501
WICHITA
Government of city
City corporation
School district
University districtGovernment of State
Government of county
LOUISVILLE
Government of city
City corporationCounty
Government of State —
$2,004,000
2,004,000
9,721,907
9,721,907
9,721,907
9,721,907
$9.70
9.30
1.50
5.90
2/ 3.81
2/l7.23
2/17.88
SJ 3.08
2/
8.28
2/17.08
2/15.39
2/ 5.45
1/ 2.38
2/12.26
a
S
1,050
1,050
17,056,220
14,211,455
9,041,404
2,943,713
2,226,338
2,844,765
36.21
30.17
19.20
6.25
4.73
6.04
21.50
7.00
4.50
5.75
551,735,375
439,261,080
1,985
1,800
34,873,968
31,852,145
3,021,823
42.68
38.98
3.70
2/19.64
£ / 2.05
1,470,405,100
1,470,405,100
154,789,310
154,789,310
2 ,065
2,065
62,454,656
59,346,586
3,108,070
79.37
75.42
3.95
2/36.52
1.91
285,058,310
285,058,310
285,058,310
253,996,500
253,996,500
253,996,500
31,061,810
31,061,810
31,061,810
1,440
1,440
1,440
10,480,077
9,389,122
563,500
527,455
52.93
47.42
2.85
2.66
2/32.94
1.98
1.65
SPRINGFIELD—
Government of city
Government of State — '
Government of county—
284,593,030
284,593,030
284,593,030
252,823,290
252,823,290
252,823,290
31,769,740
31,769,740
31,769,740
1 ,855
1 ,855
1,855
9,164,831
8,205,662
525,009
434,160
59.74
53.49
3.42
2.83
1/28.83
1.84
1.53
FALL RIVER
Government of city
Government of S t a t e —
Govarnment of county-
96,876,290
96,876,290
96,876,290
82,972,950
82,972,950
82,972,950
13,903,340
13,903,340
13,903,340
840
840
840
3,815,217
3,438,096
214,742
162,379
33.10
29.83
1.36
1.41
2/35.49
2.22
1.68
CAMBRIDGE
Government of city
Government of S t a t e —
Government of county-
177,929,200
177,929,200
177,929,200
161,831,000
161,831,000
161,831,000
16,098,200
16,098,200
16,098,200
1 557
1 557
1 557
6,994,313
6,374,302
337,120
282,891
61.19
55.77
2.95
2.47
2/35.82
1.89
1.59
NEW BEDFORD
•
Government of city
Government of State —
Government of county--
109,293,640
109,293,640
109,293,640
92,025,550
92,025,550
92,025,550
17,268,090
17,268,090
17,268,090
971
971
971
4,402,282
3,997,840
230,300
174,142
39.10
35.51
2.05
1.55
1/36.58
2.11
1.59
SOMSRVTLLE
Government of city
Government of State —
Government of county-
118,804,830
118,804,830
118,804,830
107,851,800
107,851,800
107,851,800
10,953,030
10,953,030
10,953,030
1,123
1,123
1,123
5,174,529
4,765,168
48.91
45.04
2.10
1.77
2/40.11
1.87
1.57
NEW ORLEANS
Government of city
420,530,438
420,530,438
494,741,692
494,741,692
309,223,294
309,223,294
363,792,111
363,792,111
111,307,144
111,307,144
130,949,581
130,949,581
1,621,821,239
1,470,910,889
1,070,085,864
1,031,649,809
1,625,194,410
1,625,194,410
WORCESTER
Government of city
Government of State —
Government of county—
City corporation-School d i s t r i c t Levee d i s t r i c t
Government of State —
BALTIMORE
Government of c i t y —
Government of StateMASSACHUSSTTS
BOSTON
Government of c i t y —
Government o f S t a t e -
See footnotes on page 256.
222,583
186,778
TABLE 2 7 . — A S S E S S E D VALUATION AND TAX L E V I E S ,
TOTAL AND P E R CAPITA:
1937—-Continued
ASSESSED VALUATION OF PROPERTY "
Per
capita
Rate p e r
$1,000
of
assessed
valuation
CITY AND DIVISION OF GOVERNMENT
Per
capita
MASSACHUSETTS—Cont inued
$137,391,725
137,391,725
137,391,725
$121,570,625
121,570,625
121,570,625
$15,821,100
15,821,100
15,821,100
$1,335
1,335
1,335
$4,507,480
4,046,073
258,597
202,810
$43.80
39.32
2.51
1.97
2/$29.45
1.88
1.48
102,645,290
102,645,290
102,645,290
90,669,500
90,669,500
90,669,500
11,975,790
11,975,790
11,975,790
1,024
1,024
1,024
4,331,560
3,962,528
200,655
168,377
43.21
39.53
2.00
1.68
S/i .8.60
1.95
1.64
DETROIT
Government of city
City corporationCounty
2,291,719,930
2,291,719,930
1,787,253,570
1,787,253,570
504,466,360
504,466,360
1,376
1,376
66,232,998
66,232,998
54,827,108
11,405,890
39.75
39.75
32.91
6.85
GRAND RAPIDS
Government of city
City corporationSchool district-Government of county-
185,434,823
185,434,823
185,434,823
152,408,860
152,408,860
152,408,860
33,025,963
33,025,963
33,025,963
1,073
1,073
1,073
4,017,749
3,645,001
1,943,458
1,701,543
372,748
23.25
21.09
11.25
9.85
2.16
10.48
9.18
2.00
FLINT
Government of city
City corporationSchool districtGovernment of county—
175,063,150
175,063,150
175,063,150
147,178,210
147,178,210
147,178,210
27,884,940
27,884,940
27,884,940
1,047
1,047
1,047
4,824,687
4,229,786
2,261,356
1,968,430
594,901
28.86
25.30
13.52
11.77
3.56
12.97
11.24
3.40
MINNEAPOLIS
Government or city
City corporationCounty
Government of S t a t e —
550,214,144
550.214.144
550,214,144
201,836,197
201,836,197
201,836,197
040,Of 7,3*1
348,377,947
348,377,947
1.152
l,'l52
1,152
273,643,954
273,643,954
273,643,954
110,347,460
110,347,460
110,347,460
163,296,494
163,296,494
163,296,494
23,579,937
20,449,148
17.737,453
2,711,695
3.130,789
13,074,353
7,907,420
1,714,955
3,451,978
49.36
42.81
37.13
5.68
6.55
47.05
28.45
6.17
12.42
Government of city
Government of S t a t e —
Government of county-'
LOWELL
Government of city
Government of S t a t e —
Government of countyMICHIGAN 1/
ST. PAUL
Government of c i t y
Government of S t a t e —
Government of county—
2/32.24
£/' 4.93
2/ 5.69
2/28.90
2/ 6.27
2/12.61
9
£
1,234
1,234
1,234
1,234
5,934,326
4,191,824
2,186,207
2,005,617
690,929
1,051,573
58.24
41.14
21.45
19.68
6.78
10.32
2/17.38
2/15.95
2/ 5.49
2/ 8.36
$48,321,344
48,321,344
48,321,344
1,356
1,356
1,356
30,212,490
28,523,691
18,728,655
9,795,036
1,688,799
36.39
34.35
22.56
11.80
2.03
2/16.63
8.70
1.50
35,187,895
35,187,895
35,187,895
35,187,895
1,278
1,271
1,271
1,271
19,253,637
18,467,256
8,254,541
3,669,779
6,542,936
786,381
46.66
44.76
20.01
8.89
15.86
1.91
2/15.65
7.00
2/12.48
1.50
249
160
160
160
8,357,573
6,839,189
3,910,078
2,929,111
419,740
1,098,644
38.37
31.40
17.95
13.45
1.93
5.04
2/14.38
2/11.59
2/ 1.66
2/ 4.35
8,797,254
8,797,254
8,797,254
2,152
2,295
2,295
35,529,400
32,659,379
27,547,285
5,112,094
2,870,021
79.48
73.06
61.63
11.44
6.42
28 64
4 98
2 80
31,907,445
67,400,445
67,400,445
116,009,846
116,009,846
116,009,846
1,855
1,910
1,910
26,250,976
24,460,119
19,443,495
5,016,624
1,790,857
82.06
76.46
60.78
15.68
5.60
14,878,715
21,932,215
21,932,215
945,171
945,171
945,171
1,248
1,294
1,284
7,773,953
5,947,455
537,274
1,289,224
55.93
42.79
3.87
9.27
DULUTH
Government of city
City corporationSchool districtGovernment of S t a t e —
Government of county—
42,906,028
42,906,028
42,906,028
42,906,028
82,863,622
82,863,622
82,863,622
82,863,622
ST. LOUIS
Government of city
City corporationSchool district —
Government of S t a t e —
895,129,560
895,129,560
895,129,560
182,526,340
182,415,310
182,415,310
KANSAS CITY
Government of city
City corporationCounty
School districtGovernment of S t a t e —
367,762,210
412,073,664
412,073,664
412,073,664
124,507,500
76,992,556
76,992,556
76,992,556
OMAHA.
Government of city
City corporationSchool d i s t r i c t Government of State—Government of county—
171,489,565
171,489,565
171,489,565
171,489,565
100,465,629
81,233,954
81,233,954
81,233,954
NEWARK
Government of city
City corporationCounty—
Government of State —
704,375,620
693,452,300
693,452,300
248,765,400
323,775,400
323,775,400
JERSEY CITY
Government of c i t y City corporationCounty
Government of S t a t e —
445,477,002
427,702,422
427,702,422
157,689,865
157,047,730
155,666,935
1
1
1
1
PATERSON
Government of c i t y
Government of State—
Government of countySee footnotes on page E56.
— —
32.77
8.21
2.93
34.28
2.99
7.22
TABLE 2 7 . — A S S E S S E D VALUATION AND TAX L E V I E S ,
TOTAL AND P E R C A P I T A :
1937—Continued
ASSESSED VALUATION OF PROPERTY
Per
capita
| Rate per
$1,000
of
I assessed
valuation
CITY AND DIVISION OF GOVERNMENT
Per
capita
NEW JERSEY—Continued
TRENTON
Government of city
Government of State —
Government of county-
#161,434,023
158,283,523
158,283,523
$140,692,700
133,401,700
133,401,700
118,759,025
22,899,525
22,899,525
$1,982,298
1,982,298
1,982,298
$1,301
1,275
1,275
$6,393,123
4,724,303
487,152
1,181,668
$51.52
38.07
3.93
9.52
$29.26
3.08
7.46
CAMDEN
Government of city
Government of S t a t e Government of county-'
136,578,173
146,975,099
146,975,099
115,651,610
113,309,371
113,309,371
16,683,250
29,422,415
29,422,415
4,243,313
4,243,313
4,243,313
1,147
1,234
1,234
5,864,668
4,251,982
435,943
1,176,743
49.24
35.70
3.66
9.88
31.13
2.97
8.01
ELIZABETH
Government of city
Government of State--•
Government of county-
139,675,008
143,762,736
143,762,736
123,670,160
121,859,143
121,859,143
12,387,070
18,285,815
18,285,815
3,617,778
3,617,778
3,617,778
1,185
1,219
1,219
5,220,948
4,028,096
362,696
830,156
44.28
34.17
3.08
7.04
28.84
2.52
5.77
16,599,695,194
16,599,695,194
16,599,695,194
16,599,695,194
2,320
2,320
459,319,513
458,995,547
323,966
64.20
64.16
.05
2/27.65
.02
BUFFALO
Government of city
City corporationCounty
Government of State —
963,317,315
963,317,315
963,317,315
963,317,315
963,317,315
963,317,315
1,648
1,648
1,648
32,720,696
32,525,239
25,743,480
6,781,759
195,457
55.99
55.66
44.05
11.60
.33
26.72
7.04
.20
ROCHESTER
Government of city
City corporationCounty
Government o f S t a t e - - '
625,203,142
625,203,142
625.203.142
625,203,142
625,203,142
625,203,142
1,875
1,875
1,875
23,084,451
22,961,909
17,810,316
5,151,593
122,542
69.22
68.85
53.40
15.45
.37
2/28.49
8.24
SYRACUSE
Government of c i t y
City corporation
County s u p e r v i s o r s '
Government of S t a t e
Government of c o u n t y
375,397,867
375,397,867
375,397,867
375,397,867
375,397,867
375,397,867
375,397,867
375,397,867
1,750
1,750
1,750
1,750
12,531,120
10,557,016
10,274,640
282,376
76,352
1,897,752
58.42
49.22
47.90
1.32
.36
8.85
27.37
.75
NEW YORK
Government of c i t y —
Government of State-
Y0NKERS-•
Government of city
Government of State--Government of county—
314,895,650
314,895,650
314,895,650
2,241
2,241
2,241
10,768,122
9,458,483
55,236
1,254,403
76.64
67.32
ALBANY
Government of city
Government of S t a t e Government of county-
233,027,890
233,027,890
233,027,890
1,795
1,795
1,795
7,661,958
6,312,959
46,839
1,302,160
59.03
48.64
UTICA—
Government of city
Government of S t a t e —
Government of county—
130,987,806
130,987,806
130,987,806
1,277
1,277
1,277
4,426,831
3,365,403
24,983
1,036,445
43.15
32.80
281,439,728
281,439,728
281,439,728
281,439,728
1,273
1,273
1,273
1,273
33,431,317
33,431,317
15,588,579
6,017,871
11,649,528
175,339
36.40
36.40
16.97
6.55
12.68
.39
8.93
.36
10.03
.24
10.10
» 1/
CLEVELAND
Government of city
City corporationCounty
School districtPark district
887,487,410
887,487,410
887,487,410
887,487,410
y
5/
5/
5/
.19
CINCINNATI
Government of city
City corporationCounty
School districtPark district
y
6/
6/
6/
729,558,510
729,558,510
729,558,510
729,558,510
1/ 76,546,770
2/ 76,546,770
2/ 76,546,770
1/ 76,546,770
1,752
1,752
1,752
1,752
15,219,268
15,219,268
7,625,756
3,063,200
4,506,129
24,183
33.08
33.08
16.57
6.66
9.79
COLUMBUS
Government of city
City corporationSchool district-Government of county—
6/ 316,300,290
6/ 316,300,290
i/ 316,300,290
2/ 32,099,640
1/ 32,099,640
2/ 32,099,640
1,163
1,163
1,163
7,386,078
6,375,718
3,553,679
2,822,039
1,010,360
24.64
21.27
11.86
9.42
3.37
TOLEDO
Government of city
City corporationSchool d i s t r i c t Government of county--
303,264,810
303,264,810
303,264,810
5/ 89,512,675
5/ 89,512,675
5 / 89,512,675
1,314
1,314
1,314
8,090,430
6,879,890
3,397,525
3,482,365
1,210,540
27.07
23.02
11.37
11.65
4.05
AKRON
—
Government of city
City corporationSchool districtGovernment of county-
196,247,590
196,247,590
196,247,590
5/ 70,432,969
5/ 70,432,969
5 / 70,432,969
1,006
1,006
1,006
7,280,380
6,512,340
3,408,178
3,104,162
768,040
27.46
24.57
12.86
11.71
2.90
See footnotes on page 256.
.05
TABLE 2 7 . — A S S E S S E D VALUATION AND TAX L E V I E S ,
TOTAL AND PER CAPITA:
1937—Continued
ASSESSED VALUATION OF PROPER'IY
CITY AND DIVISION OF GOVERNMENT
Per
capita
Per
capita
Rate p e r
$1,000
of
assessed
valuation
OHIO—Continued
DAYTON—
Government of city
City corporationSchool district—
Government o f o o u n t y -
$1,350
1,350
1,350
$5,578,218
4,437,473
2,769,585
1,667,888
1,140,745
$27.00
21.48
13.41
8.07
5.52
57,049,114
57,049,114
57,049,114
57,049,114
57,049,114
1,513
1,513
1,513
1,513
1,513
4,744,553
4,112,474
2,026,715
2,061,245
24,514
626,017
6,062
27.24
23.61
11.63
11.83
.14
3.59
.03
26,982,962
26,982,962
26,982,962
26,982,962
1,214
1,214
1,214
1,214
2,237,235
1,853,679
652,704
1,200,975
352,460
31,096
20.81
17.24
6.07
11.17
$12,089,632
12,089,632
12,089,632
550
550
550
5,032,636
3,893,989
1,297,368
2,596,621
1,138,647
24.99
19.33
6.44
12.89
5.65
11.70
23.43
10.27
8,703,981
8,703,981
8,703,981
679
679
679
5,085,689
4,405,549
2,308,636
2,096,913
680,140
15.60
14.17
4.60
22.97
20.86
6.77
$278,910,970
278,910,970
278,910,970
$220,985,230
220,985,230
220,985,230
263,586,314
263,586,314
263,586,314
263,586,314
263,586,314
206,537,200
206,537,200
206,537,200
206,537,200
206,537,200
5/
5/
5/
5/
5/
130,540,742
130,840,742
130,540,742
130,540,742
103,557,780
103,557,780
103,557,780
103,557,780
5/
5/
5/
5/
OKLAHOMA CITY
Goveriment of city
City corporationSohool d i s t r i c t Government of county—
110,838*811
110,838,811
110,838,811
81,672,379
81,672,379
81,672,379
17,076,800
17,076,800
17,076,800
TULSA
Government o f o i t y
City corporationSchool d i s t r i c t —
Government o f county—
100,523,182
100,523,182
100,523,182
77,679,526
77,679,526
77,679,526
14,139,675
14,139,675
14,139,§75
YOUNGSTOWN
Government of city
City corporation—School district
Park district
Government of o o u n t y —
Government of township-
5/$57,925,740
5/ 57,925,740
5/ 57,925,740
CANTON
Government of c i t y
City c o r p o r a t i o n School d i s t r i c t
Government o f c o u n t y
Goveranent of t o w n a h i p -
.29
$9.93
5.98
4.09
7.69
7.82
.09
2.38
.02
5.00
9.20
2.70
y
.24
CKLAHOMA 1/
W
H
ft
M
%
PORTLAND—
Government of city
City corporationCounty
School d i s t r i c t Port district
Government of S t a t e —
14,609,133
14,279,075
6,168,301
4,323,221
3,408,798
378,755
330,058
47.26
46.20
19.96
13.99
11.03
1.23
1.07
37.20
36.70
24.22
12.37
(V500
)
73,385,354
72,398,115
47,775,003
24,398,926
224,186
987,239
.50
5/13.18
9.25
2/ .38
1.00
464,482,185
1,622
2,284
1,622
685
40,859,710
40,395,228
17,067,058
10,948,176
12,379,994
464,482
60.22
59.54
25.15
16.14
18.25
.68
2/15.51
2/ 7.06
11.25
1.00
75,964,470
75,964,470
742
742
526
1,268
4,727,317
3,757,934
1,721,268
2,036,666
75,964
893,419
32.74
26.02
11.92
14.10
.53
6.19
2/16.06
19.00
1.00
2/ 4.88
33,348,670
33,348,670
1 ,067
1 ,067
282
982
3,882,022
3,093,773
1,389,041
1,704,732
33,349
754,900
32.82
26.15
11.74
14.41
.28
6.38
11.00
13.50
1.00
2/ 6.50
113,160,868
36,580,001
36,580,001
1 303
1 ,303
327
1 ,339
4,689,978
3,714,952
1,602,528
2,112,424
36,580
938,446
41.95
33.23
14.33
18.89
.33
8.39
11.00
14.50
1.00
2/ 6.27
408,235,920
228,876,200
12,609,461
12,609,461
49.33
49.33
2/19.79
204,964,360
204,964,360
204,964,360
204,964,360
204,964,360
24,415,280
24,415,280
24,415,280
24,415,2b0
24,415,280
2,637,721,753
2,637,721,753
592,350,999
987,239,384
41,159,875
41,159,875
41,159,875
41,159,875
41,159,875
875
875
875
875
875
22.80
15.98
12.60
1.40
1.22
PENNSYLVANIA §/
PHILADELPHIA.
—
Government of c i t y
City corporationSchool district —
Poor district
Government of State —
PITTSBURGH
Government of city
City corporationCounty
School d i s t r i c t Government of S t a t e —
SCRANTONGovernment of city
City corporationSchool districtGovernment of S t a t e —
Government of county-
Government of city
City corporationSchool district—
Government of State —
Government of county—
READING
Government of city
City corporationSchool districtGovernment of State —
Government of county-
987,239,384
1,100,443,930
1,085,402,674
1,100,443,930
464,482,185
107,192,963
107,192,963
107,192,963
126,276,460
126,276,460
82,867,395
145,684,395
145,684,395
1 ,838
1,337
(V)
RHODE ISLAND U
PROVIDENCE
Government of citySee footnotes on page 256.
TABLE 2 7 . — A S S E S S E D VALUATION AND TAX L E V I E S ,
TOTAL AND P E R C A P I T A :
1937—Continued
ASSESSED VALUATION OF PROPERTY
CITY AND DIVISION OF GOVERNMENT
Per
capita
Per
capita
Rate per
#1,000
of
I assessed
valuation
MEMPHIS
Government of c i t y — —
Government of S t a t e Government of county—
$281,669,256
312,831,502
312,831,502
$207,095,935
233,787,120
233,787,120
$32,996,050
30,187,975
30,187,975
$41,577,273
48,856,407
48,856,407
$1,077
1,196
1,196
$9,002,837
5,999,655
250,265
2,752,917
$34.43
22.94
.96
10.53
$21.30
.80
8.80
NASHVILLE
Government of c i t y — •
Government of State—'
Government of county—
160,547,636
181,699,706
181,699,706
113,670,050
131,499,620
131,499,620
27,453,900
30,776,400
30,776,400
19,423,686
19,423,686
19,423,686
1,028
1,163
1,163
5,040,156
3,532,048
145,360
1,362,748
32.27
22.61
.93
8.72
22.00
.80
7.50
CHATTANOOGA
Government of city
Government of S t a t e Government of county-
112,424,106
97,414,351
97,414,351
81,076,300
81,076,300
81,076,300
11,072,306
11,072,306
11,072,306
20,275,500
5,265,745
5,265,745
910
789
789
3,943,491
2,248,482
77,931
1,617,078
31.93
18.21
.63
13.09
20.00
.80
16.60
KNOXVILLE
Government of c i t y Government of S t a t e —
Government of county—
126,694,201
95,532,408
95,532,408
97,192,080
80,199,846
80,199,846
13,159,832
6,559,150
6,559,150
16,342,289
8,773,412
8,773,412
1,146
864
864
4,666,190
3,357,396
76,426
1,232,368
42.19
30.36
.69
11.14
26.50
.80
12.90
HOUSTON
Government of city
City corporation
County
School district
Navigation districtDrainage district
Government of State
293,438,150
228,252,587
293,438,150
226,304,170
7,712,142
200,537,708
242,602,520
197,340,182
242,602,520
197,340,182
4,627,285
169,625,303
50,835,630
30,912,405
50,835,630
28,963,988
3,084,857
30,912,405
923
718
923
712
(4/)
631
12,966,112
11,722,776
5,868,763
1,721,025
3,521,258
579,339
32,391
1,243,336
40.79
36.88
18.46
5.41
11.08
1.82
(4/)
3.91
20.00
7.54
12.00
2.56
4.20
6.20
DALLAS
GoverimetLt of c i t y
Government o f S t a t e —
Government of e o u n t y -
281,941,000
195,421,090
236,591,579
206,186,375
123,009,395
164,679,884
75,754,625
71,911,695
71,911,695
1,014
851
9,742,176
6,758,727
1 211 611
1,'771,'838
35.04
24.31
4,36
6.37
2/
SAN ANTONIO
Government of city
City corporationSchool district —
208,726,870
208,726,870
162,631,320
162,631,320
46,095,550
46,095,550
857
857
7,018,633
5,128,102
3,040,833
2,087,269
28.82
21.06
12.49
8.57
2/14.57
10.00
TEXAS
2/23.97
6.20
7.49
Government of S t a t e Government of county—
29,283,135
29,283,135
537
662
810,096
1,080,435
3.33
4.44
FORT WORTH
Government of c i t y — •
City corporationSchool d i s t r i c t Government of S t a t e —
Government of county—
35,316,953
35,316,953
26,592,545
26,592,545
960
960
734
868
6,719,323
4,627,853
2,841,664
1,786,189
769,635
1,321,835
39.71
27.35
16.79
10.56
4.55
7.81
EL PASO
Government of city
Government of S t a t e —
Government of county-
16,106,650
17,874,040
17,874,040
772
621
723
2,856,234
1,836,942
407,241
612,051
27.00
17.36
3.85
5.78
34,862,121
34,862,121
34,862,121
34,862,121
34,862,121
908
908
908
908
908
5,369,136
3,763,658
1,963,648
1,800,010
737,022
746,186
122,270
37.23
26.10
13.62
12.48
5.11
5.17
.85
RICHMOND
Government of c i t y —
Government of State-
29,853,551
118,241,215
1,438
639
6,424,492
•5,685,244
739,248
34.75
30.75
4.00
NORFOLK
Government of c i t y —
Government of State-
18,606,602
30,761,577
1,163
237
3,931,902
3,750,978
180,924
30.31
28.92
1.39
SEATTLE
Government of city
City corporationCounty
School d i s t r i c t —
Port district
Government of State —
57,677,036
57,677,036
57,677,036
57,677,036
57,677,036
669
669
669
669
669
13,157,409
12,259,297
5,125,491
3,251,837
3,756,744
125,225
898,112
35.17
32.77
13.70
8.69
10.04
15,694,715
15,694,715
15,694,715
15,694,715
608
608
608
608
3,225,745
2,026,826
1,276,721
750,105
241,628
957,291
27.67
17.38
10.95
6.43
2.07
8.21
UTAH
SALT LAKE CITY
Government of city
City corporation
School district
Government of State
Government of county
Government of Metropolitan water districtVIRGINIA 1/
SPOKANE
Government of c i t y
City corporationSchool d i s t r i c t Government of State —
Government of countySee footnotes on page 256.
.33
2.40
TABLE 2 7 . — A S S E S S E D VALUATION AND TAX L E V I E S ,
TOTAL AND P E R CAPITA:
1937—Continued
ASSESSED VALUATION OF PROPERTY
CITY AND DIVISION OF GOVERNMENT
Per
capita
Per
capita
WASHINGTON—Continued
TACOMA.
Government of city
City corporationSchool d i s t r i c t Park district
Government of State —
Government of county-'
Government of port
$49,580,762
49,520,762
49,520,762
49,520,762
49,520,762
49,520,762
$37,945,386
37,945,386
37,945,386
37,945,386
37,945,386
37,945,386
$11,575,376
11,575,376
11,575,376
11,575,376
11,575,376
11,575,376
MILWAUKEE i 2 /
Government of city
City corporation—
County
Sewerage districtGovernment of S t a t e —
940,266,341
938,372,052
847,236,685
938,372,052
777,485,790
777,485,790
777,485,790
777,485,790
69,750,895
69,750,895
69,750,895
69,750,895
109,589,665
109,589,665
109,589,665
109,589,665
(12/)
(12/)
$458
458
458
458
458
458
$93,029,656
91,135,367
91,135,367
1,569
1,566
1,414
1,566
$2,863,574
1,907,823
1,165,450
643,331
99,042
197,588
659,121
99,042
$26.47
17.63
10.77
5.95
.92
1.83
6.09
.92
30,346,847
29,947,002
20,936,329
6,606,521
2,404,152
399,845
50.65
49.99
34.95
11.03
4.01
.67
3,398,805
3,398,805
(12/)
16.75
16.75
HAWAII i i /
HONOLULU l i /
Government o f c i t y
Government of T e r r i t o r y -
1/
2/
3/
4/
5/
6/
7/
8/
9/
10/
11/
18/
General property not taxed for State purposes.
