SCIENTIFIC ADMINISTRATION
Better county government, however, involves a good deal more than a
mere skeleton of organization. It is not enough to provide the means
for fixing responsibility in a general though fundamental sense, in
officers who are conspicuous and powerful. That is the beginning of
efficiency. And yet “responsibility” in its greater refinements, in
its more intimate applications, is precisely the key to what all the
various prophets of better government and public administration are
preaching. Turn on the light! That is what the Short Ballot movement
proposes by the more sweeping fundamental changes in the structure.
Turning on the light is also essence of the doctrine of better
accounting, better auditing, better budget making, better purchasing
and the whole tendency to greater publicity in the conduct of public
affairs.
Those county commissioners out in Kansas and Iowa who paid too much for
their bridges--what was the real trouble with them? A writer in the
agricultural journal which exposed these scandals wound up his article
with an exhortation to the people to “elect good honest men.” Such
advice was at least a shade or two more constructive than the political
preaching of a century ago (which still has its adherents) that public
officials tend inevitably to become thieves and crooks; that the best
that we can do is to tie their hands by ingenious “checking” and
“balancing” devices until it is almost impossible for them to move.
To-day one group of political reconstructionists says: “Give these
officers plenty of power, and then watch them,” and another group,
supplementing the former, says: “Give officers the means of knowing
exactly what they are doing; give also the public the means of watching
intelligently and minutely; and if their public servants go wrong it is
‘up to the people,’” actually as well as formally. One is quite safe in
assuming, for instance, that the offices of those middle western county
officials were terribly “shy” on reliable data on bridge construction
with which to meet the wiles of the combined contractors.
To begin with, what kind of a bridge was most needed? Did they have
records as to the volume and weight of traffic which was likely to come
over the structure? Did they seek light from an engineer of untarnished
reputation or did they just trust to their “horse sense” and the fact
that they “had lived there all their lives and they ought to know, if
anybody did”? What did the records in the county engineer’s office show
as to the relative durability and maintenance expense of steel bridges
as against wooden bridges, under the peculiar local conditions?
Then as to the bids on the proposed structure: how did these compare
with the cost of bridges of equal tonnage in other states and counties?
How about the current state of the steel market--would it be better to
buy now or wait a few months until business at the mills was likely to
be slack?
How about financing the bridge project? Should the cost be borne out
of the current year’s revenues, should it be covered by a ten-year
bond issue or should the next generation of taxpayers be saddled with
payments long after the bridge had outlived its usefulness?
A board of supervisors or a county manager or a county engineer armed
with an answer to this series of extremely pertinent questions and a
modicum of common honesty would be proof against ninety-nine per cent.
of the “slick” deals which are so often “put over” on an unsuspecting
public and their easy-going servants.
The science of public administration consists principally in knowing
_exactly_ where you are and what you are doing--knowledge
gained through experimentation, investigation and comparison and by
consultation of authoritative standards and with authorities themselves.
We will illustrate this principle in a few of its applications:
ACCOUNTING
The accounting system of any organization, public or private, is useful
in proportion to the definiteness of its analyses or classifications,
according to what is most important to be known. Thus, in New
York State, the statutes authorize boards of supervisors to allow
claims on the basis: (1) of specific amounts imposed by state law,
such as the stated salaries of judges, (2) of amounts fixed by the
board of supervisors under authority of law. In at least one county
(Westchester) it was formerly the custom to lump a great variety of
claims under the second heading--under the title “county audited
bills”--a procedure which was satisfactory enough perhaps, if to know
the _authority_ for payment were the only information desired.
By such a system it was impossible to tell the cost of running any
county office or department without actually tracing each voucher back
to its source. Thus, it was found that, in the year 1907 the budget
authorization for the superintendent of the poor was $17,485.61, while
the expenditures shown by the treasurer’s report were $108,906.58
and the actual cost of the office, when proper additions were made
from the “county audited bills,” was $118,464.33. Discrepancies of an
equally serious nature were revealed in the case of most of the other
offices. The accounting system through its inexact classifications gave
information which was useful in protecting the treasurer but which
was practically without value as a description of what the county’s
departments were doing and how economically they were doing it.
