FOREST TAXATION IN THE UNITED STATES 629 
Taxpayers are justified in demanding an examination and appraisal 
of every institution or agency of government and the discontinuance 
of those which are not worth their cost. In making the appraisal, 
however, care must be taken not to overlook intangible and indirect 
benefits. Faced with the necessity of reducing their budgets, many 
eoverning bodies have, in the last year or two, suspended public- 
health work or educational activities that promised big dividends in 
the long run and have overlooked substantial savings that could 
have been made by introducing certain improvements in organization 
or administration. There are undoubtedly places where public 
services could be curtailed without any detrimental effect, but quite 
often fully as great savings could be effected through a better coordi- 
nation of the work of the different units and departments. Forest 
land, and all other rural property, could obtain a considerable measure 
of tax relief through this channel. In certain sparsely settled areas, 
as already pointed out, there could be and should be a definite curtail- 
ment of governmental services. In most rural areas, however, the 
savings should come through a reduction in overhead costs rather 
than through the suspension of essential services. The problem is 
(1) to secure efficiency and economy in the public administration, and 
(2) to limit governmental activities to those which the community 
can afford, or, in other words, to those which it can pay for without 
an excessive load of taxation. Many a community has the oppor- 
tunity, through efficiency and economy, to increase the useful services 
rendered by its government while at the same time reducing the cost 
and so relieving the burden of taxation. 
ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT 
There is no question but that the cost of local government in rural 
areas could be reduced through improvements in administration, 
without reducing the effectiveness of public services. It has already 
been pointed out that a reduction in the number of political units and 
the consequent enlargement of the administrative area would create 
a condition more favorable to good administration. Many units now 
are too small and weak to attract the type of personnel or to provide 
the equipment required for efficient public service. But even were 
the county to become generally the primary unit of government in 
rural territory, and even were the counties to be enlarged in many 
instances through consolidation, there would still remain room for 
improvement in administration. No form of government is more 
fettered by tradition or clings more tenaciously to antiquated practices 
than county government. 
A unified, well-coordinated administration is just as much frus- 
trated by a long ballot in the county as it is in State government. 
The popular election of numerous administrative officials, each of 
whom is the political peer of all the others, results in a government 
that is planless, disjointed, and irresponsible. The only county 
officers that should be chosen by popular election are the members of 
the policy-determining board. The policy-determining functions, 
including education, should be concentrated in a single ‘board. All 
county officers performing administrative tasks should be appointed 
by and be responsible to the county board or to a county manager 
who stands between them and the board. The manager plan has 