Average rate.
Valuation of personal property included with that of real property.
Per capita not computed; population not known.
Includes public utilities and tangible personal property only.
Includes public utilities.
Tangible personal property only.
Only money at interest and negotiable instruments taxed for State purposes.
Real and personal tangible property taxed only for city purposes and personal intangible property taxed only for State purposes.
Street railways and connected utilities taxed for general. State purposes. Real and personal property taxed for forestry only.
Not included in group or grand totals.
Not reported.
540
540
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—ASSESSED VALUATION AND TAX LEVIES
257
TABLE 28
In 55 cities, constituting a majority of the cities included in this report,
an average tax rate is reported for one or more divisions of government—"division" meaning the city corporation, school district, State, county, or other
independent civil division. This procedure is followed, because the specific
divisions for which an average is reported have two or more tax rates. The taxlevying units having plural rates are indicated "by footnote 2 in table 27. The
assessed values and tax levies for these governmental divisions are reported in
detail in table 28.
CITIES IN WHICH DIVISIONS OF GOVERNMENT HAVE TWO OR MORE TAX RATES.-The 55 cities
referred to above are located in 22 States and the District of Columbia, each
city having one or more divisions of government which in 1937 had more than a
single rate of taxation on property within the city. The city corporation was
the predominant division having such multiple levies, but in some cases it was
the school district, State, county, or other minor civil divisions, or several
of these divisions.
REASONS FOR MULTIPLE TAX RATES. —There is nothing unsound in the fact that a
municipality or other unit has more than one tax rate on property within its
borders, although the existence of this condition adds to the problem of fiscal
administration, accounting, and public reporting. The complexity in reporting
is evidenced in presenting an over-all view of the assessed valuations and tax
rates of cities. Of the 55 cities, Los Angeles affords the most Interesting
example of multiple rates of taxation, as to numerous governmental units fixing
such rates, geographical areas within the city taxed at a rate varying from
that paid by general property as a whole, and variety in types of property taxed
at these rates.
There are many reasons that lead a tax-levying authority to fix varying tax
rates upon property within its borders. The predominant one is the adoption of
classification of property for tax purposes. It has been recognized by many
taxing agencies—but by no means universally—that, because of the great expansion of wealth In Intangible personal property of various types,the long-established provision that all property shall be assessed and be taxed at a uniform
rate could not be enforced. Experience has shown that such a tax in many cases
would be confiscatory and would lead to nondeclaratlon or other evasion. Consequently, the laws relating to taxation of such intangibles have been revised
to provide that when such property is subject to a property tax, the rate
should be relatively low. Similarly, it has been found desirable by some units
of government to favor tangible personal property with a lower rate than real
property.
Among the examples of classification of property for taxation in 1937, with
different rates for each type of property, were the assessed valuations and respective tax rates against them of the cities in California, Iowa, Kansas, and
Minnesota. In Washington, D. C , intangible personalty, comprising 30 percent
of the total assessed valuation, was taxed at a rate of $5 per $1000, while
property in general was taxed at three times that rate. Wilmington levied a
relatively high rate of tax on the valuation of corporations. Omaha reported
two classes of intangibles, with a different rate on each, and a third rate on
building and loan valuations. The Commonwealth of Virginia established four
classes of intangible property in Its cities.
A variation of the principle of classification of property Is that of the
'•graded tax law," applied in Pittsburgh and Scranton. In these cities, although
the assessment of improvements to land is at the same legal basis as on land,
the rate of tax for city purposes Is one-half that on land.
Another condition leading to varying tax rates within a city Is that of
geographical areas. When two or more underlying units are found within a city,
it is not unusual that each such unit has Its own tax rate. Examples of this
condition are the cities in Connecticut, Indiana, and Washington. Further, conditions governing the annexation of outlying territory have sometimes involved
the establishment of varying tax rates for the old and new areas, as exemplified
in Philadelphia and Baltimore.
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
258
The extent of public services undertaken in certain areas within a city or
other unit of government is occasionally a "basis for variation in tax rates.
Numerous examples are found in the cities shown in table 28, such as the local
improvement districts for various functions in Los Angeles and other cities in
California, Jacksonville's fire district, the garbage and light districts in
Des Moines, the park district in Kansas City (Mo.)» and the poor districts in
Philadelphia. A variation from this practice is the range in tax rates for the
five boroughs of New York.
Exemption of property from taxation, either wholly or partially, also gives
rise to variation in rates of levy. Among the purposes for which exemption may
be granted are those of homesteads, industries, and property of pensioners. In
order to make the exemption effective, the property is relieved in some measure
from the tax burden borne by property generally. In Florida cities, for example, homestead property is exempt from taxation except for specified debt
service. Louisville presents an interesting example of Industrial exemption in
its provision that manufacturing plants and unmanufactured agricultural products
are taxed at lower rates than that on general property. St. Louis has special
rates on merchants' and manufacturers' stocks, as well as on steamboats. In
Rochester and Utica, the property of pensioners Is subject to school and highway taxes only.
The table, being limited to a report of property retained upon the assessment rolls at some rate of tax, does not reflect the scope and extent of property within the 94 cities that is wholly exempt from taxes.
TABLE 2 8 . — A S S E S S E D VALUATION AND TAX LEVIES I N C I T I E S HAVING D I V I S I O N S OF (XJVEHNMENT
WITH TWO OR MORE TAX RATES: 1 9 3 7
C M , AND PARTS OF CITY OR CLASSES OF PROPERTY
LONG BEACH, CALIF.:
City corporation
Original c i t y
A n n e x a t i o n s N o s . 1 , 2 , 3 , and 4
A n n e x a t i o n s N o s . 5 , 7 , and 8
A n n e x a t i o n No. 9
A n n e x a t i o n s N o s . 1 0 , 1 1 , and 12
A n n e x a t i o n No. 1 3
A n n e x a t i o n s N o s . 1 4 t o 20 i n c l u s i v e - '
S t o c k s , bonds, e t c .
Solvent credits
Assessed
valuation
Rate p e r
#1,000 of
assessed
valuation
#208,123,930
66,566,300
42,745,335
44,255,715
1,781,955
35,854,195
2,060,955
1,405,125
2,224,845
11,229,505
#2,848,120
998,494
636,905
654,985
25,'182
487,617
24,938
14,473
1,483
3,743
School d i s t r i c t s
Property in generalS t o c k s , bonds, e t c . Solvent credits
158,630,655
145,176,305
2,313,529
2,224,845
11,229,505
1,483
3,743
County
Property in generalS t o c k s , bonds, e t c . Solvent credits
158,630,655
145,176,305
2,224,845
11,229,505
LOS ANGELES, CALIF.:
City corporation
Taxation districts Nos. 1, 2, and 6Taxation districts Nos. 3, 4, and 5 Taxation district No. 7
Taxation district No. 8
Taxation district No. 9
Taxation district No. 10
Taxation district No. 11
Unsecured personalStocks, bonds, etc.
Solvent credits
Municipal improvement districts:
No. 2
No.
No. 3
No.
No.
No.
1/ Average rate.
1/
#13.68
15.00
14.90
14.80
14.30
13.60
12.10
10.30
.67
.33
1/
14.60
15.90
.67
.33
2,139,318
2,134,092
1,483
3,743
1/
13.49
14.70
.67
.33
1,702,717,478
626,090,160
581,789,540
7,591,240
13,218,765
3,516,190
7,457,315
1,580,195
63,326,598
107,704,005
290,443,470
21,921,439
10,017,443
9,250,453
126,774
231,328
55,556
114,097
26,547
1,028,656
71,803
96,814
1/
4,203,225
6,672,220
1,314,510
46,157,775
19,277,485
4,286,440
19,1535
4,671
9,070
41,542
5,783
6,430
2,308,303
12.87
16.00
15.90
16.70
17.50
15.80
15.30
16.80
1/ 16.24
.67
.33
4.60
.70
6.90
.90
.30
1.50
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—ASSESSED VALUATION AND TAX LEVIES
TABLE 2 8 . — A S S E S S E D VALUATION AND TAX LEVIES I N C I T I E S HAVING D I V I S I O N S
WITH TWO OR MORE TAX RATES: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
LOS ANGELES, CALIF.—Continued
City corporation—Continued
M u n i c i p a l improvement d i s t r i c t s r — C o n t i n u e d
No. 19
No. 20
No. 22
No. 23
No. 27
No. 3 5
No. 3 6
No. 37
No. 4 2
No. 45
No. 47
No. 52
No. 53
No. 5 4
No. 57
No. 60
No. 61
No. 62
No. 63
No. 64
No. 67
No. 68
No. 69
No. 7 0
No. 7 3
No. 7 5
County waterworks d i s t r i c t No. 3
Unsecured p e r s o n a l
A c q u i s i t i o n and improvement d i s t r i c t s N o s . 7 ,
3 8 , and T r y i n g s No. 1
OF GOVERNMENT
Assessed
valuation
CITY, AND PARTS OP CITY OB CLASSES OF PROPERTY
|4,450,960
1,561,705
23,280,180
4,589,370
10,072,145
500,355
10,304,585
779,785
1,204,960
8,413,080
23,116,670
717,385
284,005
124,540
948,010
6,178,935
1,412,370
635,795
181,835
363,055
430,590
1,515,195
936,745
4,387,500
1,089,325
771,570
38,202,285
14,603,667
$16,914
3,592
51,216
16,063
49,353
18,613
91,711
54,507
5,061
21,874
18,493
15,424
8,123
8,220
7,963
15,447
41,947
13,797
42,258
15,067
12,487
9,849
4,028
4,347
13,617
22,067
141,348
15,866
29,
685,645
75,885
CountyProperty in general
Stocks, bonds, etc.Solvent credits
Drainage improvement districts
Fire protection districts
-«
Free library district
Garbage disposal districts
Lighting districts
Lighting maintenance districts
Park district
Road improvement districts
Sewer maintenance districts
County waterworks districts
Acquisition and improvement districts-
1,702,717,478
1,304,570,003
107,704,005
290,443,470
39,603,965
77,254,624
261,293,770
28,001,650
59,898,429
2,512,787
1,430,893
1,922,437
40,111,335
2,935,733
12,388,466
21,011,802
19,177,179
71,803
96,814
460,198
285,842
130,647
44,523
150,345
23,897
3,005
38,756
18,852
21,959
487,982
School districts
Property in generalStocks, bonds, etc.—
Solvent credits
1,702,717,478
1,304,570,003
107,704,005
290,443,470
18,041,226
17,872,609
71,803
96,814
Metropolitan water district
Real and secured personal-'
Unsecured personal
1,304,570,003
1,241,243,405
63,326,598
4,719,624
4,592,971
126,653
257,262,703
182,122,560
65,688,375
3,790,779
1,146,875
4,514,114
4,938,977
3,606,027
1,234,942
75,057
21,446
1,505
School district
Property in general—
Do
Unsecured personal
Do
Oakland High:
Property in general
Unsecured personal
Solvent credits
257,262,703
188,558,935
59,252,000
3,817,854
1,119,800
3,779,293
1,140,781
346,624
20,616
5,823
247,810,935
4,937,654
4,514,114
Utility district
Property in general
Unsecured personal
252,748,589
247,810,935
4,937,654
2,222,864
41,081
1,504
658,627
644,308
14,319
OAKLAND, CALIF.:
City corporation
Original city
Annexations
Unsecured personalDo
Solvent credits
1 / Average r a t e .
259
260
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
TABLE
28.
-ASSESSED VALUATION AND TAX LEVIES I N C I T I E S HAVING D I V I S I O N S OF GOVERNMENT
WITH TWO OR MORE TAX RATES:
CITT, AND PARTS OF CITY OR CLASSES OF PROPERTY
1937—Continued
Assessed
valuation
OAKLAND, CALIF.—Continued
County
Property in general7nsecured personal—
Solvent credits
$257,262,703
247,810,935
4,937,654
4,514,114
#3,029,550
2,973,731
54,314
1,505
SAN DIEGO, CALIF.:
City corporation
Property in generalStocks, bonds, e t c Solvent credits
149,065,915
133,723,190
1,107,130
14,235,595
2,813,670
2,808,187
School d i s t r i c t - — —
Property in generalStocks, bonds, e t c Solvent credits
149,065,915
133,723,190
1,107,130
14,235,595
1,779,990
1,774,607
738
4,745
County
Property in general
Stocks, bonds, etc.
Solvent credits
149,065,915
133,723,190
1,107,130
14,235,595
2,162,438
2,156,955
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF.:
City corporation
Property in general
Unsecured personal
Stocks, bonds, etc.
Solvent credits
Reassessments
980,422,121
754,658,835
61,429,515
2,803,423
161,530,348
157,909
30,989,745
28,556,390
2,261,335
5,507
161,530
BRIDGEPORT, CONN.:
City corporation
First districtSecond district—
232,613,300
232,613,300
227,554,215
6,710,873
4,617,374
2,093,499
HARTFORD, CONN.:
City corporation
Urban property
Suburban property—
352,324,793
351,978,463
346,330
8,851,648
8,846,498
5,150
NEW HAVEN, CONN.:
City corporation
General city
Town
City and town
308,411,018
298,918,323
9,492,695
308,411,018
8,015,813
4,603,917
50 ,,216
3,361,680
13,275,086
12,250,283
1,024,803
25,225
22,663
2,562
Improvement districts
Fairmont Association—
Fairhaven East AssociationWILMINGTON, DEL.:
City corporation
Property in general:
Taxed at full rateTazad at half-rateCorporations
WASHINGTON, D. C.:
City corporation
Property in general—
Personal intangibleJACKSONVILLE, FLA.:
City corporation
Property in general:
Inside fire l i m i t s —
Outside fire limitsSchool districtProperty in general:
Subject to all taxes
Subject only to debt service-
Property in general
Intangible property—
Class A
Class B
Class C
1/ Average rate.
738
4,745
738
4,745
4,483
152,145,650
146,530,700
3,283,475
2,331,475
2,344,491
26,268
93,259
1,780,268,924
1,255,291,054
524,977,870
21,453,384:
18,828,495
2,624,889
71,950,520
1,214,416
70,493,353
1,457,167
1,198,387
16,029
56,920,149
1,032,035
46,400,000
10,520,149
969,018
£5,017
85,339,877
46,400,000
163,623
115,000
17,320,730
8,325,324
13,293,823
34,643
16,651
1,329
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—ASSESSED VALUATION AND TAX LEVIES
261
TABLE 28.—ASSESSED VALUATION AND TAX LEVIES IN CITIES HAVING DIVISIONS OF GOVERNMENT
WITH TWO OR MORE TAX RATES: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
CITY", AND PASTS OF CITY OR CLASSES OF PROPERTY
MIAMI, FLA.:
City corporation
Property in general:
Original city
Coconut Grove
Buena Vista
Silver Bluff
Annexed territory
Homesteads for debt service only:
Original city
Coconut Grove
Buena Vista
Silver Bluff
AnnezBd territory-
Assessed
valuation
$138,609,410
#3,394,906
83,474,860
4,185,362
1,981,803
5,254,609
22,107,456
2,354,826
108,777
49,585
127,844
501,397
9,659,650
802,950
580,850
1,932,050
8,629,820
139,195
9,788
6,517
20,344
76,633
School district
Property in general
Homesteads for de"bt service only
Special districts for debt service only-
38,244,160
32,267,780
5,976,380
38,244,160
983,042
653,423
17,929
311,690
State
Property i n general—
Intangible p r o p e r t y -
77,495,130
32,267,780
45,227,350
156,513
80,669
75,844
County
Property in general
Homesteads for debt service only-
38,244,160
32,267,780
5,976,380
786,379
774,426
11,953
TAMPA, FLA.:
City corporation
Property in general:
Territory A
Territory B
Territory C
Territory D
Homesteads for debt service only:
Territory ATerritory B
Territory C
Territory D
88,707,487
2,426,527
45,104,530
18,370,070
10,192,762
3,647,140
1,353,136
532,732
270,108
136,710
3,129,110
4,044,000
3,806,565
413,310
40,678
48,528
36,162
8,473
School district
Property in general
Homesteads for debt service only-
33,692,747
28,792,477
4,900,270
1,116,575
1,037,681
78,894
State
Property in general
Intangible property—
Class A
Class B
Class C
36,863,167
28,792,477
82,652
71,981
3,811,164
1,380,135
2,879,391
7,623
2,760
33,692,747
28,792,477
4,900,270
961,438
915,601
45,837
370,791,329
349,157,529
21,633,800
258,496,900
250,246,900
8,250,000
6,627,960
5,935,678
692,282
2,985,089
2,877,839
107,250
EVANSVILLE, D O .
Township
Pigeon—
Perry
Knight—
115,510,780
102,797,440
2,565,310
10,148,030
439,794
370,071
18,983
50,740
INDIANAPOLIS, IND.:
Township
Center
Perry
Warren
WashingtonWayne
--«
505,861,680
420,477,510
816,420
14,064,550
55,006,340
15,496,860
859,914
756,859
3,021
9,845
22,003
68,186
Property in general
Homesteads for debt service onlyATLANTA, GA.:
City corporation
Property i n general
Repossessed property
County
Fulton
De Kalb
1 / Average rate.
——
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
262
TABLE 28.—ASSESSED VALUATION AND TAX LEVIES IN CITIES HAVING DIVISIONS OF GOVERNMENT
WITH TWO OR MORE TAX RATES: 1937—Continued
c m , AND PARTS OF crrr OH CLASSES OF pRoPERTr
Assessed
valuation
SOOTH BEND, I N D .
Township
PortageGerman--
$128,171,820
128,069,380
102,440
$198,641
198,508
133
163,629,450
2,818,925
130 818,501
3 801,160
1 ,167,496
27 574,038
268,255
133 949,681
42 130,826
2,541,471
71,944
3,286
50,598
204
134,485
16,937
School district
Property in general
Money and credits
Building and loan
163,629,450
135,787,157
27,574,038
268,255
2,925,760
2,871,763
53,769
228
State
163,361,195
135,787,157
27,574,038
503,775
467,515
36,260
163,629,450
135,787,157
27,574,038
268,255
1,354,278
1,329,356
24,817
105
KANSAS CITY, SANS.:
City corporation
Real and personal tangiblePersonal intangible
93,707,494
88,454,899
5,252,595
1,600,058
1,591,304
8,754
School district
Real and personal tangiblePersonal intangible
93,707,494
88,454,899
5,252,595
1,441,723
1,432,969
8,754
Drainage district
Kaw Valley
Fairfax
33,899,391
33,305,530
593,861
184,817
181,843
2,969
State
Real and personal tangible-'
Personal intangible
93,707,494
88,454,899
5,252,595
222,831
218,454
4,377
Real and personal tangiblePersonal intangible
93,707,494
88,454,899
5,252,595
1,148,983
1,144,606
4,377
WICHITA, KANS.:
City corporation
Real and personal tangiblePersonal intangible
135,159,517
114,419,724
20,739,793
1,277,162
1,242,596
34,566
School district
Real and personal tangiblePersonal intangible
135,159,517
114,419,724
20,739,793
1,762,3C4
1,727,726
34,566
Real and personal tangiblePersonal intangible
135,159,517
114,419,724
20,739,793
248,411
831,128
17,283
County
Real and personal tangiblePersonal intangible
135,159,517
114,419,724
20,739,793
814,788
797,505
17,283
418,903,321
8,968,785
393,286,017
1,817,862
7,405,947
16,393,495
8,848,933
10,470
11,032
98,350
429,742,835
411,371,144
5,429,755
12,941,936
1,761,788
1,727,759
8,145
25,884
I MOINES, IOWA.:
City corporation
— — — - — — —
Property in general:
With garbage collection
Without garbage collection—'
Corporate landMoney and credits
Building and l o a n — —
Light district
Metropolitan light district-
Property in generalMoney and credits
CountyProperty in general
Money and credits
Building and loan
LOUISVILLE, KT.:
City corporation
-—
Property in general:
Subject to all taxas
Manufacturing plants
Unmanufactured agricultural productsBank stock
County
Property in generalUnmanufactured agricultural productsBank shares
1/ Average r a t e .
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—ASSESSED VALUATION AND TAX LEVIES
263
TABLE 28.—ASSESSED VALUATION AND TAX LEVIES IN CITIES HAVING DIVISIONS OF GOVERNMENT
WITH TWO OR MORE TAX RATES: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
CITY, AND PARTS OF CITY OR CLASSES OF PROPERTY
LOUISVILLE, KY.—Continued
State
Assessed
valuation
$651,453,501
306,633,958
289,970,517
54,849,026
$1,658,019
153,317
1,449,853
54,849
1,621,821,239
31,852,145
793,390,747
73,224,580
22,978,475
311,022,267
421,205,170
20,548,820
1,782,726
523,725
7,733,258
1,263,616
State
Property in generalSecurities
1,470,910,889
1,116,491,099
354,419,790
3,021,823
2,484,193
537,630
BOSTON, MASS.:
City corporation
Property in generalMotor vehicle
1,625,194,410
1,590,544,700
34,649,710
59,346,586
58,446,010
900,576
CAMBRIDGE:, MASS.:
City corporation
Property in generalMotor vehicle
177,929,200
172,710,300
5,218,900
6,374,302
6,219,317
154,985
FALL RIVER, MASS.:
City corporation
Property in generalMotor vehicle
96,876,290
92,263,750
4,612,540
3,438,096
3,304,203
133,893
LOWELL, MASS.:
City corporation
Property in generalMotor vehicle
102,645,290
98,278,400
4,366,890
3,962,528
3,837,284
125,244
LYNN, MASS.:
City corporation
Property in general—
Motor vehicle
137,391,725
131,966,570
5,425,155
4,046,073
3,893,490
152,583
NEW BEDFORD, MASS.:
City corporation
Property in general—
Motor vehicle
109,293,640
104,634,100
4,659,540
3,997,840
3,864,629
133,211
SOMERVILLE, MASS.:
City corporation
Property in generalMotor vehicle
118,804,830
113,453,300
5,351,530
4,765,168
4,616,620
148,548
284,593,030
272,492,880
12,100,150
8,205,662
7,869,600
336,062
City corporation
—
Property in generalMotor v e h i c l e — — —
285,058,310
272,053,950
13,004,360
9,389,122
9,029,452
359,670
DULUTH, MINN.:
City corporation
Property in generalMoney and credits
125,769,650
53,587,440
72,182,210
2,186,207
2,114,025
72,182
School district
Property in generalMoney and credits
125,769,650
53,587,440
72,182,210
2,005,617
1,933,435
72,182
State
Property in generalMoney and credits
125,769,650
53,587,440
72,182,210
690,929
654,838
36,091
County
Property in generalMoney and c r e d i t s
125,769,650
53,587,440
72,182,210
1,051,573
1,015,482
36,091
Real property
Tersonal propertyBank deposits
BALTIMORE, MD.:
City corporation
Property in general:
Full r a t e
Suburban rate
Rural rate
Annexation
Securities
SPRINGFIELD, MASS.:
City corporation
Property in g e n e r a l Motor vehicle
WORCESTER, MASS.:
1/ Average r a t e .
264
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
TABLE 2 8 . — A S S E S S E D VALUATION AND TAX L E V I E S I N C I T I E S HAVING D I V I S I O N S OF GOVERNMENT
WITH TWO OR MORE TAX RATES:
CITY, AND PARTS OF CITY OR CLASSES OF PROPERTY
1937—Continued
Assessed
valuation
MINNEAPOLIS, MINN.:
City corporation
Property in g e n e r a l Money and c r e d i t s
$550,214,144
243,658,821
306,555,323
$17,737,453
17,124,342
613,111
County
Property in generalMoney and credits
550,214,144
243,658,821
306,555,323
2,711,695
2,558,417
153,278
State
Property in g e n e r a l Money and c r e d i t s
550,214,144
243,658,821
306,555,323
3,130,789
2,977,511
153,278
PAUL, MINN.:
City corporation
Property in generalMoney and credits
273,643,954
134,652,994
138,990,960
7,907,420
7,629,438
277,982
State
Property in generalMoney and credits
273,643,954
134,652,994
138,990,960
1,714,955
1,645,460
69,495
County
Property in g e n e r a l Money and c r e d i t s
273,643,954
134,652,994
138,990,960
3,451,978
3,382,483
69,495
KANSAS CITY, MO.:
City corporation
Property in general:
Subject to all taras
Subject to special park levy-
527,457,605
527,457,605
137,070,780
7,911,864
342,677
524,254,115
486,930,450
2,135,770
35,187,895
6,542,936
6,330,0136
2,990
209,8150
1,125,977,244
1,035,772,314
90,093,900
111,030
18,728,655
18,124,915
603,629
111
OMAHA, NEBR.:
City corporation
Property in general
Personal intangible (class A ) Personal intangible (class B ) Building and loan
271,955,194
239,510,005
10,604,227
20,526,722
1,314,240
3,910,078
3,844,136
8,838
54,738
2,366
School district
Property in general
Personal intangible (class A ) Personal intangible (class B ) Building and loan
252,723,519
220,278,330
10,604,227
20,526,722
1,314,240
2,929,111
2,863,618
8,638
54,738
1,917
State
Property
Personal
Personal
Building
in general
intangible (class A ) intangible (class B ) and loan
252,723,519
220,278,330
10,604,227
20,526,722
1,314,240
419,740
387,690
4,418
27,369
263
County
Property
Personal
Personal
Building
in general
intangible (class A ) intangible (class B ) and loan
252,723,519
220,278,330
10,604,227
20,526,722
1,314,240
1,098,644
1,066,147
4,418
27,369
?10
16,599,695,194
8,252,020,105
1,923,709,614
3,939,292,859
2,186,323,584
298,349,032
458,995,547
227,272,611
52,576,917
109,122,934
61,874,487
8,148,598
School district
Property in general
Do
R a i l r o a d p r o p e r t y a s s e s s e d by S t a t e LOUIS, MO.:
City corporation—
Property in general
M e r c h a n t s ' and m a n u f a c t u r e r s '
Steamboats
r YORK, N. Y.:
City corporation
Manhattan Borough—realBronx Borough—real
Brooklyn Borough—real—
Queens Borough—real
Richmond Borough—real—
1 / Average r a t e .
stock-
PART II: GENERAL GOVERNMENT—ASSESSED VALUATION AND TAX LEVIES
265
TABLE 28.—ASSESSED VALUATION AND TAX LEVIES IN CITIES HAVING DIVISIONS OF GOVERNMENT
WITH TV/O OR MORE TAX RATES: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
CITY", AND PARTS OF CITY OR CLASSES OF PROPERTY
Assessed
valuation
ROCHESTER, N. Y.:
City corporation
Property in general
Real property of pensioners-
$625,203,142
623,068,540
2,134,602
$17,810,316
17,784,018
UTICA, N. Y.:
City corporation
Property in general
Real property of pensioners-
130,987,806
130,101,174
886,632
3,365,403
3,355,175
10,228
CANTON, OHIO:
Township
CantonPlain—
130,540,742
118,067,826
12,472,916
31,096
23,613
7,483
116,216,065
82,867,395
33,348,670
754,900
621,505
133,395
3,624,961,137
47,775,003
498, 066,169
1,998, 360,864
8,301,103
33,972,135
161,880
626,440
964,591
517,100
7 122,950
1, 383,450
987, 239,384
59,358
11,759
3,948,957
592,350,999
498,066,169
87,161,880
7,122,950
224,186
199,226
23,535
1,425
1,100,443,930
556,552,050
543,891,880
17,067,058
11,464,972
5,602,086
County
•
Property in general
Money at interest, e t c -
1,549,884,859
1,085,402,674
464,482,185
10,948,176
9,090,247
1,857,929
READING, PA.:
County
Property in general
Money at interest, e t c -
149,740,869
113,160,868
36,580,001
938,446
792,126
146,320
SCRANTON, PA.:
City corporationLand
Improvements-
107,192,963
47,736,653
59,456,310
1,721,268
1,060,708
660,560
183,157,433
107,192,963
75,964,470
893,419
589,561
303,858
637,112,120
490,781,120
146,331,000
12,609,461
12,024,137
585,324
281,941,000
6,758,727
270,533,550
11,407,450
6,655,125
103,602
236,591,579
235,011,859
1,579,720
1,771,838
1,762,589
9,249
ERIE, PA.:
County
Property in general
Money at interest, e t c PHILADELPHIA, PA.:
City corporation
Urban:
Outside poor districtInside poor districtSuburban:
Outside poor districtInside poor district—
Farm:
Outside poor districtInside poor districtMoney at interest, etc.