Exact classification is also essential to the last degree in the
making of the budget, to the end that actual experience in the way of
revenues received and funds disbursed may be made the reliable basis
of future activities. In a well-ordered system of state supervision of
local accounts the classifications will be made by a state official
who will have the power to enforce compliance upon the part of the
fiscal officer in each county. So that in time each county will have
the inestimable advantage of being able to compare its finances with
those of other similar units. A proper accounting system will proceed
so far in its analysis as to provide a large amount of data concerning
the cost of _units_ of service rendered and materials consumed.
Among other things, it will reveal at any and all times precisely what
is the condition of the county’s assets both in the shape of funds and
of investments; it will show how much the county actually owes and is
to owe at any future date.
THE BUDGET
On the basis of accounts that tell in detailed classification the
needs and the resources of the county, the governing body will be able
to embark upon the financial voyage of each new year with chart and
compass. At a stated time before the budget-making period the heads of
departments, having before them the records of transactions and costs
in previous years, will frame their requests for future service. But
because of the exactness of the estimates required to be submitted, any
request for an increase of appropriation will stand out as a shining
mark. The department head will thereby be thrown on the defensive, will
be obliged to explain himself. The knowledge of that condition will
have a distinctly beneficial effect upon any desire of his to seek
increased appropriations without careful consideration.
The governing body will proceed, moreover, with the certitude that
the public has at its disposal the means of knowing in detail what
its government is costing. The business of the year will be treated
as a program of public service; and in the framing of that program
every interested citizen and group of citizens will be urged to take
part through the medium of public hearings. As the Westchester County
Research Bureau says: “It would be easy to provide an opportunity for
the filing of either objections or additional suggestions by taxpayers
and for consideration of these at public hearing at the county seat
before the board of supervisors by public notice of such filing and of
such public hearing. Such hearings would doubtless speedily end such
abuses as are exemplified in our bulletin on the Purchase of County
Supplies. In the face of public objection, few supervisors would vote
affirmatively for appropriations for such extravagant expenditures. The
difference in result would be that between the action of an informed
public, able to deliberate in advance upon proposed expenditures, and
the absence of action of a public ignorant of the character of such
proposed expenditures--the usual condition under present methods of
budget provision for public funds.
“It is easy to prevent the official adoption over public objection of
extravagant estimates. It is difficult to prevent extravagant misuse
of public funds appropriated in lump sums, or to rectify such misuses
after such expenditures have been incurred.”[24]
Complete knowledge and complete mutual confidence and understanding on
the part of the public on the one hand and its agencies of government
on the other--that is the big and seemingly reasonable promise of a
budget system of the right sort. It cannot be put into operation in the
fullest extent without those structural changes in county government
with which we have already dealt.
AUDITING AND PURCHASING
A special field in which exact knowledge is particularly essential as
a safeguard against theft is that of the auditor. To many a county
treasurer the auditing demands of the government appear to be met when
some basis of authority for a payment has been established. Sometimes
even then the authority in question is not a legal one for often it may
not be established by reference to the letter of the statute but by the
precedents set by previous incumbents. Not “What does the law say about
it?” but “What did ---- do in such cases?” is apt to be the question
uppermost in the mind of the official. How many millions of good money
have slipped through county treasurers’ hands through such a procedure
will never be known. The state examiner who has not discovered many an
old-fashioned county where many such illegal payments have been made is
rare indeed.
But such post-mortem checking of illegal payments is, for the most
part, but a sad business. Modern standards of auditing organization
and practice aim to insure more completely that the authority for
payment shall be established _before_ payment. The auditor should
certainly be wholly independent of the disbursing officer and some
authorities would also insist, of the appropriating body. Least of all
should the auditing be done by the appropriating body itself or through
its committees (as is true in some states) for such an audit through
lack of first-hand consideration and definite fixing of responsibility
rapidly degenerates into a perfunctory performance. It is even the
practice in some counties to audit bills in full board by acclamation!