Poor districtUrban
Suburban—
Faim
PITTSBURGH, PA.:
City corporationLand
Buildings
County
Property in general
Money at interest, etc.
PROVIDENCE, R. I.:
City corporation
Property in generalPersonal intangible—
DALLAS, TEX.:
City corporation
Property in general:
Subject to all taxes
Subject to school levyCounty
Property in general
Rolling stock and intangible-
1/ Average r a t e .
254932 O—40
18
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
266
TABLE 28.—ASSESSED VALUATION AND TAX LEVIES IN CITIES HAVING DIVISIONS OF GOVERNMENT
WITH TWO OR MORE TAX RATES: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
C m , AND PARTS OF CITY OR CLASSES OF PROPERTY
SAN ANTONIO, TEX.:
City corporation
General city
Improvement districts:
Nos. 2 and 8 —
No. 4 - —
No. 7 —
No. 1 2 No. 14NORFOLK, VA.:
City corporation
Real estate and personal tangibleMachinery
State
Personal intangible:
Bonds, notes, e t c Capital
Bank stock
Money—
RICHMOND, VA.:
City corporation
Real estate and personal tangibleMachinery
State
Personal intangible:
Bonds, notes, etc.
Capital
Bank stock and moneyed capital
Money and stock of banks in liquidation—
SEATTLE, WASH.:
City corporation
Old limits, new limits, Ravenna, Southeast
Seattle, and South Seattle
Ballard, Columbia, Dunlap, Georgetown, South Park
West Seattle and Yesler
WASH.:
City corporation
General city
Parkwater
School district
Former No. 8 1 —
Former No. 122Former No. 1 4 3 TACOMA, WASH.:
City corporation
Districts Nos. 1 and 2
Districts Nos. 3, 4, and 5—
District No. 6
School district
Property in general
Subject to bond rate
Subject to no bond rate-
Assessed
valuation
$208,726,870
208,726,870
$3,040,833
3,026,540
13,058,870
5,984,170
4,261,890
1,059,020
1,826,140
3,917
7,181
1,705
212
1,278
150,816,972
149,520,512
1,296,460
3 ,750,978
3 ,738,013
12,965
30,761,577
180,924
12,929,762
8,416,544
4,290,136
5,125,135
64,649
63,124
42,901
10,250
265,912,574
255,610,534
10,302,040
5 ,685,244
5 ,623,432
61,812
118,241,215
739,248
27,194,727
62,740,694
9,513,395
18,792,399
135,974
470,555
95,134
37,585
250,449,590
5 ,125,491
211,946,557
4 ,349,582
38,503,033
775,509
70,941,977
70,863,814
78,163
1 ,276,721
1 ,275,549
1,172
70,941,977
69,026,544
1,823,208
92,225
750,105
724,779
24,431
895
49,520,762
45,989,076
1,719,297
1,812,389
1 ,165,450
1 ,091,321
37,446
36,683
49,520,762
49,107,774
210,400
202,588 |
643,331
638,401
2,904
2,026
MILWAUKEE, WIS.:
City corporation
Property in general
Public u t i l i t i e s
940,266,341
847,236,685
91,135,367
1,894,289
20 ,936,329
19 ,575,708
1 ,318,460
42 ,,161
Property in generalPublic utilities
938,372,052
847,236,685
91,135,367
6 ,606,521
6 ,200,841405,680
State
Property in generalPublic u t i l i t i e s
938,372,052
847,236,685
91,135,367
399,845
95,585
304,260
Do
County
1/ Average r a t e .
PART III. PUBLIC-SERVICE ENTERPRISES
267
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
268
29.—Income, by type of enterprise: 1937
30.—Payments, by type of enterprise: 1937
31.—Income of water-supply systems: 1937
32.—Payments of water-supply systems: 1937
33.—Income of electric-light and power systems: 1937
34.—Payments of electric-light and power systems: 1937
35.—Income of transit systems: 1937
36.—Payments of transit systems: 1937
37.—Income of gas-supply systems: 1937
38.—Payments of gas-supply systems: 1937
39.—Income of ports, harbors, docks, and wharves: 1937
40.—Payments of ports, harbors, docks, and wharves: 1937
41.—-Income of airports: 1937
42.—Payments of airports: 1937
43.—Income of "All other" enterprises: 1937
44.—Payments of "All other" enterprises: 1937
45.—Method of financing capital outlays: 1937
46.—Gross debt, by unit of government and by character, and net debt: 1937
47.—Bonded debt at close of year, by type of enterprise: 1937
48.—Bonded debt at close of year, by rate of interest: 1937
49.—Issue and retirement of debt: 1937
50.—Amount of specified assets at close of year: 1937
PART III. PUBLIC-SERVICE ENTERPRISES
For the first time in this series of reports, financial statistics of public-service enterprises are presented separately from those of general government. The Bureau's classification of such enterprises includes water systems,
electric light and power systems, street railways and other transit systems,
gas systems, ports, docks, harbors, wharves, ferries, airports, and associated
facilities.
During 1937, the cities included in this volume reported a total Income of
$403,623,152 from such enterprises, which was $55,793,201 less than the total
payments made by them. Only two of the 94 cities reported no such enterprises
within the Bureau's classification; these were Bridgeport and Gary.
REASONS FOR SEPARATE REPORTING. — T h e primary objective in reporting publicservice enterprises separately is to improve the comparability of the data on
the financial operations of general government. Formerly, the statistics of
revenues and payments and debt of public-service enterprises were Included
with those for the rest of the city. Because of the variations in number and
size of these enterprises in each city and the different and often complex relations which existed between these enterprises and general government, it was
impossible to avoid a distorted picture of general government. The effect was
partially to vitiate the intercity comparability of the statistics of general
government. Finally, separation of the financial data pertaining to the two
types of municipal services takes recognition of the fact that city government,
when assuming the ownership or operation of public-service enterprises, is engaging in a proprietary, as distinguished from a general governmental, function.
This In itself justifies separate reporting.
Looking to the future, the Bureau hopes that the separate reporting of public-service enterprises will be a step forward In promoting the comparability
of operation between the publicly-owned and the privately-owned utilities.
Also, since- one of the principal characteristics of a public-service enterprise
is its wholly or partially self-supporting nature, the segregation of accounts
and the separate reporting of the financial statistics should be constantly refined to the point where they may provide a reasonably useful measure of the
degree to which the publicly maintained enterprise is actually self-supporting.
Admittedly, the present study does not afford a reliable basis for such measurement. This objective will involve a searching inquiry into the accounting
methods and operating policies pursued by the individual cities with respect to
their public-service enterprises, whether the properties are adequately maintained, whether proper reserves for major replacements are provided, whether
services rendered to general government are charged on a cost basis, and whether
services performed for these enterprises by general government are charged at
cost.
CONTRIBUTIONS TO OR FROM GENERAL GOVERNMENT.—Since all transactions of the public-service enterprises have been eliminated from general government and are
classified separately, the fiscal relations between the two are reflected In
four items, namely: "Contributions from public-service enterprises," shown in
general government revenues, "Contributions to public-service enterprises,"
shown in general government costs, "Contributions from general funds," shown in
public-service enterprise income, and "Contributions to general revenues,"
shown in public-service enterprise costs. Accordingly, contributions from public-service enterprises to the general funds of the city are Included in the
expenditures of the enterprises and in the revenues of general government; conversely, contributions to public-service enterprises from the general revenues
of the city, or deficits incurred by the public-service enterprises and financed
by the city, are included in the income of the enterprises and in the expenditures for general government.
269
270
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
The Bureau, in reporting the flow of funds between public-service enterprises and general government under the heading "contributions," has made every
possible effort to eliminate from such figures all payments for services rendered. For example, payments for water, light, etc., and any other payment by
the city to the enterprise for services rendered, have been charged as an operation and maintenance cost of general government and are included as an operating revenue of the enterprise. Similarly, payments by the enterprise to the
city treasury for rent in the city hall, for collection of bills, and other
services rendered or space or supplies furnished, are included as an operating
expense of the enterprise and as a revenue of general government.
It is not
possible, of course, for the Bureau to determine whether such payments for services rendered are reported on a true-cost oasis.
During 1937 contributions in the amount of $61,385,253 were made to publicservice enterprises from the general funds of 77 cities, and 47 cities reported
contributions of $31,636,434 from public-service enterprises to general funds.
This would suggest that general government was required to support Its publicservice enterprises to the net amount of $29,746,819, but it does not necessarily measure the extent to which such enterprises were or were not self-supporting.
In view of the foregoing factors, there are obvious limits to which the
data are susceptible of analysis, and discretion should be exercised in drawing
inferences from the statistics. The Bureau is handicapped by the absence of
clarifying records maintained by the individual cities as to the financial
operations of their public-service enterprises, although, as previously mentioned, refinements will be introduced in the data whenever possible,,
ENTERPRISES INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF THIS REPORT.—Although the ownership and
operation of water systems has become virtually a corollary of the operation of
municipal government, in recent years 92 of the 94 cities have broadened their
activities to include a variety of proprietary functions normally associated
with commercial enterprise. The increasing number of municipal airports is
noteworthy. The following comprises the list of activities engaged in by 92 of
the 94 cities which the Bureau classifies as public-service enterprises:
Terminals
2
Water
85
Conduits
2
Electric light and power
13
Ice plant
>
1
Transit
13
Plantation
1
Gas
7
Grain elevator
1
Ports, harbors, docks, and wharves
42
Railway (for docks)
1
Airports
66
Ferries
3
241
Radio stations
4
It is evident that the range of public-service enterprises engaged in by the 92
cities is extensive and in some cases far from the field of normal municipal
activity. Some of the functions are associated with essential services for the
preservation of life or property, but in others it is apparent that the enterprises are of a commercial character, engaged in by the cities either because
the services were lacking and demanded by the public, or largely prompted by
the income factor. This report does not attempt to explore the factors which
prompted these cities to engage in operation of such public-service enterprises.
An analysis of each of the tables of financial statistics of public-service
enterprises appears below.
TABLE 29
Income of public-service enterprises of the 92 cities having such activities in 1937 is shown in table 29 by type of enterprise. Further details as to
the sources of such income are presented in table 29-A.
INCOME. — Public-service enterprises owned by the 92 cities reported total
Income of $403,623,152 in 1937. Of this amount, approximately 51 percent was
reported from water systems; 23 percent from transit systems; 10.5 percent from
PART III: PUBLIC-SERVICE ENTERPRISES
271
electric light and power systems; 6.5 percent from ports, harbors, docks, and
wharves; 4 percent from gas systems; and 2.7 percent from airports. The balance
of income was derived from such miscellaneous public-service enterprises as
ferries, terminals, radio stations, conduits, an ice plant, a plantation, a
grain elevator, and a railroad serving city docks.
SOURCES OF INCOME.—The source from which public-service enterprises derived
their income is shown in table 29-A. Per capita figures are presented for total
Income and also for operating income.
TABLE 29-A.—INCOME, BY TYPE OF ENTERPRISE AND BY SOURCE: 1937
Total income
$403,623,152
Per capitaWater-supply systems
Electric light and power systems
Transit systems
Gas-supply systems
Ports, harbors, docks, and wharvesAirports
All other
Operating
income
$305,622,825
18,658,190
$14,461,528
9 ,104 831
4 ,215 000
510 056
10.71
8.11
206,234,652
42,316,799
92,743,232
16,614,213
26,296,783
10,882,156
8,535,317
187,244,318
41,707,260
45,278,903
12,265,331
13,763,797
1,089,039
4,274,177
4,632,988
148,441
3,414,180
133,882
276,410
345
51,944
Contributions
from general
funds
Pension assessments
$12,907,934
$61,383,253
7,824,449
457,111
1,302,355
6,144,422
2,278
33,449,411
1,197,258
2,100,135
26,626
10,543,576
7,692,637
3,550,929
$362,347
Per capitaWater-supply systems
Electric light and power systems
Transit systems
Gas-supply systems
Ports, harbors, docks, and wharvesAirports
All other
30,987
1,709
188,693
Of the total Income reported by these enterprises, 75.7 percent was derived
from operating revenue, and 15.2 percent was reported as contributions from
general government funds. Most of the remainder of the income was from rents,
grants, and interest. It will be noted that the ratio of operating income to
total Income varies widely among the different types of public-service enterprises, being 98.5 percent of the electric light and power systems and of gas
systems, as against 10 percent in the case of airports. Water systems also derived a high total of Income from operating revenue—approximately 90 percent.
Many of the airports, for the time being at least, are contemplated more in the
nature of civic Improvements essential to progressive local government than as
proprietary enterprises of the character expected to be self-supporting at the
outset, which accounts for the comparatively substantial support given them
from general government funds. In contrast, no general government funds were
contributed to gas systems, which are proprietary enterprises undertaken essentially as a business proposition.
Income of the Individual types of enterprises is discussed in greater detail in connection with the presentation of tables concerning them.
TABLE 29.—INCOME, BY TYPE OF ENTERPRISE:
19S7
(Includes data for e n t e r p r i s e s owned but not operated by c i t y )
Water-supply
systems
Electric light
and power
systems
Group I
Group I I —
Group I I I -
Gas-supply
systems
Ports, harbors, docks,
and wharves
(Table 35)
(Table 31)
Grand total-
Transit systems
Airports
(Table 41)
$403,623,152
5206,234,652
$42,316,799
$92,743,232
$16,614,213
$26,296,783
$10,882,156
265,157,219
52,324,251
86,141,682
122,226,863
23,196,551
60,811,238
25,272,284
6,380,785
10,663,730
83,517,238
9,113,113
112,881
4,215,000
6,412,722
5,986,491
15,153,345
5,394,377
5,749,061
7,292,931
1,257,194
2,332,031
$4,215,000
$8,862,045
284,703
1,183,723
(Table 43)
7,479,558
569,509
486,250
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
10
11
12
13
14
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, Pa.
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.—
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
$107,530,778
15,224,914
18,238,217
27,528,377
35,897,463
9,157,994
4,733,294
$40,803,477
14,751,057
7,019,674
7,234,598
12,807,576
5,498,115
4,447,324
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
9,162,536
8,550,382
4,034,140
16,562,788
1,739,606
3,719,021
3,077,709
5,370,782
4,746,937
3,484,710
8,229,406
1,739,606
3,135,761
2,957,840
$51,878,486
$19,442,816
3,482,478
5,397,038
19,907,778
13,620
3,437,741
103,953
698,606
93,754
$5,986,770
$189,154
422,782
386,001
195,710
177,401
182,017
1,975,653
274,819
455,676
2,819,409
1,117,495
375,293
94,440
119,869
GROUP I I . — CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
15
16
17
18
Minneapolis, Minn.
New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o —
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, Mo* —
Seattle, Wash.
$1,667,127
4,112,463
6,261,887
4,222,449
2,493,774 |
13,782,924
21
22
23
24
25
26
Indianapolis, Ind.Rochester, N. Y . —
Jersey City, N. J.Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
6,282,359
2,192,675 1
2,178,742
3,158,288
1,979,527
3,992,036
$1,500,393
2,129,320
4,017,724
2,394,903
2,326,851
$93,890
$1,297,463
2,105,790
707,957
$6 380 785
14,696
836,356
27,977
959,156
4.564.159
$6,218,742
1,496,382
2,128,066
1,500,730
1,893,737
2,023,875
437,744
193,980
15,515,
50,676
1,409,100
36,591
1,949,319
$72,844
146,551
123,677
283,233
138,946
63,874
63,617
241,933
54,478
49,199
18,842
$539,129
30,380
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0
$766,431
$78,127
81,863
64,706
103,525
20,422
Columbus, Ohio
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, C a l i f . —
Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
$2,259,417
1,676,832
5,534,718
4,310,139
2,365,771
$1,414,859
1,584,969
3,545,054
4,206,614
2,345,349
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.-Birmingham, Ala.Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
1,939,262
1,167,088
25,546
1,621,686
1,599,620
1,889,082
1,102,686
367
1,319,570
1,351,932
Providence, R. I.San Antonio, Tex.Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
2,275,646
1,001,513
3,788,077
933,960
1,156,474
2,157,285
978,946
1,391,903
922,350
1,137,793
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.—
1,185,353
690,376
2,230,250
1,376,474
960,231
1,120,593
690,376
711,297
1,376,474
960,231
64,760
Fort Worth, Tex.Hartford, C o n n . —
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.—
San Diego, Calif.'
999,773
1,271,354
842,416
63,808
2,271,200
881,143
1,199,004
824,275
1,886,046
11,360
289,359
118,630
71,431
18,141
52,448
95,795
Long Beach, Calif.Nashville, Term.
Springfield, Mass.Tulsa, Okie.
Bridgeport, C o n n . —
3,646,694
791,894
1,058,939
1,102,987
1,263,816
745,186
1,058,939
1,007,317
611,134
27,791
74,249
18,917
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
Peterson, N. J.
897,351
2,622
933,278
1,030,556
1,245,336
777,986
1,012,789
1,245,336
Jacksonville, Fla.Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.Kensas City, Kans.-
4,667,567
1,683,059
1,463,043
864,390
43,757
3,338,296
1/ Not separately reported.
Included with Ports, harbors, docks, and wharves.
515,965
974,989
993,134
824,043
976,654
$10,000
1,703,691
221,267
16,677
64,402
25,179
302,116
64,723
22,567
82,059
11,610
18,681
$2,206,729
1,697,495
34,373
2,622
155,292
17,767
515,679
658,798
469,909
40,347
4,500
63,370
49,272
TABLE 29.—INCOME, BY TYPE OF ENTERPRISE: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
(Includes data for enterprises ovmed but not operated by city)
Water-supply
(Table 31)
Electric light
and power
systems
(Table 33)
Transit systems
Gas-supply
systems
Ports, harbors, docks,
and wharves
Airports
(Table 35)
(Table 37)
(Table 39)
(Table 41)
(Table 43)
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
68
69
70
71
72
$1,840,377
669,452
841,699
821,285
78,434
$571,067
667,731
803,638
816,314
73
74
75
76
77
848,938
378,977
507,961
405,300
616,921
835,125
378,977
507,961
367,926
611,271
78
79
80
81
82
784,030
45,232
422,095
3,813,052
1,374,907
784,030
421,889
1,016,770
628,340
430,816
860,784
592,840
430,816
605,470
521,224
462,554
519,271
600,478
465,241
462,554
514,712
573,771
465,241
48,036
1,319,380 1
650,079
426,790 J
492,192
650,075
426,790
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
Wilmington, Del.
ansv
e,
.
91
93
94
a er ury,
$1,292,406
2/ Not included in group or grand totals.
$67,744
$1,201,566
$2,232
4,971
8,262
$1,721
27,567
78,434
13,813
37,374
5,650
45,232
206
2,680,644
$98,806
16,832
600,873
255,314
38,547
33,069
4,559
26,707
14,075
$1,292,406
91,599
.$791,845
33,961
35,343
54,095
PART I I I : PUBLIC-SERVICE ENTERPRISES
275
TABLE 30
The payments made "by these enterprises during 1937 are presented in table
30 by type of enterprise and in table 30-A by character of payment. It should
be stated that, as in the case of reporting cost payments of general government,
the Bureau includes as a payment the cost of outlays at the time they are made
and not the payments made to retire debt incurred in financing the outlay.
Otherwise, a duplication of cost would result.1
PAYMENTS.—During 1937 the publie-service enterprises of the cities considered in this study reported total payments of $459,416,353.
Of this amount,
43.6 percent was for water systems; 22.3 percent for transit systems; 20.9 percent for electric light and power systems; 6.1 percent for ports, harbors, docks,
and wharves; 3.4 percent for gas systems; and approximately 2.1 percent for airports. The types of "All other" public-service enterprises have been discussed
in connection with table 29, and further details regarding them are contained
in tables 33 and 34.
CHARACTER OF PAYMENTS. — The character of payments by public-service enterprises is shown in table 30-A.
TABLE 30-A.—PAYMENTS, BY TYPE OF ENTERPRISE AND BY CHARACTER: 1937
Operating
Total
©459,416,353 ^151,220,895
Per capita
Water-supply systems
Electric light and
power systems
Transit systems
Gas-supply systems—
Ports, harbors, docks,|
and wharves
Airports
All other
Administrative
expenses
of leased
enterprises
Contributions to
general
funds
Pensions
$109,265 »113,481,216 B162,090,969 $31,636,434 $877,574
4.01
49,706,472
55,911,212
96,303,993
102,277,075
15,555,940
19,675,095
37,127,535
9,165,941
6,860,373
41,259,502
795,733
66,519,466
22,326,712
786,555
3,135,304
1,018,736
4,807,711
113,755
436,277
27,341,649
9,475,280
7,600,856
5,841,452
2,227,213
4,611,467
12,673,407
999,184
1,186,545
8,967,312
6,234,855
1,344,857
345,792
14,028
452,311
12,734
200,361,560
309,132
5,676
Of the total payments reported for public-service enterprises, $151,220,895, or
32.9 percent, constituted expenses for operation and maintenance of the enterprises. It may be interesting to compare these figures with the $305,622,825,
or 75.7 percent, of total income derived from operating revenue. Payments of
$162,090,969 for outlays were greater than the operating expenses of these
enterprises and represented approximately one-third of all payments. Payments
for interest, $113,481,216, accounted for 24.7 percent of the total, and contributions to the general funds of the cities amounted to $31,636,434, or 6.9
percent of total payments, but were almost 8 percent of their total income.
Per capita payments of public-service enterprises for operating expenses
are included in the statistics presented in table 30-A, while per capita Income
is presented in table 29-A. It is recognized that such statistics are of limited value in connection with public-service enterprises but are included for
the use of those who might be interested in such comparisons. The varying number of public-service enterprises among the 92 cities, and the differing magnitude of the scope of their service and of their financial transactions, render
intercity comparisons somewhat nebulous. Furthermore, the per capita figures
for the aggregate of public-service enterprises are not comparable with previous
years, since the Bureau's classification of public-service enterprises for 1937
excludes certain types of activities previously Included, while new types of
activities have been added. If accurate data were available, it would be enlightening to present'statistics of a comparative nature based on the number of
consumers or connections served, especially so far as water, electric, and gas
services are concerned, but this report is restricted to financial data.2
Cost payments of the individual types of enterprise are discussed further
in connection with the presentation of tables concerning them.
1/ For an explanation, see the discussion in connection with table 20, supra.
2/ The Bureau in 1915 compiled certain non-financial data on municipally-owned water supply systems.
See General Statistics of Cities: 1915.
TABLE 3 0 . —PAYMENTS, BY TYPE OF ENTERPRISE:
1937
(Includes data for enterprises owned but not operated by city)
Grand totalGroup I
Group I I —
Group III-
Water-supply
systems
Electric l i g h t
and power
systems
(Table 32)
(Table 34)
Transit systems
Gas-supply
systems
Ports, harbors, docks,
and wharves
Airports
(Table 38)
(Table 40)
(Table 42)
$459,416,353
$200,361,560
#96,303,993
$102,277,075
$15,555,940
$27,841,649
,475,280
$7,600,856
330,074,847
48,267,204
81,074,302
124,049,501
19,620,150
56,691,909
77,124,388
8,238,229
10,941,376
93,933,625
8,240,153
103,297
4,215,000
5,842,569
5,498,371
18,460,310
4,070,355
5,310,984
5,698,387
1,659,979
2,116,914
6,593,636
595,769
411,451
$4,215,000
$12,919,680
284,703
1,183,723
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
11
12
13
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, Pa.
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, C a l i f . —
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
$124,791,891
15,449,302
17,379,717
25,475,009
90,260,284
7,766,873
3,633,422
§43,465,814
15,002,494
4,567,174
6,283,646
15,648,850
4,422,777
3,424,755
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.'
Washington, D. C.
9,684,004
6,478,055
3,278,145
17,478,537
2,166,197
3,740,097
2,493,314
6,609,164
3,637,047
2,906,699
10,137,359
2,166.197
3,372,862
2,404,663
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$62,835,447
$71,293,546
3,246,237
6,892,038
13,908,473
13,620
103,953
518,794
2,262,613
2,584,605
3,021,434
0/>
$162,105
521,782
282,890
195,685
97,859
104,714
1,861,653
250,102
277,692
1,735,139
120,115
38,651
GROUP I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 5 0 0 , 0 0 0
Minneapolis, Minn.'
New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J.
Indianapolis, Ind.'
Rochester, N. Y . —
Jersey City, N. J".'
Houston, Tex.
25
26
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
$1,845,151
3,639,420
5,396,746
3,777,899
2,51.?, 810
15[o74[l81
5,723,817
1,193,071
1,624,155
2,571,698
1,853,654
3,054,602
$1,741,049
1,493,447
3,719,045
2,245,353
2 > 394.727
1^204,'727
$63,634
$1,429,144
1,588,328
500,957
$8,238,229
14,696
548,356
19,977
877,183
4,675,368
$5,666,704
900,166
1,573,479
1,098,498
1,779,350
1,470,309
16,616
50,676
918,640
35,413
1,525,164
$40,468
146,403
74,677
483,233
98,106
53,331
57,113
229,933
378,695
38,891
59,129
$5,570,950
694,393
328,293
GROUP III.—CITES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
$1,716,059
1,438,491
4,675,338
6,384,344
2,133,974
$1,010,501
1,351,628
3,207,676
6,291,271
2,113,577
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.'
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, T e n n . —
1,454,041
970,962
2,153,413
1,416,169
1,786,910
1,376,642
945,017
2,128,658
1,207,807
1,086,374
Providence, R. I.San Antonio, Tex.Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
1,737,062
752,273
3,221,763
772,125
719,283
1,668,139
729,968
1,045,185
705,725
682,603
Oklahoma City, Okla.'
861,153
537,662
2,330,250
1,299,297
752,773
815,393
537,662
761,297
1,299,297
752,773
869,285
2,118,990
593,074
704,337
2,058,390
574,933
Columbus, OhioToledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.—•
Atlanta, Ga.
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstovra, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.Fort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.—
F l i n t , Mich.
New Haven, Conn.
San Diego, Calif.
2,069,615
1,814,154
Long Beach, Calif.'
Nashville, Tenn.— •
Springfield, Mass.Tulsa, Okla.
2,900,.,66
633,274
790,065
639,276
1,075,629
593,311
790,065
566,067
$666,431
$5 ,000
1,387,215
$39,127
81,863
64,706
93,073
20,397
41,343
25,945
24,755
208,362
57,663
538,480
22,305
63,693
66,400
36,680
#2,011,940
45,760
6,360
173,942
33,808
1,392,695
357,993
19,394
164
59
18
27
81
948
681
141
448
519
74 249
20 569
Bridgeport, Conn.—
S a l t Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
Peterson, N. J.—
705,924
3,360
807,904
1,160,754
918,235
Jacksonville, F l a . Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J .
Chattanooga, Tenn.Kansas City, Kans.-
4,830,673
1,824,321
1,058,957
809,366
63,410
3,398,768
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
••
1/ Not separately reported.
22,521
3,360
145,292
662,612
1,150,687
918,235
10,067
462,109
1,229,472
752,733
773,463
517,660
554,432
306,224
35,903
4,500
Included with "Ports, harbors, docks, and wharvea."
501,015
19,653
2,897,753
56,778
40,417
$36,056
TABLE 30.—PAYMENTS, BY TYPE OF ENTERPRISE: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
(Includes data for enterprises owned but not operated by c i t y )
Water-supply
systems
(Table 32)
Electric l i g h t
and power
systems
(Table 34)
Transit systems
Gas-supply
systems
Ports, harbors, docks,
and wharves
Airports
(Table 36)
(Table 38)
(Table 40)
(Table 42)
(Table 44)
GROUP III.—CITES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—-Continued
68
69
70
71
72
$1,718,634
612,272
702,045
642,924
55,976
$504,042
610,551
663,984
637,953
73
74
75
76
77
802,559
364,977
444,219
300,970
495,728
788,746
364,977
444,219
269,178
492,678
78
79
80
81
82
646,041
27,447
370,449
2,664,742
2,304,925
620,376
25,665
369,493
645,390
789,603
1,906,039
83
84
35
86
398,070
822,495
466,717
398,070
578,799
395,601
87
88
89
90
417,395
371,342
445,346
436,006
417,395
369,004
431,250
436,006
91
21,462
1,092,725 1
685,531
420,338 1
330,917
685,531
420,338
93
94
850,626
— 1
2/ Not included in group or grand totals.
$1,183,620
$30,972
$2,232
4,971
8,262
§1,721
27,567
55,976
13,813
31,792
I
3,050
27,447
956
$100,046
186,416
243,696
38,047
33,069
2,338
14,096
3,251
850,626
13,267
1,274,811
$753,314
18,211
8,494
54,095
PART n i : PUBLIC-SERVICE ENTERPRISES
279
TABLES 31 and 32
Water Systems
In contrast with most other types of public-service enterprises, the majority of water systems are municipally owned in communities of the size considered
in- this report. Only 9 of the 94 cities do not have a municipal water system:
Indianapolis, New Haven, Bridgeport, Scranton, Chattanooga, Wichita, Peoria,
Gary, and Utica.3 Birmingham is included, although its activities in this field
of service are limited to an industrial water supply in the process of construction with the aid of both W.P.A. and P.W.A. funds. The first municipal water
system to be constructed by any of the 94 cities was that built by Albany in
1799, most of the others having been constructed between 1850 and 1900.4
INCOME OF WATER SYSTEMS.—The 85 water systems included in this study reported
total income of $206,234,652, which was approximately 51 percent of the total
income reported by all public-service enterprises. The operating revenue of
the water systems, that is, the earning power originating from the facilities
themselves, was approximately 90 percent of the total income received by them.
Grants for improvements and extensions to these facilities amounted to 3.8 percent of total income, and contributions from general city funds amounted to 3
percent of the total.
This latter figure contrasts with the 15.2 percent of
total income derived by all public-service enterprises from general city funds.
It is to be noted that 34 of the water systems reported such contributions.
PAYMENTS OF WATER SYSTEMS.—Payments of the water systems totaled $200,361,560,
which amount was 43.6 percent of total payments reported by all public-service
enterprises. As compared with approximately 90 percent of total income received
from operating revenue, however, only 36'.2 percent of total payments by water
systems were for operating expenses. Other large types of payment were, in percentage of total payments, outlays, 27.9 percent; interest, 24.8 percent; and
contributions to general city funds, 10.9 percent. Water systems accounted for
69 percent of the total contributions to general city funds made by public-service enterprises, but accounted for only 10 percent of total funds contributed
by the cities to the public-service enterprises.
Based on this summary of income and payments, it is evident that the water
systems had a balance of $5,873,092 available for amortization of debt or for
reserve requirements even if all capital outlays had been financed from current
Income. In this connection, table 37 indicates that these water systems had a
bonded indebtedness of $1,159,474,572 outstanding at the close.of 1937.
TABLES 33 and 34
Electric Light and Power Systems
As contrasted with water systems, the growth of municipal electric light
and power systems has been more conspicuous In the smaller communities than in
the cities of the population size considered in this report, although one of
the cities included in this report, Tacoma, was a pioneer in this field of municipal enterprise. Only 13 of the 94 cities reported such municipal facilities
in 1937.
This may be due to the substantial investment required to provide
large municipalities with this type of service or to such other factors as franchises.
INCOME OF ELECTRIC LIGHT AND POWER SYSTEMS.—Of the total income, operating income accounted for 98.6 percent as compared with the average of 75.7 percent
derived by all enterprises from this source.
PAYMENTS OF ELECTRIC LIGHT AND POWER SYSTEMS.—Total payments of the electric
light and power systems aggregated $96,303,993. Of this amount 20.4 percent was
operating expense—an interesting comparison with the 98.6 percent of total Income received from operating revenue, which Indicates an operating surplus of
over $22,000,000 for the 13 systems during the year. The largest payment item
3/ In tables 31 to 44, inclusive, only those cities are listed that have the type of enterprise specified.
4/ For information as to the years in which most of these water systems were constructed see Bureau
of the Census, Statistics of Cities Having fi Population of over 25,000; 1902 and 1903.
280
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
was for outlays, which amounted to almost 70 percent of the total. Interest
payments accounted for 7.1 percent of the total, an amount substantially below
the average of almost 25 percent for all public-service enterprises. Contributions to general city funds were made by 7 of the 13 enterprises.
A striking situation in connection with the subject of contributions is the
fact that the amount contributed to support of general government by the Jacksonville plant, $1,725,564, was greater than the cost of operating the plant
during the year. It might be added that this contribution represented approximately a third of all Jacksonville's revenues, as discussed in part i::.
Based on this summary of income and payments of municipal electric light
and power systems, It is evident that income failed to cover payments by almost
$54,000,000, chiefly because of extensive improvements and additions to plant
equipment.
TABLES 35 and 36
Transit Systems
Municipally-owned transit systems were reported by 13 of the 94 cities, although only 6 of these systems were municipally-operated. The remaining were
leased to others for operation, and the Income therefrom is indicated under
'•rents or leases."
INCOME OF TRANSIT SYSTEMS.— Total income of $92,743,232 was derived from these
transit systems in 1937, of which amount $54,383,734, or 58.6 percent, represented either operating revenue or Income from lease of the properties. Contributions from general city funds accounted for 36.1 percent of total income,
a figure well above the average of 15.2 percent derived by all public-service
enterprises from this source. Most of this amount was represented by the heavy
support given by New York to its transit system, although 7 other cities also
contributed from general funds to their municipally-owned transit systems.
Grants which constituted a small proportion of total income were received by
the systems in New York and Detroit.
PAYMENTS OF TRANSIT SYSTEMS.—Total payments of $102,277,075 were reported by
the 13 municipally-owned transit systems in 1937, of which amount 36.3 percent
represented operating expense. As is typical of most transit systems, the debt
load is heavy, and interest payments thereon were larger than operating expense,
accounting for 40.3 percent of total payments. Expenditures for outlays constituted 21.8 percent of total payments, considerably below the 32.7 percent
average for all public-service enterprises. Contributions to general government
were negligible. They were reported in only four cases, the largest amount being derived by Cincinnati from its stock ownership and control of the Cincinnati Southern Railway.
Based on the foregoing summary it is evident that, while transit systems
realized operating revenues $8,153,053 in excess of operating expense, total
payments were $9,533,843 greater than total income received.
Transit system
bonded indebtedness outstanding at the close of 1937 totaled $1,021,101,048.
PART III: PUBLIC-SERVICE ENTERPRISES
281
TABLE 31.—INCOME OF WATER-SUPPLY SYSTEMS: 1937
Operating
income
206,234,652
Grand total—
122,226,863
23,196,551
60,811,238
Group I
Group I I —
Group III-
Federal
grants
$187,244,318 £4,632,988
112,915,231
20,168,691
54,160,396
3,075,362
694,936
862,690
Contributions
from
general
funds
Pension
assessments
All
other
fi/$7,824,449 $6,144,422 &30,987 $357,488
1/4,938,804
385,476
2,500,169
1,244,585
1,947,001
2,952,836
9,572
21,415
43,309
447
313,732
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
New York, N. Y.
$40,803,477
14,751,057
7,019,674
7,234,598
Los Angeles, C a l i f . — — 12,807,576
5,498,115
4,447,324
San Francisco, Calif.—
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
5,370,782
4,746,937
3,484,710
8,229,406
1,739,606
3,135,761
2,957,840
$38,228,025 12,318,568
14,747,446
3,611
7,019,674
6,939,821
268,153
10,852,983
174,269
5,459,767
3,757,153
6,581
4,416,920
4,672,359
3,484,190
6,488,348
1,728,556
2,666,755
2,453,234
$256,884
24,989
1,219,645
38,348
486,274
140,255
813,607
520
234
1,627,231
890
162,281
468,116
2/3,710
$1,635
518,031
142,648
197,301
15
74,578
112,947
1,478
646
$9,572
338,615
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.
New Orleans, La.
Cincinnati, Ohio
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, Mo.
Seattle, Wash.
$1,500,393
2,129,320
4,017,724
2,394,903
2,326,851
1,784,570
$1,483,966
1,262,760
2,466,553
2,394,903
2,320,446
1,738,363
$10,749
10,347
245,863
Rochester, N. Y . —
Jersey City,'N. J.Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
1,496,382
2,128,066
1,500,730
1,893,737
2,023,875
1,471,338
1,987,386
1,346,689
1,878,004
1,818,283
25,044
140,680
34,892
15,733
205,592
$385,476
17
6,019
*>5,678
856,213
919,832
6,388
39,741
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, Ohio
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif. 3/Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
$1 ,414 ,859
1,584 ,969
3 ,545 ,054
4,206 ,614
2,345 ,349
1,889 ,082
$1,349,785
1,434,545
2,803,698
2,848,847
2,343,324
1,876,584
60,485
17,398
2,025
12,498
1,102 ,686
$92
St. Paul, Minn.
Birmingham, A l a . —
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
Providence, R. I.San Antonio, Tex.-
1,015,564
46,449
1,319 ,570
1 351 932
2 157 285
978 946
1,317,704
1,334,959
1,721,231
907,437
1,866
13,365
199,999
71,509
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, O k l a . —
Worcester, Mass.
1 391 903
922 350
1 137 793
1 120 593
690 376
1,308,401
886,088
790,144
1,118,193
676,685
76,706
1,332
1,276
Richmond, Va.
•
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.—•
Fort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
711
1 376
960
881
1,199
711,297
810,920
899,353
881,022
1,182,457
Flint, Mich.
San Diego, Calif.
Long Beach, Calif.—
Nashville, Tenn.
Springfield, Mass.
19
$32,308
367 |
297
474
231
143
004
824, 275 !
1,886, 046
1,263, 816
f
1
745, 186
1,058, 939 II
See footnotes at end of table.
204932 O ^»0
648,563
781,954
1,556,828
900,186
725,324
1,058,939
$3,608
34,930
346,373
2,400
13,691
565,554
36,878
121
16,547
24,000
42,32.1
3,626
152,205
78,900
19,862
177,013
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
282
TABLE 31.—INCOME OF WATER-SUPPLY SYSTEMS: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
Operating
income
Federal
grants
Contributions
from
general
funds
Pen:3ion | All
assessother
ments
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
Tulsa, Okie.
Des Moines, I o w a —
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
$1,007,317
862,978
777,986
1,012,789
$891,938
842,111
666,417
806,218
Paterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
1,245,336
515,985
974,989
993,134
1,245,336
515,985
848,731
915,617
17
77,517
Trenton, N. J.
Kansas City, Kans.'
Fort Wayne, I n d . —
Camden N. J.
824,043
976,654
571,067
667,731
696,665
896,675
571,036
661,501
19,783
79,979
31
6,230
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J.—
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.-
803,638
816,314
835,125
378,977
666,807
783,554
637,448
378,977
661
32,760
3,210
Cambridge, M a s s . —
New Bedford, Mass.'
Reading, Pa.
Knorville, T e n n . —
507,961
367,926
611,271
784,030
501,884
367,926
600,660
784,030
4,110
421,889
1,016,770
628,340
430,816
421,889
842,528
436,222
430,779
Wilmington, Del.Tampa, Fla.
Somerville, Mass.
El Paso, Tex.
605,470
521,224
462,554
514,712
552,499
520,379
462,554
486,223
Evansville, Ind.Lynn, Mass.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.Lowell, Mass.
573,771
465,241
492,192
650,079
426,790
560,281
465,241
492,192
634,734
333,890
South Bend, Ind.Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Canton, Ohio
Honolulu, Hawaii 4/
1/
2/
3/
4/
1,292,406
$115,379
$20,867
$991
45,672
110,578
145,059
126,241
136,170
194,467
1,207
9,084
125,736
192,118
845
10,943
13,490
15,345
86,518
27,314
Includes $3,710 State grant.
State grant.
Includes those data for light and power system, not separately reported.
Not included in group or grand totals.
$320
TABLE 3 2 . — P A Y M E N T S OF WATER-SUPPLY SYSTEMS:
1937
(See t e x t d i s c u s s i o n , p . 279)
INTEREST
Operating
expense
Grand
total-
Group I
Group I I —
Group I I I -
General obligation bonds
$200,361,560
$72,572,192
$47,646,726
124,049,501
19,620,150
56,691,909
40,086,727
10,305,731
22,179,734
30,626,309
3,602,605
13,417,812
Contributions
to general
funds
Short-term
loans
Revenue bonds
$226,317
$1,833,429
$55,911,212
$21,862,552
$309,132
1,233,582
331,609
268,238
35,048,607
4,088,094
16,774,511
16,788,852
1,200,279
3,873,421
52,489
91,832
164,811
$9,208,025
4,462,204
70,600
511,843
8,444,648
450,039
890,497
$12,334,614
341,903
782,950
1,927,083
27,048
320,878
5,450,552
999,832
1,640,115
645,243
2 , 1 8 6 332
GROUP I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
11
12
13
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.-Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Califs
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$43,465,814
15,002,494
4,567,174
6,283,646
15,648,850
4,422,777
3,424,755
$6,912,951
9,471,704
2,191,678
2,468,217
3,722,616
2,759,552
2,208,549
$14,800,224
6,609,164
3,637,047
2,906,699
10,137,359
2,166,197
3,372,862
2,404,663
1,291,461
2,273,053
1,734,678
1,713,601
1,156,793
1,159,713
1,022,161
1,204,288
1,328,151
256,356
2,973,206
$210,000
2,935
1,521,946
3,269,829
3,425,961
1,108,504
$723 7 4 8
55 625
3 2 5 709
950
736,894
104 682
594 787
1,572
443 584
365
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
15
16
17
18
19
20
Minneapolis, Minn.'
New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
$1,741,049
1,493,447
3,719,045
2,245,353
2,394,727
1,204,727
$1,115,006
668,237
1,515,662
1,272,522
1,559,410
632,732
$93,437
284,919
376,839
429,750
604,475
24
25
26
Rochester, N. Y . —
Jersey City, N. J.
Houston, Tex.
L o u i s v i l l e , Ky.
P o r t l a n d , Oreg.
900,166
1,573,479
1,098,498
1,779,350
1,470,309
544,216
692,220
697,910
984,894
622,922
241,082
698,643
92,000
39,420
742,040
$261,109
$532,606
540,291
1,778,083
20,945
130,842
290,780
102,600
32,616
238,088
224,293
96,950
$519,536
$48,461
2,600
20,106
12,268
150,000
530,743
TABLE 32.—-PAYMENTS OF WATER-SUPPLY SYSTEMS:
1937—Continued
(See t a r t d i s c u s s i o n , p . 279)
INTEREST
Operating
expense
General obligation bonds
Short-term
loans
Contributions
to general
funds
Revenue bonds
GROUP III.—CITIES HATING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
$1,010,501
1,351,628
3,207,676
6,291,271
$721,140
781,015
1,455,603
671,526
$253,945
25,915
1,744,020
1,029,288
$15,147
544,698
8,053
4,590,457
A t l a n t a , Ga.
D a l l a s , Tex.
S t . P a u l , Minn.—
Birmingham, A l a . -
2,113,577
1,376,642
945,017
2,128,658
424,833
550,737
633,385
117,550
396,548
284,854
76,521
304,753
26,778
2,097,436
#1,494,673
124,604
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
Providence, R. I.San Antonio, Tex.-
1,207,807
1,086,374
1,668,139
729,968
349,290
424,129
885,434
287,524
468,923
244,532
731,445
343,805
386,128
309,811
50,102
98,639
3,466
103,091
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, O h i o —
Oklahoma City, Okla.
1,045,185
705,725
682,603
815,393
705,215
386,397
248,948
301,158
211,680
239,041
268,182
235,576
128,290
80,287
165,473
278,659
Worcester, M a s s . — Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.'
537,662
761,297
1,299,297
752,773
294,781
267,818
421,489
356,713
101,559
150,750
50,650
129,437
122,806
64,004
827,158
129,311
Fort Worth, T a x . —
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
—
San Diego, Calif.-
704,337
2,058,390
574,933
1,814,154
235,983
432,953
340,437
629,226
203,594
219,815
94,081
556,043
94,016
1,384,254
25,945
628,885
148,419
i,ong J
Nashville, Tenn.—
Springfield, Mass.
Tulsa, O k l a . —
1,075,629
593,311
790.065
566,067
313,320
374,807
413,605
275,654
114,892
151,350
256,309
231,174
377,380
28.958
112,324
59,239
270,037
38,166
Des M o i n e s , Iowa
S a l t Lake C i t y , U t a h Y o n k e r s , N. Y.
—
P e t e r s o n , N. J .
683,403
662,612
1,150,687
918,235
301,005
478,654
383,137
273,474
240,868
186,958
141,530
29
30
Columbus, Ohio
T o l e d o , Ohio
Oakland, C a l i f ,
Danver, Colo.
32
33
34
40
41
.42
49
51
60
61
l/-
$31,222
$1,158
530,783
10,972
$20,269
18,516
278,725
137,312
114,470
15,840
Jacksonville, F l a . Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J .
462,109
.,229,472
752,733
773,463
46,675
521,014
446,745
49,093
26,813
280,618
55,096
216,811
Kansas City, Kans.Fort Wayne, Ind.
Camden, N. J .
E r i e , Pa.
501,015
504,042
610,551
663,984
160,142
83,339
61,025
59,080
20,240
110,902
10,648
217,390
Elizabeth, N. J.—
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.Cambridge, M a s s . —
537,953
788,746
364,977
444,219
271,050
6,950
34,055
New Bedford, Mass.Reading, Pa.
Knorville, Tenn.
South Bend, Ind.
269,178
492,678
620,376
369,493
51,568
109,835
200,249
32,938
Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, D e l . -
645,390
789,603
398,070
578,799
3,735
159,842
45,367
188,355
Tampa, Fla.
Somenrille, Mass.El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, I n d . —
395,601
417,395
369,004
431,250
124,971
122,514
79,965
45,138
18,938
66,285
103,840
80,223
Lynn, Mass.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.Lowell, Mass.
436,006
330,917
685,531
420,338
17,366
57,519
287,422
14,330
40,256
64,548
260,194
54,168
Honolulu, Hawaii 2/-
18,695
177,906
18,090
435,900
10,615
110,000
3,000
293,677
6,650
14,678
8,828
502,382
15,801
20,986
184,790
60,783
1,000
23,842
13,711
81,753
5,336
9,307
62 000
214,117
392,882
89,109
94,532
15 248
64,812
33,476
205,218
1/ Includes data of electric light and power system, not separately reported.
2/ Not included in group or grand totals.
8
286
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
TABLE 3 3 . — I N C O M E OF ELECTRIC LIGHT AND POWER SYSTEMS:
1937
( S e e t e x t d i s c u s s i o n , p . 279)
City
No.
CITY
Operating
revenue
Total
Grand t o t a l -
Group I
Group I I —
Group I I I -
Interest
FedereO.
g r a n t £i
$42,316,799
$41,707,260
$148,441
$457,3.11
1 / $3,987
25,272,284
6,380,785
10,663,730
25,218,485
5,917,148
10,571,627
53,799
36,654
57,988
424,705
32,406
2/ 2,278
3/ 1,709
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
Los Angeles, Calif.
Cleveland, Ohio
San Francisco, Calif.—
$19,442,816
3,482,478
2,346,990
$19,419,974
3,482,478
2,316,033
$22,842
30,957
GROUP I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 5 0 0 , 0 0 0
Seattle, Wash.-
1
$ 6 , 5 8 0 , 7 8 5 ||
$5,917,148 |
$56,654 |
$424,705 | 2 / $2,278
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, Ohio
Oakland, Calif. 4 / Memphis, Tenn.
Jacksonville, Fla.Kansas City, Kans.-Fort Wayne, Ind.
Tacoma, Wash.
1/
2/
3/
4/
$766,431
221,267
805
3,431,375
2,361,642
1,201,566
2,680,644
$766,431
221,267
$805
3,416,857
2,308,002
1,178,426
2,680,644
$14,518
53,640
3,543
17,888
3/
$1,709
I n c l u d e s $ 2 , 2 7 8 , c o n t r i b u t i o n s from g e n e r a l f u n d s , and $ 1 , 7 0 9 , p e n s i o n a s s e s s m e n t s .
C o n t r i b u t i o n s from g e n e r a l f u n d s .
Pension assessments includes assessments of other u t i l i t i e s , not separately reported.
A l l r e v e n u e s , o t h e r t h a n "operating", a r e i n c l u d e d w i t h t h o s e o f w a t e r - s u p p l y s y s t e m .
TABLE 3 4 . — P A Y M E N T S OF ELECTRIC LIGHT AND POWER SYSTEMS:
1937
( S e e t e x t d i s c u s s i o n , p . 279)
Operating
expense
General
obligation
bonds
&96,303,993 ( $ 1 9 , 6 7 5 , 0 9 5 fc/$3,998,851
Grand total
77,124,388
8,238,229
10,941,376
Group I
Group I I —
Group I I I -
11,952,716
2,437,074
5,285,305
3,778,984
1 / 219,867
Contributions to
general
funds
Revenue
bonds
»2,861,522 $66,519,466 S3,135,304
847,988
1,719,930
293,604
59,310,518
3,971,267
3,237,681
$113,755
1,234,182
1,901,122
109,958
3,797
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 AND OVER
Los A n g e l e s , C a l i f . H$71 , 2 9 3 , 5 4 6
C l e v e l a n d , Ohio
3,246,237
San F r a n c i s c o , C a l i f ,
2,584,605
$9,290,445
2,428,838
233,433
$1,481,251
180,879
2,116,854
$847,988 ^58,661,935 ^1,011,927
582,583
53,937
66,000
168,318
GROUP I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 5 0 0 , 0 0 0
| S e a t t l e , Wash.
$8,238,229
to,719,930
$2,437,074
$3,971,267
$109,958
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, Ohio
Oakland, Calif. 2 / —
Memphis, Tenn.
Jacksonville, F l a . —
Chattanooga, Tenn.—
Kansas City, K a n s . —
Fort Wayne, Ind. Z/Khoxville, Tenn.
Tacoma, Wash.
$666,431
15,741
538,480
3,687,994
19,653
2,897,753
1,183,620
25,665
1,906,039
$402,416
15,741
$39,902
3,455
1/ 71,701
1,743,118
553,971
1,225,848
$73,825
$7,696
535,025
538,822
19,653
1,046,826
625,852
25,665
372,013
$150,288
1,725,564
1/ Includes $2,666 interest on short-term loans.
2/ Other payments, not reported separately, are included with water-supply system.
3/ Includes pension payments of other utilities, not separately reported.
3,000
$3,797
TABLE 35.—INCOME OF TRANSIT SYSTEMS: 1937
(Includes data for e n t e r p r i s e s owned but not operated by c i t y .
Operating i n come
Grand total-
Group I
Group I I —
Group III-
See t e x t d i s o u s s i o n , p . 280)
Rents from
leases
$92,743,232
$45,278,903
$3,414,180
$9,104,831
83,517,238
9,113,113
112,881
39,336,718
5,843,379
98,806
2,992,247
421,933
7,394,860
1,700,475
9,496
Federal g r a n t s
$1,302,355
Contributions
from general
funds
$33,449,411
Pension assessments
$188,693
$4,859
4,859
32,297,506
1,147,326
4,579
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y. 1/
Philadelphia, Pa. 2 / ~
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif. Zj
Boston, Mass. 2/
San Francisco, Calif.-
$51,878,486
5,397,038
19,907,778
13,620
3,153,333
3,166,983
$16 805 907
$2,209,037
19 3 6 3 916
297,451
485,759
$2,732,438
2,105,555
$1,252,995
49,360
$28,877,444
3,291,483
4,252
13,620
2,543,247
3,166,895
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
New Orleans, La.
Cincinnati, Ohio 3 / Newark, N. J. 2/
Seattle, Wash.