And since so large a portion of county claims are for material and
supplies for use in the construction and maintenance of roads,
bridges and institutions, the work of audit cannot fail to be closely
associated with the purchasing system. The purchasing agent by
whatsoever name called, is, after all, a special sort of auditor,
dealing with a variety of commodities instead of funds. As in every
other branch of public service, successful purchasing depends primarily
on exact information, relating in this case, to standards of utility
of various articles, the present and the probable future state of the
market, the exact condition of present supplies, the honest fulfillment
of contracts. Such information may come through stock ledgers,
inspectors, trade journals or chemical tests.
In the county of Alameda, Cal., as a result of investigation, publicity
and political pressure resulting in changes in the purchasing procedure
in the county offices, the sum of $810,205 was saved on the one
item of cost of elections in the years 1912-1916. Blank affidavits
of registration dropped from $16.50 to $3.30 per thousand, election
ballots from $22.12 to $1.65. On advertising, election proclamation,
etc., there was a saving during the period of 1700 per cent. And
this is by no means an unique experience. It is typical of results
obtained under careful scientific purchasing methods in public work
everywhere.[25] Accurate records, a study of unit costs, “pitiless
publicity,” standardization and elimination of senseless waste and lost
motion constitute the explanation. The Tax Association is now urging
the consolidation of public purchasing agencies throughout the county
in order to take advantage of the still greater economies which accrue
to the large buyer.
OTHER FORMS OF ACCOUNTING
It is not only in its material interests that the county will be in
need of exact information. Where the county comes into contact with
the human factor the importance of working in the daylight cannot be
overlooked. It will not do for the officer in charge of the poor to
keep records “under his hat” concerning the inmates under his charge.
Similarly, the probation officer will investigate and account for the
delinquencies and the special needs of his wards, in a really informing
way. And the sheriff, so long as he shall be the peace officer of
the county, will furnish a record of crimes committed within his
jurisdiction which will possibly lead to suitable preventive measures.
It is a high standard of administrative efficiency which we have set
up. No single county so far as we know, measures up to it at present.
No county, apparently, without compulsion from the central state
government, has even made any serious progress along these lines except
at the instigation of a privately supported research bureau or tax
association. County administrative organization and procedure is virgin
soil for constructive civic effort.
But administrative procedure is not more important to county betterment
than the personnel of the organization. “Politics” in administration
has come to mean the antithesis of scientific standards. Mediocrity and
incompetency sit enthroned where party expediency takes precedence over
the interests of the whole county.
THE MERIT SYSTEM
Therefore abolish “politics!” No single county of its own initiative
has taken a more important step toward that end than Los Angeles,
California, under its special home-rule charter, which is not--able for
the advanced character of its civil service provisions. Among other
things it creates a bureau of efficiency, consisting of the civil
service commission (three members), the secretary thereof and the
auditor of the county. To quote the language of the charter, the duty
of this bureau is that of “determining the duties of each position in
the classified service, fixing standards of efficiency, investigating
the methods of operation of the various departments and recommending to
the board of supervisors and department heads measures for increasing
individual, group and departmental efficiency, and providing for
uniformity of competition and simplicity of operation.” The commission
is required to “ascertain and record the comparative efficiency of
employees in the classified service” and has power after a hearing,
to “dismiss from the service those who fall below the standards of
efficiency established.”[26]
With a combination of a structure of government designed to fix general
responsibility, an administrative procedure designed to let daylight
into public business and an administrative personnel free to serve the
interests of the public, the people of the county will be in a position
to just about get what they want, within the measure of power granted
to the locality under the laws of the state.
[24] “The Making of the County Budget,” Westchester County Research
Bureau, 1912.
[25] Excellent results have been obtained by the purchasing agent of
Onondaga County, New York, Mr. Frank X. Wood.
[26] For full text of provisions, see Charter of Los Angeles (Appendix
B).