Rochester, N. Y. 2 / -
$1,297,463
2,105,790
707,957
4,564,159
437,744
$1,295,845
$1,618
420,315
$1,685,475
15,000
$692,957
16,625
437,744
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Tacoma, Wash.
Utica, N. Y. 2 / ~
$98,806
14,075
$98,806
1/ Includes independent subway and rapid transit system owned but not operated by city,
2/ Owned but not operated by city.
3/ Cincinnati Southern Railway owned but not operated by city.
$9,496
|4,579
$665
$188,693
4,106
TABLE 36.—PAYMENTS OF TRANSIT SYSTEMS: 1937
(Includes data for enterprises owned but not operated by the c i t y .
Operating
expense
Grand t o t a l Group I
Group I I —
Group I I I -
Administrat i o n of
leased
enterprises
See text discussion, p . 280)
INTEREST
Contribution
General obligation bonds
to general
funds
Revenue bonds
$102,277,075
$37,127,535
$108,313
$41,004,977
1/ $254,525
93,933,625
8,240,153
103,297
31,761,213
5,282,969
83,353
69,861
38,452
39,937,413
1,064,313
3,251
1/ 254,525
21,724,749
585,926
16,037
$1,018,736
$436,277
122,627
895,453
656
317,762
118,515
GROUP I.—CITES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y. £/-Philadelphia, Pa. 5/
Detroit, Mich.
-Los Angeles, Calif. 5/—
Boston, Mass. 3/
San Francisco, C a l i f . —
$62,835,447
$22,497
$29,485,220
6,265,723
1,888,826
47,364
2,215,249
82,395
$13,082,412
6,892,038
18,908,473
13,620
2,262,613
3,021,434
15,964,888
$20,267,815
603,818
736,997
$317,762
$13,620
109,007
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
New Orleans, La.
Cincinnati, Ohio i / Newark, N. J. 5/
Seattle, Wash.
Rochester, N. Y. 3/-
$1,429,144
1,588,328
500,957
4,675,368
46,356
$1,190,042
$10,681
27,771
$145,023
682,194
201,886
16,625
18,585
$94,079
$895,453
1/ $254,525
299,071
192,776
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
81
91
Tacoma, Wash.
Utica, N. Y. S/-
1/
2/
3/
4/
$100,046
3,251
$83,353
Includes $32,052 i n t e r e s t on short-term loans.
Includes independent subway and rapid t r a n s i t system owned, but not operated by c i t y .
Owned, but not operated by c i t y .
Cincinnati Southern Railway owned, but not operated by c i t y .
$16,037
$3,251
$656
PART III: PUBLIC-SERVICE ENTERPRISES
289
TABLES 37 and 38
Gas Systems
Only 7 of the 94 cities reported municipal ownership of gas systems in 1937,
all "but that of Philadelphia being municipally operated. Development in this
field of municipal activity has not been extensive, although it may be of interest to note that only Philadelphia, Richmond, and Duluth reported municipallyowned gas plants when the Bureau listed such enterprises in its Statistics of
Cities Having a Population of Over 25.000: 1902 and 1903. Philadelphia was the
pioneer in this field, having acquired its system in 1836 when its private owners disposed of it to the city.
INCOME OF GAS SYSTEMS.—Total income reported by the municipally-owned gas
plants was $16,614,213, virtually all of which, except for a negligible item of
interest on investments, was derived from operating revenue or In Philadelphia
from leases. No Federal grants were received and no contributions were received
from general city funds.
PAIMENTS OF GAS SYSTEMS.—Total payments of gas systems were $15,555,940, of
which amount approximately 60 percent was for operating expenses. Approximately
31 percent was in the nature of contributions to general city funds on the part
of 5 of the 7 systems; in the case of Philadelphia the entire amount of income
from the lease of the enterprise was turned over to general city funds. In
sharp contrast to the situation with respect to other public-service enterprises, a very small proportion of total payments comprised outlays or interest
on indebtedness.
Based on the above analysis, it is evident that total Income of the 7 gas
systems exceeded total payments by $1,058,273. Considering the sources of income and the nature of payments, it is clear that these enterprises were selfsupporting. It is of further interest to note that the total bonded indebtedness of municipal gas systems, $17,710,050, as shown in table 37, was not much
greater than the revenues derived from operation of the enterprises during 1937.
TABLES 39 and 40
Ports. Harbors. Docks, and Wharves
During 1937 there were 42 cities which owned port, harbor, dock, or wharf
facilities. All these were municipally operated except four that were leased
to others and three that were operated in part and leased in part.
INCOME OF PORTS AND ASSOCIATED FACILITIES.—Total income of $26,296,783 was reported from municipal ports, harbors, docks, and wharves In 1937, of which
amount 52.3 percent was derived from operating revenue. The next largest source
of income was from general fund contributions, which amounted to approximately
40 percent of the total, and this source of revenue was reported by all but 9
of the 42 enterprises. The only other item of significance was $1,197,258 received as grants for improvements and extensions, and this item appeared in the
accounts of only 7 of the enterprises.
PAIMENTS OF PORTS AND ASSOCIATED FACILITIES. —Cost payments for these publicservice enterprises totaled $27,841,649, and it is significant that only about
21 percent constituted operating expense. Interest payments on outstanding indebtedness comprised 45.5 percent of total payments, the highest ratio for all
types of enterprises. Expenditures for capital outlays constituted 32.2 percent of all payments, which item was somewhat below the average for all publicservice enterprises. As might be expected, contributions to general city funds
were of negligible size, and were scattered among 10 of the 42 enterprises considered.
Based on this summary, it is evident that the operating Income of these enterprises was almost $8,000,000 in excess of operating expenses, but that total
payments exceeded total income by $1,544,866. It is evident also that this excess of payments over Income was caused by a heavy burden of interest on bonded
indebtedness, which was outstanding In the amount of $323,599,542 at the close
of 1937.
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
290
TABLE 3 7 . — I N C O M E OF GAS-SUPPLY SYSTEMS: 1937
City
No.
Total
Grand total—
Operating
income
Rents from
leases
$16,614,213
$12,265,331
$133,882
4,215,000
6,412,722
5,986,491
6,359,946
5,905,385
52,776
81,106
Group I —
Group I I —
Group III-
$4,215,000
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
Philadelphia , Pa. I/—
-I
$4,215,000
#4,215,0
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
21
24
$6,218,742
193,980
I Indianapolis, Ind.Houston, Tex.
$6,165,966
193,980
$52,776
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
$2,206,729
1,290,422
1,697,495
791,845
Omaha, Nebr.
Richmond, Va.
Long Beach, Calif.
Duluth, Minn.
$2,125,961
1,290,422
1,697,157
791,845
$80,768
338
1/ Owned but not operated by c i t y .
TABLE 38.—PAYMENTS OF GAS-SUPPLY SYSTEMS:
Operating
expense
Grand t o t a l -
1937
General
bonds
Revenue
bonds
Contributions to
general
funds
$15,555,940
$9,165,941
$433,839
$361,894
$736,555
$4,807,711
4,215,000
5,842,569
5,498,371
5,026,884
4,139,057
16,200
417,639
361,894
350,344
436,211
4,215,000
87,247
505,464
Group I
Group I I —
Group I I I -
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
Philadelphia, Pa. 1/
-j
$4,2
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Indianapolis, Ind.'
Houston, Tex.
$5,666,704
$4,906,266
175,865 ||
120,618
$16,200
$360,094
1,800
$350,344
$50,000
37,247
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
39
44
52
Omaha, Nebr.
Richmond, Va.
Long Beach, Calif.'
Duluth, Minn.
1/ Owned but not operated by city.
$2,011,940
1,340,422
1,392,695
753,314
$1,773,911
715,652
943,824
705,670
$93,700
145,000
161,160
17,779
$144,329
124,210
137,807
29,865
$355,560
149,904
PART IIIJ PUBLIC-SERVICE ENTERPRISES
291
TABLE 39.—INCOME OF PORTS, HARBORS, DOCKS, AND WHARVES: 1937
Rents
from
leases
Operating
income
Grand total—
Group I
•Group I I —
Group I I I -
$26,295,783
$13,763,797
15,153,345
5,394,377
5,749,061
9,161,622
2,271,113
2,331,062
Federal
grants
$510,056 M$l,197,258
40,817
144,033
91,560
20,000
59,078
430;978
1/
644,745
232,529
319,984
Contribut i o n s from
general
funds
$10,543,576
Pension
sessments
$5,686
5,286,161
2,687,624
2,569,791
GROUP I.—CITIES HAYING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OYER
New York, N. Y, 2 / - .
Chicago, 111.—
Philadelphia, P a . Los Angeles, Calif,
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md. 5 / Pittsburgh, Pa.
Milwaukee, Wis.
$8,862,045
284,703
1,183,723
3,437,741
103,953
698,606
93,754
488,820
$6,007,506
93,200
232,426
2,310,469
103,953
207,117
93,754
113,197
$282,212
$40,817
$20,000
$2,572,327
191,503
951,297
764,739
430,672
GROUP II.—CITIES HAYING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
15
17
18
19
20
22
23
24
25
26
Minneapolis, Minn.
Kansas City, Mo.
Jersey City, N. J . —
Houston, Texas 5/
$93,890
14,696
836,356 1
27,977
959,156
16,616
50,676
1,409,100
36,591
1,949,319
§21,630
14,696
121,208
2,900
808,763
12,852
50,676
656,115
36,591
545,682
$72,260
$2,000
98
4/ $15,285
715,148
23,077
135,010
3,764
7,523
$59,078
134,412
686,384
217,244
1,051,981
GROUP III.—CITIES HAYING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
28
29
36
37
44
48
50
51
52
53
60
62
Oakland, Calif.
Providence, R. I.
Hartford, Conn. 6/
New Haven, Conn.
San Diego, Calif.
Long Beach, Calif.
Nashville, Tenn. 6 / ~
Yonkers, N. Y.
Jacksonville, F l a . — -
63 Albany, N. Y. 1/
64 Norfolk, Ya. 6/
65
66 Chattanooga, T e n n . —
70
71 Elizabeth, N. J.
76
79
81
82
35
86
New Bedford, Mass.
Wilmington, Del.
$4,848
$10,000
1,703,691
61,340
118,361
206,731
919
$644,858
14,081
86,629
18,332
6,320
$5,152
991,584
47,220
9,594
182,079
919
2,772
109,370
105,562
11,360
289,359
611,134
27,791
17,767
515,679
5
5,224
208
64,324
2,750
14,402
405,585
8,588
179,989
505,572
22,562
16,767
105,225
1,000
410,454
658,798 | |
469,909
40,347
4,500
2,232
4,971
37,374
45,232
16,832
600,873
255,314
38,547
$67,249
$39
22,138
i
377,095
26i348
960
2,232
1,168
5,900
12,032
9,432
354,458
122,483
25,896
261,407
$5,686
11,249
3,540
3,803
31,474
32,600
7,400
600
246,415
1,496
131,335
12,651
1/ Includes $15,285 State grant.
2/ Includes revenues of airports, not separately reported.
3/ Includes $20,000 rent of pier, owned but not operated by city.
4/ State grant.
5/ Includes port owned and operated by independent navigation district and wharves owned by city and
operated by navigation district.
j6/ Owned but not operated by city.
7/ Port of Albany revenues except that rents were from docks and wharves owned but not operated by
city.
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
292
TABLE 4 0 . — P A Y M E N T S
OF P O R T S ,
HARBORS,
DOCKS,
AND WHARVES:
1937
INTEREST
Operating
expense
Grand total-
$27,841,649
18,460,310
4,070,355
5,310,984
Group I
Group I I —
Group H I -
General
obligation
bonds
Outlays
Revenue
bonds
$5,842,404 &/$12,343,991 fe/$329,416 $8,967,312
2,534,859 3/ 9,459,002
1,830,564
1,386,659
1,476,981 1/ 1,498,330
2/329,416
6,294,121
813,928
1,859,263
Contributiona to
gener.-al
funds
Pensions
$345,792
$12,734
172,328
38,586
134,878
618
12,116
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y. 5/«
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Los Angeles, Calif.St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Milwaukee, Wis.
$12,919,680
284,703
1,183,723
3,108,583
103,953
518,794
93,754
247,120
$1,105,938
131,877
121,922
848,202
16,146
213,923
9,187
67,664
3/$7,057,123
$4,756,619
152,826
1,061,801
921,414
$87,807
304,871
46
45,663
113,793
84,521
GROUP I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 5 0 0 , 0 0 0
Minneapolis, Minn.Cincinnati, Ohio—'
Newark, N. J.
Kansas C i t y , M o . —
S e a t t l e , Wash.
R o c h e s t e r , N. Y.
-•
J e r s e y C i t y , N. J . —
Houston, Texas 6 /
L o u i s v i l l e , Ky.
P o r t l a n d , Oreg.
$63,634
14,696
548,356
19,977
877,183
$22,246
16,616
50,676
918,640
35,413
1,525,164
13,361
35,005
446,206
14,919
571,829
115,114
3,327
608,557
$38,173
12,275
304,827
16,650
252,737
128,415
370,382
102,052
391,615
561,102
$3,215
•2,421
15,889
20,494
$618
GROUP I I I . — C I T I E S EATING A POPULATION OF 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 3 0 0 , 0 0 0
T o l e d o , Ohio 2/
Oakland, C a l i f .
Memphis, T e n n .
P r o v i d e n c e , R. I . —
Richmond, Va.
Hartford, Conn. 1/—
$5,000
1,387,215
19,458
68,923
206,731
919
$452,199
16,568
15,128
4,526
$5,000
335,983
2,750
1/ 48,013
$599,033
140
5,782
194,205
$919
1,435
60,278
72,012
New Haven, Conn.
San Diego, C a l i f . —
Long Beach, Calif.—
Nashville, Tenn. 1/Yonkers, N. Y.
Jacksonville, F l a . —
6,360
173,942
357,993
19,394
10,067
517,660
Albany, N. Y. 9/—
Norfolk, Va. 7 / —
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J . —
554,432
306,224
35,903
4,500
2,232
4,971
207,058
New Bedford, Mass.'
Peoria, 111.
Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Wilmington, D e l . —
Tampa, Fla.
31,792
27,447
13,267
1,274,811
243,696
38,047
972
8,460
8,867
48,800
123,246
14,247
8,267
397,369
31,403
3,010
67,994
267,322
9,000
1,800
105,225
8/ $3,172
1,915
45,670
15,487
10,394
15,066
^2/304,055
16,801
282,623
4,500
4,500
14,402
23,601
$12, U 6
1,175
4,971
3,345
12,600
4,400
188,015
120,450
23,800
27,475
6,387
1 / I n c l u d e s $ 1 4 5 , 9 1 3 i n t e r e s t on s h o r t - t e r m l o a n s .
2 / I n c l u d e s $ 7 , 8 8 4 i n t e r e s t on s t i o r t - t e r a l o a n s .
Z/ I n c l u d e s $ 1 4 5 , 5 0 0 i n t e r e s t on s h o r t - t e r m l o a n s .
jyIncludes
$413 i n t e r e s t
on s h o r t - t e r m
loans.
5 / Includes cost
of a i r p o r t s , n o t s e p a r a t e l y r e p o r t e d .
6 / I n c l u d e s p o r t owned and o p e r a t e d b y i n d e p e n d e n t n a v i g a t i o n d i s t r i c t , and w h a r v e s owned b y c i t y and o p e r a t e d b y n a v i g a t i o n d i s t r i c t .
7 / Owned
b u t not o p e r a t e d by c i t y .
8 / I n t e r e s t on s h o r t - t e r m l o a n s .
9 / P o r t of Albany payments e x c e p t t h a t
t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n t o g e n e r a l fund i s made b y d o c k s and w h a r v e s , owned but n o t o p e r a t e d b y c i t y , ,
10/ Inc l u d e s $ 4 , 7 1 2 i n t e r e s t on s h o r t - t e r m l o a n s .
PART III: PUBLIC-SERVICE ENTERPRISES
293
TABLES 41 and 42
Airports
Municipal airports were reported by 66 of the 94 cities, all "but one also
municipally operated. The one exception was the airport of Portland, Oregon,
which reported that its airport was operated by the Port Commission of Portland.
•These facilities are, of course, of comparatively recent origin, most of them
having been constructed in response to a public demand for services to accommodate this type of transportation. The demand grew, not from the thought that
such enterprises could immediately develop substantial earning power, or even
be self-supporting within the life of the original investment, but simply from
the conclusion that such facilities were an essential of progressive local government.
INCOME OF AIRPORTS.— Total income of $10,882,156 was reported by these airports in 1937, only 10 percent of which was derived from operating revenue. In
contrast, 70.7 percent was derived from general fund contributions, all except
the airports at Portland, Syracuse, Scranton, and South Bend reporting income
from this source.
In this connection it should be noted that statistics relative to the municipal airport at New York are included with those for ports, harbors, docks
and wharves, because the statistics for the airport were not separable. It
also should be mentioned that contributions by general city government to the
San Francis- airport were in the form of funds derived from a lease to the Exposition Company of the new municipal airport site at Yerba Buena Island for
the duration of the Exposition.
Grants, mostly Federal, amounted to 19.3 percent of total income, but were
distributed among only 8 of these enterprises, with Baltimore and San Francisco
receiving the bulk of the funds.
PAYMENTS OF AIRPORTS.—Total payments of $9,475,280 were reported by municipal
airports in 1937, of which amount only 11.5 percent was derived as operating
revenue—by far the lowest ratio of all public-service enterprises. Expenditures for outlays constituted 65.8 percent of total payments. Interest payments
on outstanding indebtedness accounted for 10.5 percent of total payments. Contributions to general city funds were negligible and were made in only two
Instances.
Based on the foregoing data, it is evident that the operating revenues of
municipal airports were approximately $1,138,000 less than operating expenditures, but that total income of these enterprises was $1,406,876 in excess of
total payments—largely because of substantial financial support by the city
treasuries. This support was sufficient to meet annual principal payments on
bonded indebtedness in the amount of $25,958,877 reported outstanding for municipal airport purposes at the close of 1937, details regarding which are presented in table 37.
TABLES 43 and 44
Miscellaneous Public-Service Enterprises
The financial operations of certain miscellaneous enterprises are presented
in tables 43 and 44. They comprise 4 radio stations, 3 ferries, 2 terminals, 2
conduits, one grain elevator, one ice plant, one plantation, and one railway
serving a municipal dock. Of this number, 5 enterprises were leased and operated by others. Owing to the fact that some of these activities are somewhat
unusual in scope and serve purposes obscure so far as the supporting tables
are concerned, an explanation of their functions may be of interest,
Municipal radio stations, four in number, are the most numerous of the miscellaneous public-service enterprises. These are commercial stations only and
do not include the nonrevenue-producing stations maintained by the several cities and reported under "Recreation." Baltimore and Erie own electric wire -conduits. The munlclpally-owned terminals in Baltimore and Memphis are facilities
294
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
for the handling of freight produce and are leased. New Orleans has a municlpally-owned sugar plantation which is operated as an auxiliary of the city
trade school. Miami's "railroad" is merely a spur running to the municipal
docks, which is leased to a private railroad.
INCOME OF MISCELLANEOUS ENTERPRISES.-The miscellaneous public-service enterprises reported total income of $8,535,317 in 1937, of which amount 57.5 percent
was derived from operating revenue or income derived from the lease of the
properties. Contributions from general city funds accounted for 41.6 percent
of the balance, most of which funds were provided by New York and Boston in
support of ferry facilities. As may be noted from the table, only the three
ferry enterprises and Seattle's radio station received contributions from general funds.
PAYMENTS OF MISCELLANEOUS ENTERPRISES.—Total payments of these miscellaneous
enterprises were $7,600,856, of which amount 60.7 percent represented operating
expenses. Expenditures for outlays amounted to 17.7 percent of total payments,
interest payments to 15.6 percent of the total. Of the 15 enterprises included
under this classification, 9 made contributions to general government, the
largest of which came from the sugar plantation operated by New Orleans.
Based on the foregoing data, it is evident that the operating expense was
$337,290 less than operating revenue but that total income was $934,461 in excess of total payments. Assuming that outlays were financed by new borrowing,
this balance appears to have been sufficient to meet normal principal payments
on the bonded Indebtedness of $45,525,975 outstanding against these enterprises
at the close of 1937.
TABLE 45
The methods employed by public-service enterprises in financing capital
outlays is shown in table 45. The data on financing capital outlays are as accurate as compilation from the individual reports permitted. It was not possible in all cases to identify the character of funds used for outlays, since the
funds may have been accumulated over a period of time from a variety of sources.
In other cases it is possible that portions of proceeds from bond Issues for
purposes designated by the Bureau as public-service enterprises may have been
used for general municipal purposes, on the other hand, Issues called "street
Improvement bonds" may have been used in part to extend water mains.
CAPITAL OUTLAYS FINANCED BY BOND ISSUES.—Of the $162,090,799 expended for capital outlays by public-service enterprises in 1937, $77,878,472, or 48.4 percent, was financed by bond Issues. Revenue bond issues predominated, accounting for 72.1 percent of bonded indebtedness incurred for this purpose. It is
to be noted, however, that such Issues were bulked among five cities and that
most of this type of financing was consummated by Los Angeles in connection
with its electric light and power plant. Seattle also floated a sizable revenue bond in connection with the municipal light and power system. The remaining revenue bond issue of any consequence was a P.W.A. loan to Birmingham for
an industrial water supply.
CAPITAL OUTLAYS FINANCED FROM CURRENT INCOME.—Current income of public-service
enterprises was the most Important source of funds for the financing of their
capital outlays, the $84,212,327 drawn from this source constituting 52 percent
of total outlays. Most of these funds came from general income (55.7 percent)
and from grants and donations (43.3 percent), the negligible amount remaining
being derived from special assessments. The use of special assessments is not
conspicuous in connection with the financing of public-service enterprises.
PART III: PUBLIC-SERVICE ENTERPRISES
295
TABLE 41.—INCOME OF AIRPORTS: 1937
Operating
income
Grand total-
Group I
Group I I —
Group III—
Contribu| tions from
general
funds
Interest
$10,882,156
#1,089,039
$2,075,510
7,292,931
1,257,194
2,332,031
348,298
315,354
425,387
2,062,773
12,737
$24,625
$7,692,637
24,625
4,881,783
941,840
1,869,014
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y. 1/Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
•
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif..
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$189,154
422,782
386,001
195,710
177,401
182,017
$33,891
1,975,653
274,819
455,676
2,819,409
94,440
119,869
14,711
15,476
47,235
32,955
16,067
19,982
$155,263
422,782
305,815
168,283
135,316
163,734
80,186
27,427
42,085
18,283
$1,252,096
708,846
259,343
229,205
- 12/2,154,936
78,373
99,887
179,236
631,441
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.New Orleans, La.
Cincinnati, Ohio
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, Mo.
Seattle, Wash.
$72,844
146,551
123,677
283,233
138,946
63,874
$12,255
29,548
10,903
158,685
17,924
16,734
$60,589
117,003
112,774
124,548
121,022
47,140
Indianapolis, Ind.Rochester, N. Y.
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg. 3/~
63,617
241,933
54,478
49,199
18,842
18,729
9,726
14,293
7,715
18,842
44,888
232,207
40,185
41,484
GROUP III
CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, O h i o —
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
$78,127
81,863
64,706
103,525
20,422
$9,162
12,426
49,977
31,631
10,466
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, M i n n . —
Birmingham, Ala.Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
16,677
64,402
25,179
302,116
64,723
8,776
9,606
5,571
9,763
9,353
22,567
82,059
11,610
1,710
6,697
11,610
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Richmond, Va.
$68,965
69,437
14,729
71,894
9,956
$184
$7,925
7,717
54,796
19,608
292,353
47,445
20,857
75,362
18,681 J
18,597
48,092
16,326
64,760
21,800
16,668
3,374
Fort Worth, T e x . —
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.—
San Diego, Calif.Long Beach, Calif..
118,630
71,431
18,141
52,448
95,795
74,249
23,675
782
5,039
1,162
12,451
80
82,218
70,649
13,102
51,286
83,344
74,169
Nashville, Tenn.
Tulsa, Okla.
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, UtahJacksonville, Fla.
18,917
95,670
34,373
2,622
155,292
63,370 1
9,247
44,653
7,314
122
17,369
11,458
9,670
51,017
27,059
See footnotes at end of table.
2,100
2,500
12,100
125,823
51,912
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
296
TABLE 41.—INCOME OF AIRPORTS:
i
City
CITY
Total
1937—Continued
Operating
income
GRANTS
Interest
Federal
Other
Contributions from
general
funds
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
Albany, N. Y.
Chattanooga, Tenn.
Fort Wayne, I n d . —
Erie, Pa.
Wichita, Kans.
£49,272
39,257
67,744
8,262
78,434
$5,180
5,342
12,961
Spokane, Wash.
Reading, Pa.
South Bend, Ind,Miami, Fla.
Tampa, Fla.
13,813
5,650
206
91,599
33,069
4,761
352
206
13,392
4,539
El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
4,559
26,707
33,961
35,343
4,857
1,695
$44,092
33,915
54,783
8,262
37,954
40,480
9,052
5,298
78,207
28,530
4,559
21,850
32,266
33,863
l/ Not separately r e p o r t e d . Included with p o r t s , h a r b o r s , docks and wharves. See p . 293, supra.
2/ Includes $2,002,973 from Exposition company for l e a s e of Yerba Buena Island for a i r p o r t s i t e .
3 / Airport operated by Port of P o r t l a n d .
TABLE 42.—PAYMENTS OF AIRPORTS: 1937
Grand total-
Group I
Group II-Group III-
Contributions
Operating
expense
I n t e r e s t on
general
obligation
bonds
$9,475,280
$2,227,213
1/ 4-999,184
#6,234,855
5,698,387
1,659,979
2,116,914
839,048
588,775
799,390
1/510,621
171,245
317,318
4,348,718
899,959
986,178
general
funds
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y. 2/Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y . —
$162,105
521,782
282,890
195,685
97,859
104,714
$136,774
1,861,653
250,102
277,692
1,735,139
120,115
88,651
30,553
84,334
55,232
79,343
18,852
60,645
135,024
167,141
34,928
36,222
$14,000
46,280
146,700
46,578
60,750
$11,331
475,502
1,166
28,544
16,353
7,742
95,280
45,485
38,794
5,540
3/233
10,981
1,735,820
120,283
183,665
1,650,256
101,030
17,025
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.'
New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
440,468
146,403
74,677
483,233
98,106
53,331
£23,031
146,403
22,039
192,797
40,708
35,409
$15,885
30,530
10,008
53,080
17,922
22,108
280,426
4,316
Indianapolis, Ind.Rochester, N. Y.
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg. 4/-
57,113
229,933
378,695
38,891
59,129
19,893
40,900
21,929
14,267
31,399
36,320
900
189,033
349,266
24,624
27,730
See footnotes at end of table.
7,500
$14,028
PAKT III: PUBLIC-SERVICE ENTERPRISES
T A B L E 4 2 . — P A Y M E N T S OF A I R P O R T S :
297
1937—Continued
Operating
expense
Interest on
general
obligation
bonds
Contributions
Outlays
general
funds
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, O h i o —
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
$39,127
81,863
64,706
93,073
20,397
$12,271
16,655
64,706
45,423
20,397
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.—
Birmingham, Ala.Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Term.
41,343
25,945
24,755
208,362
57,663
13,027
23,447
20,795
18,207
20,191
22,305
63,693
66,400
36,680
45,760
9,673
14,649
9,328
18,397
25,374
21,800
164,948
59,681
18,141
27,448
3,699
32,797
47,655
8,452
12,596
81,519
74,249
20,569
73,209
22,521
5,470
11,551
15,830
46,114
14,899
3,960
24,017
6,730
3,360
145,292
56,778
40,417
39,257
3,360
43,542
27,174
28,715
11,055
11,702
11,250
30,972
8,262
55,976
13,813
3,050
956
25,796
3,800
43,546
11,396
9,445
186,416
33,069
2,338
14,096
18,211
8,494
39,954
7,631
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.Richmond, Va.
Fort Worth, Tex.Hartford, Conn.—
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.San Diego, Calif.Long Beach, Calif.Nashville, T e n n . —
Tulsa, Okla.
Des Moines, I o w a —
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, UtahJacksonville, Fla.
Albany, N. Y.
Chattanooga, Tenn.
Fort Wayne, Ind.Erie, Pa.
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Reading, Pa.
South Bend, Ind.Miami, Fla.
Tampa, Fla.
El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
l/
2/
3/
4/
11,246
9,767
4,605
$26,842
4,500
47,650
55,612
3,867
229
18,132
4,188
25,960
12,026
3,466
2,498
3,960
134,543
33,605
12,403
30,912
39,812
18,283
3,731
$13,072
18,101
106,191
9,689
14,852
22,164
53,885
62,698
779
3,078
892
101,225
29,604
1,074
2,850
8,225
3,863
Includes $233 interest on short-term loans.
Not separately reported. Included with "Ports, harbors, docks, and wharves."
Interest on short-term loans.
Airport operated by Port of Portland.
>MM2 O—40—
$14
60,708
16,952
1,376
8,262
2,985
2,417
3,050
146,462
25,438
1,264
See p. 293, supra.
298
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
TABLE 43.—INCOME OF "ALL OTHER" ENTERPRISES: 1937
(Includes data for enterprises owned but not operated by c i t y .
Operating
income
Grand total-
Group I
Group I I —
Group III-
See text discussion, p .
Interest
Rents
from
leases
Federal
grants
| Contributions from
general
funds
$26,626
$3,550,929
$8,535,317
$4,274,177
$51,944
$631,641
7,479,558
569,509
486,250
3,421,620
551,725
300,832
43,162
481,631
8,782
150,010
3,533,145
17,784
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.:
Ferries
Baltimore, Md.:
Conduits
Terminal l/Boston, Mass.:
Ferries
$5,986,770
$2,799,675
635,864
481,631
592,702
375,293
29,243
$43,162
$481,631
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
New Orleans, La.:
Plantation
Seattle, Wash.:
Radio
Ferries
$539,129
$539,129
12,490
17,890
6,658
5,938
$5,832
11,952
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Dallas, Tex.:
Radio
Memphis, Tenn.:
Terminal 1/
Grain elevator 1/
Omaha, Nebr.:
Ice plant
Jacksonville, Fla.:
Radio
Camden, N. J.:
" Radio 1/
Erie, Pa.:
Conduits
Miami, Fla.:
Railway to docks l/-
1/ Owned but not operated by city.
$33,503
$33,487
107,386
98,620
141,158
141,158
1,721
27,567
54,095
$16
$72,100
22,094
72,100
48,720
27,567
$26,626
PART III: PUBLIC-SERVICE ENTERPRISES
299
TABLE 44.—PAYMENTS OF "ALL OTHER" ENTERPRISES: 1937
(Includes data for enterprises owned t u t not operated by c i t y .
See t e x t discussion, p . 293)
Interest
Operating
expenses
Grand total-
Group I
Group I I —
Group III-
Contributions to
general
funds
general
obligations
$7,600,856
$4,611,467
$1,186,545
$1,344,857
$452,311
6,593,636
595,769
411,451
3,988,640
435,088
187,739
1,140,549
5,151
40,845
1,305,162
193
39,502
153,609
155,337
143,365
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.:
Ferries
Baltimore, Md.:
Conduits
Terminal 1 / —
Boston, Mass.:
Ferries
$5,570,950
$3,648,158
$631,965
$1,290,827
397,193
297,200
31,915
198,874
297,200
12,795
308,567
12,510
1,540
$153,609
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
New Orleans, La.
PlantationSeattle, Wash.:
Radio
Ferries
$570,426
$415,089
11,508
13,835
11,315
8,684
$155,337
$193
$5,151
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Dallas, Tex.:
Radio
Memphis, Tenn.:
Terminal 1/
Grain elevator 1/
Omaha, Nebr.:
Ice plant
Jacksonville, Fla.:
Radio
Camden, N. J.:
Radio 1/
Erie, Pa.:
Conduits
Miami, Fla.:
Railway to docks l/—
1/ Owned but not operated by city.
$36,056
$25,457
38,100
46,835
4,641
100,945
97,874
106,132
59,721
$31,851
6,360
$599
$10,000
34,479
6,249
1,355
3,071
1,074
525
44,812
1,721
1,721
27,567
25,133
54,095
54,095
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
300
TABLE 4 5 . — METHOD OF FINANCING CAPITAL OUTLAYS: 1937
(Includes data for e n t e r p r i s e s owned but not operated by c i t y .
See t e x t discussion, p . 294}
BONDS
CURRENT REVENUE
City &
d
Total
CITY
Special
assessment
Grants and
donations!/
$46,897,634
$823,132
$36,491,561
31,841,063
4,939,329
10,117,242
629,107
194,025
31,284,779
1,066,119
4,140,663
General
Revenue
General
$162,090,799
$21,726,498
$56,151,974
128,031,875
10,709,711
23,349,213
14,684,253
1,435,335
5,606,910
49,592,673
3,268,928
3,290,373
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
P h i l a d e l p h i a , Pa.
D e t r o i t , Mich.
Los Angeles, C a l i f . Cleveland, Ohio
S t . Louis, Mo.
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
P i t t s b u r g h , Pa.
San Francisco, C a l i f . Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$35,523,286
4,626,361
1,149,920
1,250,006
68,474,094
1,048,975
898,239
$4,550,000
3,675,698
148,871
504,590
7,282,927
999,832
1,786,808
662,268
1,597,200
120,283
305,890
702,818
6,597,637
148,558
$49,592,673
$8,951,141
4,462,204
70,600
1,175,657
9,806,421
855,910
404,223
12,795
27,048
15,034
4,005,440
806,809
1,188,905
58,876
58,475
603,392
$407,327
$22,022,145
164,157
376,502
74,349
2,070,036
44,507
494,016
2,065,703
1,540
183,666
3,277,487
193,023
28,757
510,671
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.'
New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.'
Rochester, N. Y . —
Jersey City, N, J.'
Houston, Tex.
L o u i s v i l l e , Ky.
P o r t l a n d , Oreg.
$537,373
634,370
1,800,191
728,859
235,160
4,470,905
351,244
294,888
32,616
689,406
248,917
685,782
$500,000
305,000
88,040
$3,268,928
$37,373
634,370
1,800,191
42,039
147,120
742,287
$381,820
459,690
900
6,465
350,344
99,390
32,616
340,140
248,917
464,542
189,033
349,266
3,996
217,244
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
27
28
29
30
31
32
$88,986
605,406
607,086
4,638,107
76,521
308,818
33
29,276
2,101,396
520,671
913,060
55,884
111,042
35
36
37
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
44
306,602
120,099
183,756
282,390
122,806
400,520
45
46
47
48
49
50
827,158
129,311
200,207
1,384,254
35,634
1,915
39
40
41
42
$88,972
392,661
8,053
506,117
76,521
305,352
$2,743,971
$1,613
$14
211,132
599,033
1,388,019
3,466
26,386
4,327
$2,097,069
491,020
542,878
89,268
121,276
68,725
219,815
1/ Includes contributions from general government funds.
29,651
309,811
55,884
98,639
236,630
30,831
165,473
278,659
1,530
193,695
60,371
12,403
30,912
39,060
18,283
3,731
206,825
827,158
129,311
118,745
1,046,739
25,945
117,700
9 689
1,915
PART III: PUBLIC-SERVICE ENTERPRISES
TABLE 45.—METHOD OF FINANCING CAPITAL OUTLAYS:
(Includes data f o r e n t e r p r i s e s ovmed but not operated by c i t y .
City N
BONDS
CITY
301
1937—Continued
See t e x t discussion, p . 294)
CURRENT REVENUE
Total
General
Revenue
General
Special
assessment
Grants and
donations!/
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
Long Beach, Calif.
TV^1 M 6 ? 0
8
' T0Im*
. s*
Salt Lake City, Utah
61
62
63
64
65
Paterson, N. J.
66
67
68
69
70
Cnattanooga, Term.
Kansas City, Kans.
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Fall River, Mass.
New Bedford, Mass.
142,422
101,225
530,783
10,972
610,830
297,419
55,096
216,811
36,435
1,067,066
738,130
10,648 1
226,480
142,422
101,225
155,111
$330,000
$524,304
271,125
44,122
16,801
30,747
15,000
5,688
1,067,066
703,866
10,648
218,218
19,264
8,828
2,985
307,915
15,801
20,986
196,884
6,387
476,431
275,493
89,109
94,532
89,109
41,561
86
87
88
89
90
44,376
66,285
105,104
80,223
40,256
16,725
11,269
103,840
80,223
33,203
219
94,439
260,194
54,168
Honolulu, Hawaii 2/
27,475
9,307
602,167
1,460,252
91
92
93
94
8,262
13,711
39,210
5,336
45,593
25,665
81
82
83
84
85
Somerville, Mass.
45,672
10,972
42,404
9,493
55,096
216,811
8,828
2,985
504,799
15,801
20,986
41,186
84,803
31,001
6,387
9,307
$415,538
78,900
19,862
$312,902
514,472
20,269
112,324
62,317
$728,440
593,372 1
40,131
112,324
62,317
90,000
55,016
669,000
125,736
425,759
52,971
$2,213
25,438
1,264
7,053
219
94,439
250,000
207,470
1/ Includes contributions from general government funds.
2/ Not included in group or grand t o t a l s .
10,194
54,168
207,470
302
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
TABLE 46
The gross and the net Indebtedness of public-service enterprises are shown
In table 46.
The caption "Governmental unit issuing" means the agency v/hich
Issued the obligations and not necessarily the governmental agency upon which
liability for the Indebtedness was placed. The table also presents data as to
the character of the indebtedness created. The Bureau classifies as a revenue
bond an obligation which Is not a general liability of the issuing municipality
and which is payable exclusively from the revenues of an Income-producing property or system without any recourse to taxation.
Gross indebtedness for public-service enterprise purposes was outstanding
in the amount of $2,797,270,099, 97.5 percent of which was Issued by city corporations.
CHARACTER OF INDEBTEDNESS AND PURPOSE OF ISSUE. — General obligation bonds constituted 92.7 percent of the gross indebtedness of public-service enterprises,
of which amount $1,777,152,196, or 68.5 percent, was accounted for by four cities: New York, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, and San Francisco.
Spokane Issued
only revenue bonds. Revenue bond issues for all cities totaled $187,010,797,
or only 6.7 percent of Indebtedness. Owing to the increasing use of this type
of financing, especially In connection with public-service enterprises, it is
likely that such obligations will represent an Increasing proportion of funded
Indebtedness in the future. The larger part of outstanding obligations of this
character shown in table 46 were issued by municipalities on the Pacific coast,
but their appearance In recent years has had a wider geographic spread.
Short-term loans outstanding at the close of 1937 comprised only one-half
of one percent of total gross Indebtedness.
There were three cities reporting no indebtedness for public-service enterprise purposes at the close of 1937—Washington, Bridgeport, and Gary, the latter two having no enterprises.
NET DEBT FOR PUBLIC-SERVICE ENTERPRISES.—Net debt for public-service enterprises, which in the Bureau classification is bonded debt less sinking-fund assets, totaled $2,499,039,946, or $66.33 per capita.
The net debt for public-service enterprise purposes Is somewhat overstated
in the foregoing figures.
In several cases it was impossible to segregate
sinking-fund assets for public-service enterprise debt from those for general
government debt. In such cases, the entire amount of sinking-fund assets was
taken as an offset against general government debt, and net debt for publicservice enterprises is overstated to that extent. The effect upon the total,
however, is probably negligible.
TABLE 47
The bonded Indebtedness outstanding at the close of 1937 for the various
types of public-service enterprise purposes is shown in table 47.
BONDED INDEBTEDNESS BY TYPE OF ENTERPRISE. — Of the bonded indebtedness of $2,781,314,407 for public-service enterprise purposes, 41.7 percent was for water systems; 6.8 percent for electric light and power systems; 36.7 percent for transit
systems; six-tenths of one percent for gas systems; 11.6 percent for ports,
harbors, docks, and wharves; approximately one percent for airports; and 1.6
percent for the miscellaneous enterprises discussed in connection with tables 43
and 44.
PREDOMINANCE OF DEBT OF WATER AND TRANSIT SYSTEMS. — A s indicated in the paragraph above, 78.4 percent of bonded indebtedness outstanding for public-service
enterprise purposes was composed of indebtedness for water and transit systems.
The heavy Indebtedness for water facilities is largely a reflection of the
greater number of such enterprises compared with other types, while the heavy
debt load of the 11 transit systems is mostly a consequence of unusually high
Investment costs involved In the creation of such facilities, plus the fact
that progress in liquidating the Investment is generally slower than In the
case of other types of enterprises. The indebtedness for purposes of port, harbor, dock, and wharf facilities also reflects the comparatively high costs involved in creating such enterprises, a large part of which is preliminary to
the actual construction of physical properties.
TABLE 46.—GROSS DEBT, BY UNIT OF GOVERNMENT AND BY CHARACTER, AND NET DEBT: 1937
(Includes data for enterprises owned but not operated by city)
NET DEBT l/
GROSS DEBT
u
i
Classified by character
Governmental unit issuing
CITY
>>
Total
4»
•H
Per
capita
O
City corporation
General obligation bonds
Revenue bonds
Short-term loans
Total
All other
Outlays
Refunding
$2,797,270,099
$74.25
$2,726,083,266
$71,186,833 b/$2,529,647,731
$64,655,879
2,178,365,905
248,090,163
370,814,031
98.43
53.79
33.93
2,175,447,317
234,407,462
316,228,487
2,918,588 3/ 2,047,977,865
13,682,701
162,816,694
54,585,544
4/ 318,853,172
17,659,884
18,605,000
28,390,995
$1,349,310,312 *188.60
18,316,482
5.25
200,696,081 101.74
109,011,180
65.43
Los Angeles, Calif.—
198,825,203 146.83
27,035,000
29.44
8,253,000
9.94
64,093,995
78.44
58,058,700
73.78
7,757,965
11.43
San Francisco, Calif.
113,944,600 173.64
5,104,174
8.52
Buffalo, N. Y.
17,959,213
30.73
$1,349,310,312
18,316,482
200,696,081
108,063,591
198,584,843
27,035,000
8,253,000
64,093,995
58,058,700
6,053,000
113,944,600
5,078,500
17,959,213
Outlays
Refunding
General
Per
capita
Revenue
$164,211,797 $22,799,000 $14,309,380 61,646,312 £2,499,039,946
$66.33
1,943,446,434
210,172,648
340,420,864
87.81
46.65
77,637,000
63,609,428
22,965,369
22,799,000
12,292,156
1,600,695
416,529
1,458,346
187,966
GROUP I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 OR OVER
1
2
4
5
8
10
11
13
14
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, Pa.
$947,589
240,360
1,704,965
25,674
5/$l,337,410,312
350,000
200,696,081
6/ 94,580,180
7/ 125,101,203
27,035,000
1,300,000
64,093,995
5/ 58,058,700
7,757,965
113,944,600
2,054,500
8/ 15,595,329
$17,660,000
$14,431,000
925,000
11,167,736,193 $163.22
5.11
17,842,000
200,696,081
55.49
92,450,544
189,591,029 140.01
27,035,000
29.44
7,678,111
9.25
58,094,697
71.10
45,639,892
58.00
7,713,577
11.37
111,934,000 170.58
4,559,304
7.61
12,476,006
21.35
til,900,000
306,482
50,000,000 $22,799,000
6,953,000
3,024,000
2,303,884
25,674
60,000
GROUP I I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 TO 5 0 0 , 0 0 0
Minneapolis, Minn.
New Orleans, L a . - Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J .
Kansas City, Mo.—
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.
Rochester, N. Y . —
Jersey City, N. J.
Houston, Texas
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
$4,291,557
12,983,438
32,536,139
45,751,000
15,106,000
61,776,836
8,780,000
13,580,000
14,499,254
11,399,600
1,774,000
25,612,339
See footnotes at end of table.
27.57
70.72
102.35
36.61
165.13
23.60
40.72
45.32
35.86
5.59
82.86
$4,291,557
12,983,438
32,536,139
45,751,000
15,106,000
56,065,774
8,780,000
13,580,000
14,499,254
5,427,500
1,774,000
23,612,800
5,972,100
1,999,539
$4,291,
12,943,
15,098,
45,696,
15,106,
6,061,
749,
13,580,
14,282,
10,078,
1,079,
23,852,
$557
40,138
1,500,000
55,000
$15,938,000
$1,458,346
$54,257,428
8,031,000
217,000
690,000
1,760,000
5,000
956,730
,938,939
405,086
696,000
,103,835
936,305
617,346
,130,401
000,694
,907,546
972,104
,507,662
25.35
35.66
102.23
36.61
160.21
23.16
36.37
34.39
31.17
3.06
63.11
TABLE 46.—GROSS DEBT, BY UNIT OF GOVERNMENT AND BY CHARACTER, AND NET DEBT: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
(Includes data for enterprises owned but not operated by city)
GROSS DEBT
NET DEBT 1/
u
1>»
Governmental unit Issuing
CITY
Total
+»
o
Per
capita
City corporation
Classified by character
General obligation bonds
Revenue bonds
Short-term loans
Total
All other
Outlays
Refunding
Outlays
Refunding
General
Per
capita
Revenue
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, O h i o Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.'
$6,793,500
799,000
41,861,358
25,416,600
2,360,000
8,444,500
7,452,000
3,015,000
|22.67
2.67
141.61
86.69
8.42
30.38
26.82
11.03
#6,793,500
799,000
7,462,390
25,416,600
2,360,000
8,444,500
7,452,000
3,015,000
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Term.
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
10,466,392
9,367,774
19,241,029
6,166,000
6,570,600
5,579,030
4,880,647
5,047,600
39.48
35.82
75.28
25.32
30.17
26.01
23.62
25.06
10,466,392
9,367,774
19,241,029
6,166,000
414,600
5,579,030
4,880,647
5,047,600
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.Fort Worth, Tex.
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.
San Diego, Calif.
2,759,800
7,578,363
805,000
2,855,000
5,443,140
7,714,802
2,062,500
405,000
13,078,109
13.94
40.99
4.62
16.52
32.17
45.79
12.34
2.49
81.69
2,759,800
7,578,363
805,000
2,855,000
5,443,140
282,000
2,062,500
405,000
13,078,109
2,759,800
9/ 7,478,363
690,000
2,855,000
10/ 3,561,140
7,714,802
11/ 2,062,500
405,000
13,078,109
Long Beach, C a l i f . —
Nashville, Tenn.
Springfield, M a s s . —
Tulsa, Okla.
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
11,534,851
3,572,000
6,384,000
4,597,000
4,855,202
4,500
4,451,500
5,181,800
73.47
22.37
41.62
31.06
33.42
.03
30.87
36.88
11,534,851
11,534,785
3,458,000
6,'384^000
4,597,000
4,855,202
6,384,000
4,537,000
4,855,202
4,500
4,451,500
5,181,800
134,398,968
6,156,000
$6,793,500
364,000
41,861,358
10,349,600
1,777,000
8,419,500
7,452,000
15,000
9,918,000
9,367,774
19,190,000
6,166,000
6,570,600
3,584,483
4,418,647
5,047,600
3,737,500
5,179,800
$435,000
15,067,000
583,000
25,000
$3,000,000
548,392
$51,029
1,994,547
462,000
$66
714,000
2,000
$5,305,702
697,665
41,159,148
24,566,897
2,159,606
8,006,089
6,094,902
3,006,556
$17.70
2.33
139.24
83.79
7.70
28.80
21.93
11.00
10,439,410
9,026,314
13,176,771
4,758,694
2,420,825
5,579,030
4,880,647
5,047,600
39.38
34.52
51.55
19.54
11.11
26.01
23.62
25.06
2,759,800
7,478,363
805,000
1,623,075
5,443,140
7,285,024
1,164,036
405,000
12,756,091
13.94
40.45
4.62
9.39
32.17
43.23
6.96
2.49
79.68
11,451,726
3.408.002
6,384,000
4.597.000
4,104,199
72.94
21.82
41.62
31.06
28.25
4,451,500
5,181,800 1
30.87
36.88
13,934,000
5,484,875
19,888,785
11,704,892
816,338
450,000
2,446,818
1,935,421
100.24
39.49
153.23
90.24
6.58
3.64
19.83
16.12
160,000
806,000
1,252,000
1,157,773
1,355,623
4,540,500
205,000
381,922
160,000
645,580
1,252,000
9.72
11.46
38.51
1.74
3.28
1.39
5.65
11.12
2,661,400
4,600,036
260,000
675,000
9,787,495
7,965,417
757,000
6,975,000
2,661,400
4,157,000
260,000
675,000
107,000
6,059,345
757,000
6,975,000
2,618,337
4,600,036
260,000
48b,246
9,644,017
7,965,417
757,000
6,940,098
23.42
41.59
2.37
4.43
89.13
73.62
7.04
65.11
2,965,000
108,000
1,644,000
956,000
415,000
262,121
1,995,000
6,642,000
375,500
2,845,000
108,000
1,289,000
756,000
415,000
249,750
418,000
6,642,000
375,500
2,901,994
108,000
1,554,939
913,020
415,000
262,121
1,995,000
6,642,000
375,500
27.25
1.02
14.70
8.69
4.03
2.55
19.58
65.57
3.75
13,934,000
5,657,500
19,993,851
15,354,491
1,445,000
450,000
5,703,000
1,951,000
100.24
40.73
154.04
118.38
11.64
3.64
46.22
16.24
Camden, N J.Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J . —
Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
Fall River, Mass.Cambridge, M a s s . —
New Bedford, Mass.-
1,514,500
1,355,623
4,635,500
205,000
609,000
160,000
806,000
1,252,000
12.72
11.46
39.32
1.74
5.22
1.39
7.05
11.12
1,514,500
1,355,623
4,635,500
205,000
609,000
160,000
806,000
1,252,000
1,055,500
1,355,623
4,635,500
205,000
Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, Tenn.'
Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind..
Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.-
2,661,400
4,600,036
260,000
675,000
9,787,495
7,965,417
757,000
6,975,000
23.81
41.59
2.37
6.16
90.46
73.62
7.04
65.43
Tampa, Fla.
Somervllle, Mass.
El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.~
Lynn, Mass.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.-Lowell, Mass.
2,965,000
108,000
1,644,000
956,000
415,000
262,121
1,995,000
6,642,000
375,500
27.84
1.02
15.54
9.10
4.03
2.55
19.58
65.57
3.75
Paterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.Kansas City, Kans.Fort Wayne, I n d . —
Honolulu, Hawaii 12/J
l/
2/
3/
4/
5/
6/
7/
8/
9/
10/
11/
12/
13,934,000
5,657,500
13,396,077
15,354,491
1,445,000
450,000
5,703,000
1,951,000
8,590,000
Net debt is bonded debt less sinking-fund assets.
Includes $1,404,357,391 funding bond-anticipation notes.
Includes $1,403,825,691 funding bond-anticipation notes.
Includes $531,700 funding bond-anticipation notes.
Funding bond-anticipation notes.
Includes $4,528,000 funding bond-anticipation notes.
Includes $3,714,350 funding bond-anticipation notes.
Includes $114,329 funding bond-anticipation notes.
Includes $311,700 funding bond-anticipation notes.
Includes ?220,000 funding bond-anticipation notes.
Includes $29,000 special assessment debt.
Not included in group or grand totals.
6,597,774
13,934,000
2,337,500
12,042,500
15,231,491
1,367,000
450,000
5,703,000
1,922,000
2,070,000
1,353,577
123,000
100,000
87,900
1,150,000
6,509,874
15,000
168,000
56,000
294,072
9,624,495
1,612,000
120,000
355,000
200,000
12,371
1,577,000
8,590,000
TABLE 4 7 . — B O N D E D DEBT AT CLOSE OF YEAR,
BY TYPE OF E N T E R P R I S E :
1937
( I n c l u d e s d a t a f o r e n t e r p r i s e s owned but n o t o p e r a t e d by c i t y )
Grand t o t a l -
Group I
Group I I —
Group III-
$2,781,314,407
2,166,073,749
245,031,122
370,209,536
Water-supply
systems
Electric light
and power
systems
$1,159,474,578
$187,944,343
135,535,843
38,346,000
14,062,500
757,101,211
105,713,954
296,659,407
Gas-supply
systems
Ports, harbors, docks,
and wharves
$1,021,101,048
$17,710,050
$323,599,542
$25,958,877
$45,525,975
990,240,620
29,427,428
1,433,000
8,359,000
9,351,050
247,497,772
36,374,296
39,727,474
13,364,448
4,754,342
7,840,087
22,333,855
22,056,102
1,136,018
Transit
systems
Airports
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 OR OVER
New York, N. Y .
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, Pa.
D e t r o i t , Mich.
Los A n g e l e s , C a l i f . C l e v e l a n d , Ohio
S t . L o u i s , Mo.
$1,337,410,312
18,010,000
200,696,081
109,011,180
198,825,203
27,035,000
8,253,000
$383,741,448
17,660,000
33,110,492
67,787,591
78,917,860
22,386,000
6,953,000
64,093,995
58,058,700
7,757,965
113,944,600
37,552,371
876,000
5,680,600
81,740,000
5,078,500
17,899,213
3,044,000
17,651,849
10
11
12
13
14
B a l t i m o r e , Md.
B o s t o n , Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San F r a n c i s c o , C a l i f . Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, W i s .
B u f f a l o , N. Y .
15
16
17
18
19
20
Minneapolis, Minn.New Orleans, La.-Cincinnati, O h i o —
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
$4,291,000
12,943,300
31,036,139
45,696,000
15,106,000
60,318,490
24
25
26
Indianapolis, Ind.Rochester* N. Y . —
Jersey City, N. J.'
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
6,780,000
13,580,000
14,499,254
11,399,600
1,769,000
25,612,339
$755,061,889
$182,776,980
139,806,431
38,017,000
26,545,028
$101,378,843
3,657,000
18,528,500
992,000
1,300,000
17,612,764
55,754,700
30,500,000
$15,829,995
$350,000
1,234,130
3,206,589
1,600,600
2,707,000
1,146,000
2,077,365
104,000
6,221,860
282,000
247,364
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
$3,402,000
9,413,300
8,219,400
21,330,000
13,534,000
7,095,000
$546,000
$343,000
245,500
14,163,000
360,000
5,179,857
653,000
700,000
1,212,000
423,342
$3,500,000
9,503,000
$38,346,000
9,166,428
749,000
199,000
$8,031,000
6,123,000
14,248,254
3,187,000
1,769,000
17,393,000
7,258,000
328,000
251,000
7,409,600
8,219,339
475,000
$30,000
21,918,239
107,863
[I.—CITIES HAYING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
27
28
29
30
31
Columbus, O h i o —
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, C o l o . —
Atlanta, Ga.
$6,793,500
799,000
41,861,358
25,416,6,00
2,360,000
$5,437,500
529,000
34,398,968
25,416,600
2,360,000
32
33
34
35
36
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, M i n n . —
Birmingham, Ala.Akron, Ohio
Memphis, Tenn.
8,444,500
7,452,000
3,015,000
10,466,392
9,367,774
7,894,500
6,905,000
3,015,000
9,343,392
5,133,000
37
38
39
40
41
Providence, R. I.San Antonio, Tex.Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
19,190,000
6,166,000
6,570,600
5,579,030
4,880,647
18,000,000
6,159,000
4,374,000
5,412,500
4,880,647
$1,782,000
42
43
44
45
46
Oklahoma City, Okla.Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, M i c h . —
5,047,600
2,759,800
7,478,363
805,000
2,855,000
4,717,600
2,759,800
3,690,700
805,000
2,855,000
3,469,550
47
48
49
50
51
Fort Worth, Tex.--•
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, C o n n . —
San Diego, Calif.-
5,443,140
7,714,802
2,062,500
405,000
13,078,109
4,858,140
7,432,802
2,062,500
11,235,609
52
53
54
55
56
57
Long Beach, Calif.Nashville, Tenn.
Springfield, Mass.Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.—
Des Moines, I o w a —
11,534,785
3,572,000
6,384,000
4,597,000
2,480,000
3,299,000
6,384,000
4,121,000
4,855,202
4,716,252
59
60
61
62
63
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.
Albany, N. Y.
4,451,500
5,181,800
13,934,000
5,557,500
19,905,951
4,421,500
5,151,000
13,934,000
925,000
13,059,000
64
65
66
67
68
69
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.Eansas City, Kans.Fort Wayne, Ind.
Camden, N. J.
15,354,491
1,367,000
450,000
5,703,000
1,936,000
1,346,500
8,943,866
1,267,000
3,489,000
1,886,000
1,346,500
$779,000
$120,000
7,462,390
$577,000
150,000
550,000
547,000
3,000,000
271,250
1,123,000
117,000
$846,524
1,190,000
7,000
414,600
166,530
330,000
300,000
18,113
585,000
282,000
70,000
1,338,750
3,231,000
335,000
503,750
5,823,785
8,000
476,000
138,950
30,800
2,372,500
100,000
2,214,000
2,205,000
6,509,874
55,000
337,077
6,410,625
100,000
100,000
250,000
50,000
175,000
TABLE 47.-—BONDED DEBT AT CLOSE OF YEAR, BY TYPE OF ENTERPRISE:
1937— Continued
(Includes data for e n t e r p r i s e s ovmed but not operated by c i t y )
Water-supply
systems
Electric light
and power
systems
T r a n s i t systems
Oas-supply
systems
P o r t s , harb o r s , docks,
and wharves
Airports
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
E r i e , Pa.
E l i z a b e t h , N. J . Wichita, Kans.
Spokane, Wash.
F a l l River, Mass.'
$1,355,623
4,635,500
205,000
609,000
160,000
11,320,000
4,575,000
Cambridge, M a s s . —
New Bedford, Mass.
Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, Term.-Peoria, 111.
806,000
1,252,000
2,661,400
4,600,036
260,000
806,000
1,136,000
2,611,500
4,310,036
South Bend, Ind.
Tacama, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
675,000
9,787,495
7,965,417
675,000
4,030,495
2,567,000
757,000
757,000
Wilmington, Del.Tampa, Fla.
Somerville, Mass
EL Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.-
6,975,000
2,965,000
108,000
1,644,000
956,000
4,365,000
2,495,000
108,000
1,623,000
918,000
Lynn, Mass.
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.Lowell, Mass.
415,000
262,121
1,995,000
6,642,000
375,500
1,061,500
6,642,000
375,500
Honolulu, Hawaii l / ~
8,590,000
1/ Not included in group or grand t o t a l s .
$35,623
$60,500
$205,000
609,000
160,000
116,000
49,900
$290,000
5,307,000
$343,000
1,090,000
107,000
4,171,500
2,610,000
470,000
21,000
38,000
415,000
$868,500
183,250
$65,000
78,871
PART III: PUBLIC-SERVICE ENTERPRISES
309
TABLE 48
The bonded indebtedness for public-service enterprise purposes is shown byrate of interest in table 48. Of the 17 specified rates, 5 rates predominated,
being paid in the aggregate on 76.6 percent of all bonded interest-bearing debt.
As expressed in percentage of total, these rates are, in order of importance:
4i percent, 20.5 percent of total; 4i percent, 20.5 percent of total; 4 percent,
17 percent of total; 3i percent, 11.4 percent of total; 5 percent, 7.2 percent
of total.
AVERAGE RATES AND NOMINAL AND EFFECTIVE RATES OF INTEREST. — T h e Bureau's method
of computing average rates of interest for each city in the issuance of bonded
indebtedness for public-service enterprise purposes is the same as that explained in the discussion of debt and specified assets of general government.5
Reference should also be made to the explanation contained in that section of
nominal and effective rates of interest, which is applicable to the material
presented in table 48.6
COMPARISON WITH INTEREST RATES ON DEBT ISSUED FOR GENERAL GOVERNMENT.—The preceding figures present interesting contrasts with the interest rates carried on
indebtedness for general government purposes. For the latter, a 4 percent interest rate was the predominant rate, accounting for 23 percent of total funded
debt outstanding, followed by 4i percent rate, which accounted for 17.9 percent
of the total. A relatively large proportion of public-service enterprise debt
was outstanding at a 3i percent interest rate than in the case of general government debt, however, the figures being 11.4 percent and 6.3 percent, respectively, of the total interest-bearing bonded debt. A striking similarity in
the level of interest rates is suggested by the fact that 40.6 percent of bonded
indebtedness for general government purposes was issued at interest rates ranging from 2 to 4 percent, inclusive, which is virtually the identical proportion—39.6 percent—of total bonded indebtedness issued for public-service enterprises within this interest range. The average rate for all issues, 4.1
percent, was the same in each case.
Since the greater part (92.7 percent) of bonded indebtedness issued for
purposes of public-service enterprises is In the nature of general obligation
bonds of the city corporations, there is, of course, no reason why the general
level of interest rates in each case should not be approximately the same. Revenue bonds, which are somewhat "unseasoned" marketwise, will naturally introduce
some fluctuations from the general level.
TABLE 49
Data relating to the issue and retirement of debt for public-service enterprise purposes are presented in table 49.
DEBT ISSUES AND RETIREMENTS.—A total of 44 cities reported issues of new indebtedness for this purpose, and 83 reported retirements. General obligation
bonds issued were $63,746,146 in excess of similar bonds retired, largely because of a substantial new issue by New York for the funding of certain shortterm loans. New revenue bond issues exceeded the amount of such obligations
retired by $53,457,404, mostly accounted for by the new $50,000,000 issue
brought out by Los Angeles in connection with its electric light and power system. New York City alone effected a reduction of $52,001,306 in short-term
debt. Cincinnati incurred $1,500,000 short-term debt, with no retirement. The
transactions relating to the issue and retirement of debt, as reported in table
49, are based upon the par value of the obligations. They do not reflect, therefore, either premiums or discounts.
NET CHANGE IN DEBT DURING THE YEAR.-These financing operations resulted in a
net increase of $117,203,550 in bonded indebtedness, but there was, on the other
hand, a net decrease of $50,476,719 in short-term indebtedness.
5/ See section C of part I I , p . 204, supra,
6/ P. 218, supra.
TABLE 48.—BONDED DEBT AT CLOSE OF YEAR, BY RATE OF INTEREST:
1937
(Includes data for e n t e r p r i s e s owned but not operated by c i t y )
4
City
No.
3
percent
percent
Grand t o t a l Group I
Group I I —
Group I I I -
4
3£
3*
percent
percent
percent
percent
peroent
$2,781,314,407
$3,701,463
$22,313,478
$4,059,852
$7,938,890
$152,508,896
$82,006,306
$318,312,284
$37,338,085
$473,884,652
$571,472,571
2,166,073,749
245,031,122
370,209,536
2,451,000
1,250,463
5,868,000
14,662,000
1,783,478
609,000
934,239
2,516,613
3,203,600
749,290
3,986,000
145,298,396
2,450,000
4,760,500
77,044,306
1,359,000
3,603,000
299,309,984
13,170,000
5,832,300
28,778,326
2,498,000
6,061,759
367,502,834
48,996,791
57,385,027
496,425,820
22,219,578
52,827,173
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 OR OVER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
$1,337,410,312
18,010,000
200,696,081
109,011,180
198,825,203
27,035,000
8,253,000
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
64,093,995
58,058,700
7,757,965
113,944,600
San Francisco, Calif.-
$5,850,000
$335,000
$819,000
1,605,000
18,000
274,000
115,000
340,600
324,000
$138,980,396
1,900,000
$68,817,306
$225,801,964
$16,832,076
$210,081,130
1,350,000
$441,963,730
950,000
1,650,000
6,944,000
4,051,000
52,290,000
2,237,000
5,176,250
26,424,000
33,226,900
1,506,000
20,396,200
9,177,350
2,531,000
3,284,000
9,137,470
7,670,850
358,700
4,533,000
772,000
852,000
561,000
194,000
5,078,500
17,899,213
722,000
38,595,000
31,807,850
832,225
12,114,000
9,703,000
5,469,840
3,024,000
8,541,729
350,000
3,550,700
$2,401,000
6,848,000
3,708,100
6,783,000
1,676,000
7,981,691
$400,000
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
$4,291,000
12,943,300
31,036,139
45,696,000
15,106,000
60,318,490
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Indianapolis, Ind.
Rochester, N, Y.
8,780,000 1
13.580,000 |
14,499,254
11,399,600
1,769,000
25,612,339
$45,000
$9,000
$13,731,000
2,326,000
80,000
$30,000
179,239
$420,000
$10,000
489,000
$1,975,000
939,000
$80,000
5,139,000
2,440,000
5,511,000
100,000
931,000
2,489,000
2,856,000
625,000
475,000
250,290
31,000
1,079,000
15,633,000
6»,0UU
10,321,000
1,956,712
6,164,000
2,413,000
331,866
GEROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
29
30
31
$6,793,500
799,000
41,861,358
25,416,600
2,360,000
32
33
34
35
36
8,444,500
7,452,000
3,015,000
10,466,392
9,367,774
hi
'
42
43
44
45
46
"
T
yracuse,
41
&
nh™'
iv
M
M*
.
19,190,000
6,166,000
6,570,600
5,579,030
4,880,647
V
Worcester, Mass.
V
+
Av,4
'
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
^ ? .•-,-, 'm
.'
*
033j:u
l sepor ,
S a l t Lake City, Utah
erson,
.
.
12,367,000
$2,700,000
583,000
1,000
1,860,000
2,964,000
224,000
290,000
1,148,000
3,015,000
3,049,000
919,000
16,190,000
2,000,000
100,000
1,501,927
150,000
50,000
292,093
216,000
352,000
859,000
1,652,250
35,000
125,000
111,000
2,058,000
80,000
1,375,000
117,000
$3,000,000
$7,079
16,000
113
$1,439,440
680,000
300,000
589,000
85,000
300,000
1,160,000
390,874
266,000
70,000
852,300
1,894,000
11,534,785
3,572,000
6,384,000
4,597,000
260,000
68,000
94,000
334,000
2,862,580
225,000
1,461,000
4,855,202
15,354,491
1,367,000
450,000
5,703,000
1,936,000
1,346,500
788,172
7,000
5,047,600
2,759,800
7,478,363
805,000
2,855,000
4,451,500
5,181,800
13,934,000
5,557,500
19,905,951
$435,000
$200,000
2,700,000
5,443,140
7,714,802
2,062,500
405,000
13,078,109
N
$2,046,000
239,000
$49,000
$150,000
$316,000
757,384
262,038
950,000
833,500
185,000
238,000
180,000
44,000
540,000
210,000
90,000
115,000
180,000
1,334,000
10,000
255,000
340,000
837,885
90,000
528,220
184,000
182,000
503,750
2,165,000
98,000
3,369,000
1,919,000
1,241,000
1,392,000
276,250
200,000
2,863,000
350,000
525,000
1,010,500
7,227,000
345,000
2,524,770
5,388,808
50,000
333,000
30,000
10,000
217,500
195,000
1,872,000
348,000
TABLE 48.—BONDED DEBT AT CLOSE OF YEAR, BY RATE OF INTEREST:
1937—Continued
(Includes data for e n t e r p r i s e s owned but not operated by c i t y )
2
percent
2*
percent
34percent
2|
percent
percent
4i
3f
percent
percent
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
70
71
72
73
74
'v
i
$1,355,623
4,635,500
205,000
609,000
160,000
75
76
77
78
806,000
1,252,000
2,661,400
4,600,036
79
80
81
82
260,000
675,000 1
9,787,495
7,965,417
83
84
85
86
757,000
6,975,000
2.965,000
87
88
89
90
108,000
1,644,000
956,000
415,000
91
92
93
94
262,121
1,995,000
6,642,000
375,500
8,590,000
1/ Not included in group or grand t o t a l s .
$471,130
$56,000
$4,500
193,000
$416,000
134,000
$98,000
49,000
$39,000
92,500
735,000
1,850,000
290,000
$472,500
28,000
85,000
1,624,000
1,622,000
26,000
$82,000
21,000
200,000
25,000
14,000
13,000
$15,000
664,000
189,000
91,000
22,750
1,050,000
935,000
211,500
10,500
70,000
67,000
#532,000
130,000
50,000
350,000
36,000
66,500
3,167,000
TABLE 48.—BONDED DEBT AT CLOSE OF YEAR, BY RATE OF INTEREST:
1937—Continued
(Includes data for e n t e r p r i s e s ovmed but not operated by city)
Oily
No.
CITY
Grand total
roup
4*
percent
5
percent
4|
percent
5£
percent
5*
percent
5|
percent
6
percent
Other reported
rates
Rates not
reported
Noninterest
bearing
Average
rate
$569,639,151
$53,555,188
$200,028,272
$10,136,000
$34,669,940
$5,472,000
$21,213,444
$208,988,064
$941,317
$3,134,554
4.1
411,587,627
72,623,169
85,428,355
29,284,689
5,126,000
19,144,499
65,886,845
41,788,193
92,353,234
4,056,000
940,000
5,140,000
16,243,000
7,308,000
11,118,940
5,413,000
4,128,293
5,899,000
11,186,151
202,391,432
1,166,862
5,429,770
251,317
690,000
2,791,280
4.1
4.3
4.5
59,000
343,274
GROUP I . — C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 OR OVER
^228,748,710
2
3
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
$168,000
$14,592,000
1/$200,696,081
Los Angeles, Calif.
a
ore,
Buffalo, N. Y.
28,485,274
44,964,843
10,819,000
4,969,000
1,000,000
2,303,000
688,300
86,153,000
$316,389
24,195,000
4,705,000
1,484,000
19,466,500
3,133,000
$3,300,000
756,000
$9,707,000
2,217,000
4,319,000
$20,000
1,068,000
$1,090,000
2,941,293
22,000
83,317
5,067
1,280
14,588,245
221,000
68,300
4,325,000
10,834,600
887,000
2,569,500
75,000
742,500
825,000
1,690,284
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapolis, Minn.New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J .
Kansas City, Mo.—
S e a t t l e , Wash.
£454,000
3,565,300
1,303,700
18,196,000
12,705,000
6,273,086
I n d i a n a p o l i s , Ind.Rochester, N. Y.—
Jersey C i t y , N. J.Houston, Tex.
L o u i s v i l l e , Ky.
P o r t l a n d , Oreg.
8,749,000
2,486,000
7,368,254
3,285,200
1/ Estimated r a t e s .
3,237,629
2,850 000
$30,000
2,000,000
3,600,100
135,000
625,000
27,229,139
1,321,000
213,000
31,000
438,000
90,000
6,450,400
$452 000
75 000
215 000
1,159,554
§2,704,000
86,000
$940,000
$2,988,000
1,013,000
$400,000
2,250,000
377,362
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.2
4.7
4.2
3.9
4.1
TABLE 48.—BONDED DEBT AT CLOSE OF YEAR, BY RATE OF INTEREST: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
(Includes data for enterprises owned but not operated by city)
City
No.
Other reported
rates
5*
percent
Rates not Noninterest
bearing
reported
Average
rate
$35,000
4.5
4.1
4.9
4.1
4.4
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
27
28
29
30
31
o urn us, 0
o
#2,293,500
315,000
5,246,390
7,649,600
419,000
§•19,000
1,592,000
$22,000
$281,000
?100,000
1,338,000
19,000
$59,000
550,500
32
33
34
35
36
5,567,000
2,408,000
82,000
2,349,000
1,256,000
654,000
1,578,000
37
38
39
40
41
1,000,000
42
43
44
45
46
$1,613,000
95,000
34,406,968
$118,000
350,000
1,800,100
1,404,000
1,773,000
368,000
67,000
500,000
53,120
134,000
300,774
4.1
5.5
4.5
4.2
4.7
6,159,000
1,782,000
4,638,600
1,955,000
19,198
Grand Rapids, Mich.
1,922,000
506,000
1,909,600
50,800
3,108,000
2,786,000
143,859
2/ 1,154,647
366,000
473,000
650,000
47
4S
49
50
51
1,462,000
113,640
1,281,600
223,000
4,482,784
128,000
220,000
24,622
4^7,900
587,500
7,320,075
52
53
54
1,947,125
569,000
1,095,000
905,000
4,406,660
699,000
693,000
2,503,500
298,000
5,000
30,000
660,000
150,000
330,000
30,000
555,000
2,574,140
61,000
4.7
3.4
4.3
5.7
4.5
4.6
3.3
4.6
4.4
4.8
2,000
1.345.000
4.5
4.2
4.0
4.5
4.3
4.6
4.5
4.0
5.1
56
57
58
59
60
61
Salt Lake City, Utah
859,000
100,000
3,084,952
179,000
1,217,500
5,465,000
375,000
320,500
1,155,000
335,000
78,800
240,000
1,908,000
4.9
30,000
230,000
4.1
4.3
4.5
62
1,325,000
5,994,225
2,419,491
693,500
350,000
65
66
68
•c. J^vj
C
v
X
^'T
J
S
3,683,000
"
c\ ' ^ TJ ' T
• n-p
1,247,301
1,292,500
1,547,040
11,215,000
560,000
1,670,000
500
1,500,000
14,000
616,000
880,000
325,000
40,000
165,000
2,000
71
4,115,000
90,000
113,000
4.6
2.7
4.1
3.7
4.2
73
26,000
143,000
88,000
228,000
192,400
442,000
-- . f' *
3,700,000
260,000
82
83
85
86
292,000
4.1
4.7
4.5
4.9
4.6
120,000
4.8
610,036
56,000
500,000
5,897,000
492,500
587,000
1,004,000
4,139,417
224,000
600,000
2,662,000
5,575,000
243,000
860,000
314,000
100,000
105,995
179,000
3,000
5.7
4.5
5.0
530,000
60,000
87
89
90
91
92
93
94
398,000
515,000
9,000
26,000
731,000
92,000
<"5,000
22,000
162,371
Wat
h'
r'
Honolulu, Hawaii 3/
^
20,000
393,000
1,310,000
980,000
8,240,000
.
2/ The r a t e reported for #754,647 of t h i s amount was an estimated average.
3 / Not included in group or grand t o t a l s .
5.0
4.7
4.4
4.6
4.3
4.4
4.4
5.9
2,493
460,000
S
4.1
590,000
20,000
2.6
4.8
3.8
3.8
4.2
3.8
4.3
3.7
5.0
TABLE 49.—ISSUE AND RETIREMENT OF DEBT: 1937
(Includes data for enterprises owned but not operated by c i t y .
Grand totalGroup I
Group I I —
Group III-
See text discussion, p . 309)
Short-term
loans
General bonds
Revenue bonds
General bonds
;216,055,1?4
$114,208,009
$58,987,928
$42,859,237
$149,328,343
191,943,113
9,289,085
14,822,976
102,381,575
2,070,000
9,756,434
51,900,000
3,268,928
3,819,000
37,661,538
3,950,157
1,247,542
119,339,519
13,527,479
16,461,345
27,657,476
9,079,033
13,725,354
#93,979,816
1,361,937
2,700,000
5,932,246
5,273,725
1,599,600
678,000
$4,443,510
20,000
2,700,000
5,932,246
5,273,725
1,599,600
100,000
1,476,674
1,495,000
746,565
3,145,900
1,476,674
1,495,000
746,565
3,145,SCO
467,500
482,556
241,700
482,556
$210,000
769,361
3,232,000
1,090,000
76,000
4,536,497
$210,000
745,800
3,232,000
1,090,000
76,000
183,512
13,000
735,000
544,000
568,900
4,000
735,000
544,000
506,000
Revenue bonds
Short-term
loans
$5,530,524
$93,335,956
2,094,000
2,265,400
1,171,124
89,588,043
2,183,046
1,564,867
$1,323,000
$89,536,306
18,937
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
New York, N. Y.
Chicago, 111.
Philadelphia, P a . —
Detroit, Mich.
Los Angeles, Calif.'
Cleveland, Ohio
St. Louis, Ho.
10
11
12
13
14
Baltimore, Md.
Boston, Mass.
Pittsburgh, Pa.
San Francisco, Calif.'
Washington, D. C.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Buffalo, N. Y.
$127,071,306
1,908,064
1,841,500
4,176,275
52,221,494
$89,536,306
2,215,000
715,000
2,215,000
715,000
1,676,000
1,676,000
#37,535,000
8,064
1 841 500
4 176 275
2 221 494
58,474
60,000
58,474
60,000
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
15
16
17
18
19
Minneapolis, Minn.
New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
21
22
Indianapolis, Ind.'
Rochester, N. Y . —
Jersey City, N. J.
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
24
25
$500,557
540,138
1,526,000
544,000
$500,000
500,000
26,000
489,000
5,618,390
$557
40,138
1,500,0Q0
55,000
$3,268,928
0,000
80,000
475,000
5,000
475,000
2,349,462
5,000
1,752,721
$23,561
$2,202,500
III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
Columbus, OhioToledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.•
Denver, C o l o . —
Atlanta, Ga.
32
33
Dallas, T e x . - —
St. Paul, Minn.Birmingham, Ala.'
Akron, Ohio
Memphis, T e n n . —
40
41
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
43
44
45
46
Oklahoma City, Okla.Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, M i c h . —
47
48
49
50
51
Fort Worth, Tex.Hartford, Conn.—'
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.San Diego, Calif.'
55
56
$583,000
500,000
$552,000
84,000
856,072
203,000
711,000
$552,000
84,000
856,072
203,000
711,000
631,000
219,000
629,000
219,000
672,140
1,145,000
672,140
345,000
$2,000,000
185,000
3,000,000
$500,000
75
123,500 j
422,000 '
225,868
657,631 !
123,500
422,000
225,868
657,631
324,2.00
333,700
311,700 |
85,000
324,200
333,700
170,900 |
296,797 ]
144,000
30,000
587,325
150,900
296,797
144,000
30,000
587,325
713,536
137,000
282,000
469,000
446,290
137,000
282,000
469,000
192,751
192,751
125,500
272,950
344,000
445,000
895,279
125,500
272,950
344,000
445,000
582,355
78,000
41,500
41,500
15,000
78,000
131,000
78,000
131,000
46,475
64,033
300,000
175,000
311,700
100,000
1,894,000
Long Beach, Calif.Nashville, Tenn.
Springfield, Mass.Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, C o n n . —
Des Moines, Iowa
267,312
60
61
62
63
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, Fla.
Albany, N. Y.
330,000
64
65
66
67
68
69
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, Tenn.Kansas City, Kans.Fort Wayne, Ind.
Camden, N. J.
100,000
85,000
820,000
2,500
400,000
838,000
1,150,000
100,000
175,800
2,064
46,475 1
137,124
TABLE 4 9 . — I S S U E AND RETIREMENT OF DEBT:
1937—Continued
(Includes data for e n t e r p r i s e s owned but not operated by c i t y .
General bonds
Revenue bonds
See t e x t d i s c u s s i o n , p . 309)
Short-term
loans
General bonds
Revenue bonds
Short-term
loans
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
Erie, Pa.
Elizabeth, N. J..
Wichita, K a n s . —
Spokane, W a s h . —
Fall River, Mass
$32,498
95,000
20,500
84,000
14,000
$32,498
95,000
20,500
Cambridge, M a s s . —
New Bedford, Mass.
Reading, Pa.
Knoxville, T e n n . —
$132,565
134,500
115,000
53,100
207,978
134,500
115,000
53,100
207,978
20,000
20,000
1,061,927
935,000
508,100
57,000
456,100
53,000
97,150
74,000
53,000
97,150
74,000
3,000
60,121
448,000
62,500
3,000
52,000
448,000
62,500
26,574
170,000
216,000
71,500
26,574
170,000
216,000
71,500
Peoria, 111.
South Bend, Ind.Tacoma, Wash.
Miami, Fla.
384,072
$669,000
Gary, Ind.
Canton, Ohio
Wilmington, Del.
Tampa, Fla.
Somerville, Mass.
El Paso, Tex.
Evansville, Ind.—
Lynn, Mass.
82,000
200,000
25,000
200,000
25,000
Utica, N. Y.
Duluth, Minn.
Waterbury, Conn.'
Lowell, Mass.
Honolulu, Hawaii l/—
1/ Not included in group or grand totals.
554,000
554,000
$8,855
$84,000
14,000
878,000
52,000
$8,121
PART III: PUBLIC-SERVICE ENTERPRISES
319
TABLE 50
Assets in sinking funds, public trust funds, investment funds, and general
funds of public-service enterprises are shown in table 50. Such assets totaled
$1,066,762,973 at the close of 1937.
ASSETS IN SINKING FUNDS. —Assets in sinking funds of public-service enterprises totaled $282,246,018, of which amount approximately 87 percent was in the
form of investments in city securities, 9.2 percent in cash, and 3.8 percent in
other investments, mostly securities.
As previously mentioned, the reported
amount of sinking-fund assets for public-service enterprises should be qualified by the statement that in several cases it was not possible to segregate
assets of general government from those of public-service enterprises, in which
case the assets were Included under sinking funds of general government.
ASSETS IN PUBLIC TRUST FUNDS.—As might be expected, assets in public trust
funds are negligible, since such funds are normally associated with general
government and are usually created for purposes which fall within the scope of
general government functions. In only two cases, Detroit and Fort Wayne, were
public trust funds created in connection with public-service enterprises. In
the case of Detroit it is a retirement fund for the platform employees of the
Department of Street Railways; in the case of Fort Wayne it is a retirement
fund for the employees of the water and electric light and power systems. The
fact that this particular trust fund in Detroit is kept entirely in cash is an
unusual circumstance and is especially rare in connection with retirement funds.
ASSETS IN INVESTMENT FUNDS AND MISCELLANEOUS INVESTMENTS.—This group of assets,
which total $707,231,417, comprised approximately two-thirds of all specified
assets held by public-service enterprises. Investments in real property amount
to 98 percent of total investment funds held in this group, and comprise for
the most part the investments in municipal public-service enterprises which are
leased to others. It will be noted that investments in the New York transit
system and in the Philadelphia gas works constitute more than 80 percent of investments in real property. Investments of this character are shown at their
book value. The other items of investment under this group are of negligible
relative importance and are self-explanatory.
ASSETS IN GENERAL FUNDS.—The last two columns in table 50 show the amount of
cash held in general treasury and administrative funds at the close of 1937,
and they require no special comment.
TABLE 5 0 . — AMOUNT OF SPECIFIED ASSETS AT CLOSE OF YEAR: 1937
W
(Includes data for enterprises owned but not operated by city)
ASSETS IN SINKING FUNDS
ASSETS IN INVESTMENT FUNDS, AND MISCELLANEOUS INVESTMENTS
City securities (par
value)
Other investments
City securities
(par
value)
Grand t o t a l.—-Wi.
'
066,762,973
$282,246,018
$26,133,658
$245,172,406
$10,939,954
$707,231,417
2/903,072,740
92,907,967
222,627,315
29,859,031
29,759,672
16,340,732
4,317,580
5,475,346
203,513,496
23,307,859
18,351,051
2,773,087
2,233,592
5,933,275
636,428,288
54,217,627
16,585,502
Group I
Group II-Group III-
3/70,782,266
8
Real property
Other investments
CASH IN GENERAL TREASURY AND GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE FUNDS
Exclusive
of amounts
held in
private
trust
accounts
Amounts
held in
private
trust
accounts
$4,393,481 $5,554,038 6693,188,775 £4,095,123 ^74,106,388 $3,012,239
3,561,948
207,876
623,657
1,703,843
1,272,152
2,578,043
628,387,061
52,493,971
12,307,743
2,775,436
243,628
1,076,059
42,894,722
8,595,515
22,616,151
$387,734,171
$853,144
$9,055,066
3,704,639
90,480
67,093
1,751,450
2,335,747
9,203,139
2,999,693
3,370,670
8,526,456
58,573,633
103,749
242,174
51,504
9,997,856
996,884
937,350
964,345
235,794
1,812,100
GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Philadelphia, Pa.
Los Angeles, Calif.—
San Francisco, Calif.
Washington, D. C.
$3,377,132
168,000
$569,755,091
3,872,639
173,462,321
4/19,124,914
22,784,258
3,157,401
3,945,559
$169,674,119
168,000
14,557,355
72,430,120
95,892
12,008,456
996,884
1,458,643
5,423,207
519,196
5,423,207
519,196
135,122
$797,278
1,625,511
53.248,561
206,905
400,335
3,023,255
1,669,863
13,036,664
$334,827
1,004,361
14,631,053
$46,827
1,004,361
646,091
2,165
382,185
162,654
1,449,599
2,165
223,673
162,654
875,599
16,560,636
9,234,174
160,665
9,234,174
574,889
124,889
5,999,298
12,418,808
44,388
2,010,600
14,295
568,271
28,388
2,010,600
$166,296,987
$391,025,906
16,399,971
173,462,321
67,093
3,545,773
$2,438,591
173,462,321
$1,703,843
$450,000
5,985,003
9,527,450
16,000
2,323,087
8,558,057
59,769,138
31,601
1,091,756
$3,368
801,172
157,708
2,097
5,288,085
GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000
Minneapoliss Minn..
New Orleans, L a . —
Cincinnati, O h i o —
Newark, N. J.
Kansas City, M o . —
Seattle, Wash.
Indianapolis, Ind.Rochester, N. Y . —
12,819,091
$1,165,871
$38,000,000
257,000
80,000
1,766
324,447
11,115,377
158,512
317,000
$38,000,000
$80,000
$1,766
156,447
25,522
$168,000
11,089,855
$462,451
621,150
617,508
206,905
318,170
2,639,304
946,968
471,688
$235,794
Jersey City, N. J.
Houston, Tex.
Louisville, Ky.
Portland, Oreg.
4,163,637
5,314,233
1,295,184
8,126,541
3,498,560
1,492,054
796,896
6,104,677
142,603
773,514
130,553
309,540
3,355,957
694,400
93,000
5,581,899
24,140
573,343
213,238
3,404,116
3,404,116
1,192,152
75,628
665,077
418,063
498,288
729,943
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000
$1,490,206
2,283,208
3,168,577
1,257,281
394,612
623,411
1,647,641
677,319
388,490
2,902,413
$1,487,798
101,335
702,210
849,703
200,394
438,411
1,357,098
8,444
26,982
341,460
$1,487,798
101,335
251,808
205,703
155,394
227,911
91,498
8,444
26,982
154,460
Providence, R. I.
San Antonio, Tex.
Omaha, Nebr.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Dayton, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Worcester, Mass.
Richmond, Va.
6,766,520
1,796,111
4,861,174
6,013,229
1,407,306
4,149,775
51,822
199,806
Youngstown, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.-
106,596
,541,911
1,231,925
2,790,059
1,394,837
429,778
869,464
178,823
185,242
1,284,985
4,774,193
181,110
168,621
3,179
322,018
83,059
163,998
322,018
83,059
163,998
751,003
1,767
57,480
751,003
284,494
72,625
17,166
3,649,599
550,662
72,625
17,166
78,204
Columbus, O h i o Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Calif.Denver, Colo.
Atlanta, Ga.
Dallas, Tex.
St. Paul, Minn.-Birmingham, Ala.Akron, Ohio
Memphis, T e r m . —
#450,402
631,000
45,000
210,500
540,100
725,500
5,961,407
1,207,500
2,033,000
2,116,775
$13,000
$185,000
559,024
344
727,496
275,294
509,875
$185,000
$210,004
$349,020
$344
153,661
81,294
573,835
194,000
76,500
433,375
$2,408
1,996,873
1,286,188
407,234
193,193
185,000
290,543
668,875
361,508
2,560,953
$621,155
1,025
25,795
74,104
201,524
175,670
102,421
106,596
207,565
320,000
1,894
220,055
2,029,835
179,308
3,697,200
15,346
102,421
964,000
Fort Worth, Tex.—
Hartford, Conn.
Flint, Mich.
New Haven, Conn.-San Diego, Calif.Long Beach, Calif.'
Nashville, Term.—
Springfield, toss.'
Tulsa, Okla.
Bridgeport, Conn.—
Des Moines, Iowa
Scranton, Pa.
Salt Lake City, UtahYonkers, N. Y.
Paterson, N. J.
Jacksonville, F l a . —
Albany, N. Y.
Norfolk, Va.
Trenton, N. J.
Chattanooga, T e n n . —
Kansas City, K a n s . —
35,469
1,369,791
774,250
9,674,941
1,005,893
60,361
7,708,383
See footnotes at end of table.
3,256,182
134,474
657,000
116,481
27,222
321,894
344,955
3,743,546
614
31,000
665,000
6,025,342
3,130,395
550,662
2,232,000
200,273
665,000
6,025,342
40,193 I
160,080
962,967
813,057
16,498
168,621
3,179
8,552
1,110
134,531
5/ 5,598
1,297,166
91,996
202,220
60,361
4,079,567
253,011
172,361
TABLE 50.—AMOUNT OF SPECIFIED ASSETS AT CLOSE OF YEAR: 1 9 3 7 — C o n t i n u e d
(Includes data for enterprises owned but not operated by city)
ASSETS IN INVESTMENT FUNDS, AND MISCELLANEOUS INVESTMENTS
ASSETS IN SINKING FUNDS
City securities (par
value)
City securities
(par
value)
Other investments
Real property
Other investments
CASH IN GENERAL TREASURY AND GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE FUNDS
Exclusive
of amounts
held in
private
trust
accounts
Amounts
held in
private
trust
accounts
GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000—Continued
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
_ .
am en,
.
New Bedford, Mass.
Knoxville, Tenn.
3/ $331,357
226,727
436,671
763,921
2,535
763,493
Honolulu, Hawaii _§/—
$127,227
$579
61,500
95,000
95,000
131,578
40,000
$55,500
169,296
57,475
160,420
15,131
23,500
121,789
374,642
371,242
62,437
327,180
1,581,314
1,142,441
43,063
663
153,598
27,625
578,818
498,923
21,341
361,000
276,062
5/ 1,452
32.809 1
943,508
$130,788
$260,521
38,000
34,376
577,768
227,078
57,314
45,343
Somerville, Mass.
#579
188,727
34,902
63,006
63,006
89,061
42,980
14,061
42,980
452,000
55,908
331,579
371,242
41,462
5/ 159,791
1,087,733
126,240
20,975
350,103
1,016,201
30,300
75,000
887,600
402,295
91,153
2,535
535,966
8,599
57,475
7,103
343,000
1,016,201
$59,648
449
277
297,217
57,314
10,441
3,000
17,000
17,000
191,000
106,000
361,000
943,508 1
$34,376
125,768
42,400
189,754
143,478
1,602
$1,768
$38,000
20,975
189,754
143,478
$129,733
85,000
48,408
27,596
270,025
370,772
21,341
25,184
29
28,732
85,171
235,668
5/ 1,452
32.809
40,394
361,000
|
1/ Assets in public trust funds, not separately tabulated, are included—total £166,911, consisting of $159,185 cash, $4,858 city securities, and $2,868 miscellaneous investments.
2/ Includes assets in public trust funds, $158,070, cash.
3/ Includes assets in public trust funds—total $8,841, consisting of $1,115 cash, $4,858 city securities, and
$2,868 miscellaneous investments.
4/ Includes $158,070 cash of public trust funds, not separately tabulated.
5/ Overdraft.
6/ Not included in group or grand totals.
DEFINITIONS OF TERMS
REVENUES
(See also figure 1, pages 18-21)
ACCOUNT. An account is a statement of debit and credit entries within a fund and relates to specified sources of receipts and purposes of expenditures.
BUSINESS TAX. A business tax is a tax on business activity exacted in proportion to the
volume of business and computed through a levy which measures activity by earnings,
premiums, etc., such as a tax on insurance premiums, on income and earnings of banks
and other corporations, and a tax on public utilities based on their gross or net income, or on miles of track operated, or on passenger car or truck miles, number of
miles of wire or miles of water mains, and also a license fee per car or bus.
CHARGES FOR CURRENT SERVICES. These charges are those made by general government departments in the form of fees, minor sales, and other charges. The fees and charges here
included are those which represent the actual compensation for services performed, and
are to be distinguished from receipts which secure, for the local governments, individuals, or corporations making the payments, the privilege or right of doing something.
COMMERCIAL FORFEIT. A commercial forfeit is an amount on deposit or an amount specified
in a bond forfeited to the city by reason of some breach of condition, such as a failure to complete a contract.
CONTRIBUriONS FROM PUBLIC-SERVICE ENTERPRISES. Contributions from public-service enterprises are of two kinds: An actual amount paid over from the revenue of one fund for
the use and benefit of the other; and the excess revenues of a public-service enterprise remaining in the general fund.
DONATIONS AND CONTRIBUTIONS. Donations and contributions are bequests and gifts from
private persons and corporations of cash, realty, securities, or other property, the
principal or income of which may be expended for city uses, regardless of whether
such gifts or bequests were paid directly to the city treasury or to the officials in
charge of funds.
FINES. A fine is a pecuniary punishment imposed for the commission of an offense or for
the neglect of official duty.
FUND. A fund is a sum of money or other resources (gross or net) set aside for the purpose of carrying on specific activities or attaining certain objectives in accordance
with special regulations, restrictions, or limitations. A fund is a distinct fiscal
entity.
GENERAL PROPERTY TAX. The general property tax is a direct ad valorem tax upon real
property, real and personal property, or real and tangible personal property.
GRANTS. A grant is an amount, other than a receipt from a shared tax (cj..v.}, received
by the city from another civil division—as the Federal Government, the State, or a
county—to aid in the support of a specified function or for purposes in general.
INTEREST. Interest is the money received by the city for the loan of credit capital.
LICENSES AND PERMITS. Under this heading are classified fees exacted by the city for
the purpose of regulation, although they may be imposed primarily for revenue purposes
with regulation only an incidental aspect.
NONREVENUES. The term nonrevenues, in this report, is applied to all city receipts other
than revenues (cuv.) .
PENALTY. A penalty is the amount recovered by the municipaliv
for a violation of the
statute law of the State or a municipal ordinance, which violatxun does not constitute
a crime.
PENSION ASSESSMENT. A pension assessment is an amount contributed by employees of the
city for the maintenance of a pension or other retirement fund.
PERMIT. See Licenses and permits.
POLL TAX. A poll tax is a capitation tax, uniform or graded, whether such tax is levied
as a specific amount against the person subject thereto or as an ad valorem tax based
upon an arbitrary valuation of polls or occupations.
PROPERTY TAXES ON OTHER THAN ASSESSED VALUATION. These are direct taxes which are assessed, levied, and collected by methods that are not generally applied in the case
of privately-owned real property. They include taxes upon the property of corporations levied upon the basis of the amount of corporate stock, corporate indebtedness,
or of both corporate stock and indebtedness, or on any basis other than an assessed
valuation applied to all property of the corporation; taxes upon savings banks and
kindred corporations, which are levied in proportion to a certain specified portion
of deposits, as their excess above the value of specified investments; and taxes upon
life insurance corporations assessed upon the basis of the valuations of their policies; and all specific taxes upon property, as taxes upon land at a specified amount
per acre, taxes upon horses, mules, and other animals at a specified amount per head,
taxes on vessels at a specified amount per registered ton, and taxes upon grain at a
specified amount per bushel.
323
324
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
PBOPORTIONATELY-SHARED STATE TAXES. See Shared taxes.
RENTS. Rents are revenues received as compensation for the use of miscellaneous real
estate, investment properties, and properties held by public trust funds and investment funds.
REVENUES. City revenues are the moneys and other wealth received by or placed to the
credit of cities that increase their assets without increasing their liabilities or
that decrease their liabilities without decreasing their assets.
ROYALTIES. Royalties are amounts received for the privilege or rights created by a
lease, such as the privilege of drilling for oil, gas, and other minerals, as well as
the share of the product or of the profit.
SALES AND SERVICE TAXES. A sales tax is a locally imposed tax upon the sale, use, storage, or consumption of selected articles, such as cigarettes, tobacco, and gasoline,
or upon general sales, consumption, use, storage, and, in some cases, services. A tax
of this nature is levied in proportion to the sales volume or amount consumed, used,
or stored. If the statute provides specifically that the tax is to be transferred
to the consumer, this is added evidence that the tax was intended to be a consumption
and not a business tax.
SHARED TAX. A shared tax is a tax levied by the State and shared with minor civil divisions of the State in proportion, or substantially in proportion, to the amount of
such tax produced by the local unit. As used in this report the term refers only to
the share of the tax received by the city. The shared tax should be distinguished
from the grant (3..v.).
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR CAPITAL OUTLAYS. A special assessment is a compulsory contribution levied under the taxing or police power to defray the cost of a specific public
improvement undertaken primarily in the interest of the public. It differs from general property taxes in that it is apportioned according to the assumed benefits to
the property affected by the improvements. Included also in the definition of a special assessment is the special charge, which is a charge against the beneficiaries of
a specific public improvement based on the actual cost of the improvement.
TAX. A tax, as defined by Bastable, is a "compulsory contribution from the vrealth of a
person or body of persons for the service of the public powers."
UNCLAIMED MONEYS. Unclaimed moneys are amounts received by the municipality from, moneys
held in trust for private persons and unclaimed by the owners, such as funds to pay
debt obligations that have been cancelled after having been long overdue without
presentation of the claim, revenue from private trust funds or accounts awaiting the
discovery of heirs or owners, money from the sale of unclaimed property, unclaimed
salaries, and cancelled warrants of prior years.
COST PAYMENTS
(See also figure 2, pages 102-107)
CHARITIES. Charities consists of municipal institutional care of independent and neglected children and of adult dependents; other institutional and noninstitutional
care, including public assistance and other welfare services, as regulation of foster
or boarding homes, legal aid, and employment agencies; and all other charities, such
as contributions by the city to some political division on account of floods or other
disasters.
CONSERVATION OF HEALTH. Conservation of health consists of vital statistics, regulation
and inspection, control of communicable diseases, child health services, adult health
services, laboratories, health centers and clinics, and miscellaneous activities, such
as general public health nursing not assignable to specific classifications and expenditures for public health information.
CONTRIBUTIONS TO PUBLIC-SERVICE ENTERPRISES. This is a new class of general govern mental
expenses, arising from reporting separately the transactions of general government
and of public-service enterprises. Such a contribution may be either an actual amount
paid over from the revenues of one fund for the use and benefit of the other, or the
portion of costs of the public-3ervice enterprise met from general revenues.
CORRECTION. Correction consists of municipal correctional institutions, delinquents in
other institutions, probation and parole, and the net expenses of industrial activities of institutions.
COST PAYMENTS. Cost payments are all amounts recorded in the books of the cities as
having been paid on account of operation and maintenance, interest, and capital outlay (a_.v.). They include all costs of city governments, consisting of the costs of
services employed; properties constructed, purchased, or rented; public improvements
constructed or otherwise acquired; materials utilized; and interest on borrowed money.
They are classified into twelve functional groups—such as highways, conservation of
health, and charities (a_.v. ).
EXPENDITURE. As used in this report, expenditure is synonymous with cost payment (a..v.).
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE, LEGISLATIVE, AND JUDICIAL. General administrative, legislative,
and judicial consists of the legislative and judicial branches of local government,
and, in addition, such auxiliary administrative agencies as those established to deal
with finance, law, elections, and general administrative buildings. The longer expression supersedes and is synonymous with the term "general government" used in the
Bureau's reports previously.
HIGHWAYS. Highways includes not only the activities relating to streets and other roadways but, in addition, structures and improvements necessary for the use of highways,
DEFINITIONS
325
such as bridges, tunnels, viaducts, and grade separations. Waterways are also reported under this function, as well as services that are appurtenant to streets, such
as street lighting and snow and ice removal, but the cleaning of streets is classified as sanitation.
HOSPITALS. Hospitals consists of general and special municipal hospitals; where public
patients are cared for in hospitals not municipally-owned, the costs are also included
in this function.
INTEREST. Interest is the designation for the interest costs incurred by cities for the
use of credit capital.
LIBRARIES. Libraries consists of municipal libraries. Libraries connected with public
schools for the use of teachers and pupils only are included under schools (£.v.).
MISCELLANEOUS. Miscellaneous consists of judgments and losses, not allocable; pensions
and gratuities on account of service; compensation for employee injury, not allocable;
municipal service enterprises, not allocable; markets and warehouses; cemeteries and
crematories; contributions to public-service enterprises; and certain unclassifiable
items.
NONCOST PAYMENTS. The term noncost payments is applied in this report to all city payments other than cost payments (£.v.).
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE. Payments for operation and maintenance are the costs and
losses of cities for which no permanent or subsequently convertible value is received
or receivable. These costs are incurred on account of services employed, property
rented, and materials utilized in connection with the maintenance and operation of
government or the management of trusts; they are exclusive of costs arising from the
construction or acquisition of permanent properties or improvements.
OUTLAYS. Outlays are the costs of land and other properties and public improvements
more or less permanent in character which are owned and used by cities in the exercise of their city functions.
PUBLIC SAFETY. Public safety consists of police, fire, protective regulation and inspection, flood control, and such miscellaneous activities as travelers' aid, game
and fish wardens, and bounties on animals.
RECREATION. Recreation consists of cultural-scientific activities, as museums and art
galleries; organized recreation; municipal parks; and special facilities for recreation, as auditoriums, stadiums, auto camps, piers, and yacht harbors.
SANITATION AND WASTE REMOVAL. Sanitation and waste removal consists of the removal and
disposal of street deposits, sewage, and waste; comfort stations; smoke regulations;
and such miscellaneous services as the control of public nuisances, expenditures for
public laundries, washhouses and baths (except those operated in parks incident to
recreation), and the removal of dead animals.
SCHOOLS. Schools consists of all educational activities except public libraries.
DEBT
(See figure 3, p. 203 .)
CONTINGENT GENERAL OBLIGATIONS. A contingent general obligation is an internal improvement bond payable from special assessments, but for which the full faith and credit
of the city is pledged. While these bonds are presumably payable from special assessments, in case of insufficient collections of special assessments to meet bond
and interest payments, the city can levy a general property tax to retire bonds and
pay interest.
FLOATING DEBT. See Short-term loans.
GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS. A general obligation bond represents a debt for which the
faith and credit of the city is pledged; it is evidenced by a formal instrument, has
a fixed date of maturity, and is payable from any revenues of the city not obligated.
These bonds are either long-term bonds or serial bonds (£.v.).
GROSS DEBT. Gross debt is the aggregate of all outstanding debt obligations.
LONG-TERM BONDS. See Term bonds.
NET DEBT. Net debt is the total of general obligation bonds and revenue bonds less sinking-fund assets accumulated for their amortization.
REFUNDED DEBT. Debt issued to retire debt already outstanding is called refunded debt.
REVENUE BONDS. A revenue bond is defined as an obligation payable exclusively from the
revenues of a specified income-producing property or system for the acquisition, construction, or improvement of which the obligation was issued. Such bonds are titled
"revenue bonds," and usually they are so recorded on the books of the city and on the
face or in the text of the bond. It is expressly understood that the obligation is
not a general debt of the municipality and that there is no recourse to any taxing
power for payment.
SERIAL BONDS. Serial bonds are bonds which come due from year to year and are payable from current revenues.
SHORT-TERM LOANS OR OBLIGATIONS. Short-term loans or obligations consist of bond anticipation notes, tax revenue anticipation notes, and other current temporary loans having only a short time to run, usually less than a year.
Final judgments rendered
against the city during the year but not paid are reported here, but short-term special assessment obligations are reported under special assessment obligations (cuv. ).
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT OBLIGATIONS. Special assessment debt is debt which is payable from
assessments levied or assessed against the benefited property in proportion to the
value of the benefit. These special assessment obligations are classified either as
326
FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
long-term loans or as short-term loans (^.v.). They are classified under each of
these subdivisions as contingent general obligations and those "payable only from
special assessments" (c[.v.).
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT OBLIGATIONS PAYABLE ONLY IROM ASSESSMENTS. Special assessment obligations payable only from assessments are internal bonds payable only from assessments. In case of insufficient collections to pay bonds and interest the holder of
the bonds cannot hold the city corporation liable, nor can the city corporation levy
general property taxes to pay bonds or interest.
TERM BONDS. Term bonds, or long-terra bonds, are bonds which ordinarily come due at one
time and are retired from sinking funds (^.v.).
SPECIFIED .ASSETS
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE FUNDS. General administrative funds are those funds, other than
investment, trust, and sinking funds, that are independently administered by boards
or commissions not under the authority of the city auditor or comptroller.
GENERAL TREASURY FUNDS. General treasury funds are the aggregate of the principal city
funds, other than investment, trust, and sinking funds, over which the city auditor
or comptroller exercises authority.
INVESTMENT FCNDS, AND MISCELLANEOUS INVESTMENTS. Under this heading are included funds,
other than sinking and trust funds, and all interest-bearing securities and investments, other than those of the funds mentioned, including real property used for purposes other than those of the city. Although the term "investment fund" is seldom employed by State officials, it seems to be an appropriate designation for funds of the
class here described. The value of real property incidentally acquired and yielding
little or no income is included as a miscellaneous investment. In some instances,
the assets in investment funds consist of bonds or stocks acquired by the city in
consideration of financial aid or grants to railroads or other public-service corporations; in a few instances they consist of real property temporarily held for securing rents or for the profits that may result from an increase in value; in other cases
they consist of bonds or mortgages received in exchange for real property and held
as investments awaiting maturity or a favorable market. In most cities reporting
investment funds or investments, the invested assets are comparatively small,,and in
some instances they are held only temporarily while awaiting a favorable opportunity
for the city to dispose of them, when the proceeds are to be turned over to the general treasury. Funds provided for the purchase, construction, or equipment of buildings or the permanent properties of the city, which are invested during the period of
accumulation, are also treated as investment funds.
PUBLIC TRUST FUNDS. Public trust funds are established by cities for the purpose of conserving and administering moneys and other forms of wealth that come to them by donation, bequest or otherwise, under such conditions that the recipient becomes a trustee
charged with the administration of the fund and with disbursements from it, or from
income derived from its principal, for designated public uses. The usual purposes
for which these funds are created are the support of educational activities in schools
and libraries, health and hospital services, care of defectives, and pensions for employees of the city government.
SINKING FUNDS. The sinking funds maintained by cities are of two distinct classes, those
with and those without investments, the distinction depending largely upon the method
of distributing the loads to be carried by these funds. The sinking funds with investments are established and maintained primarily for the redemption of long-term
bonds at maturity, the purpose of converting a part of the cash accumulation into securities being to increase the earning power of the funds. The sinking funds without
securities are maintained primarily for the amortization of debt obligations by purchase before their maturity, or for the retirement of serial bonds, the purpose of
the funds usually being accomplished without the accumulation of assets in large
amounts.
ASSESSED VALUATIONS AND TAX LEVIES
ASSESSED VALUATION. Assessed valuation is the valuation set upon real estate or other
property by assessors of a governmental unit as a basis for levying taxes.
TAX LEVY. A tax levy is the amount of a particular type of tax imposed by the State,
such as a general property tax levy.
TAX RATES ON PROPERTY. A tax rate on property is the amount of tax per unit of assessed
valuation. The unit of assessed valuation is either $1, -$100, or $1,000, the lastnamed being used by the Bureau. The product of the tax rate and the assessed valuation is the property tax levy.
PUBLIC-SERVICE ENTERPRISES
INCOME. Income is the term used to designate public-service enterprise revenues. This
latter term is defined the same as revenues of the city (a..v.).
OPERATING EXPENSE. Operating expense of a public-service enterprise is tha's part of the
payments (a_.v.) which are expended in the actual operation of the enterprise.
OPERATING REVENUE. Operating revenue of a public-service enterprise is that part of the
income (a..v.) which arises from the operation of the enterprise itself.
@FedFRASER