The San Francisco call., 1895-07-17
Assessor Seibe'S Commissions
Up to Date Exceed
$4,000.
ACTIVE WORK OF DEPUTIES.
Promises to Reduce Valuation-HoW
the Law Was Changed at
Sacramento.

of the Legislature, authorizing Assessors
to collect taxes on personal property un-
secured by real estate, Assessor Slepe mas
collected on 80, 600 assessments. He is
ready to turn in the sum OF S437,562 4o,
which represents a tax on valuation of
$50 900 600. The law was approved March
QS, 1895, but the collectors did not begin
the work of gathering in money until May
Is, 1895.
According to the county government
act. approved March "a, 1898, the Assessor
is allowed to retain for his own use per
cent of the amount of personal property
taxes collected. Itappears, therefore, that
Assessor Siebe's commissions will amount
to S26 253 y on the sum already collected
this year.
The facts in relation to the change of the
law are these: The county government
act and fee bill did not purport to apply
to the Citv and County of San Francisco
and in a recent decision of the Supreme
Court was expressly held not to apply to
this City. Formerly the collection OF taxes
in this City was under the provisions of
the consolidation act and acts amenda-
tory thereof. An act was passed provid-
ing that collections of taxes in San Fran
cisco should be under the provisions of the
Political Code, section 3S29 which provides
that for services rendered in collection of
taxes the Assessor shall receive compensa-
tion as the act governing such county
officers may provide. This provision of
the Code went into effect March 2S 1895.
Under the amendment of section 216 of the
county government act of 1893 the As
SCISSOR is entitled to retain for his own use
per cent of all personal property taxes
collected.
The law permits collections of this kind
until the third Monday of July, which this
year was Monday, July Is, but the State
Board of Equalization has made ruling,
so says the Assessor, which extends the
time OF such collections to August 3. The
Assessor will turn over the books to the
Board of Supervisors as Board of Equali-
cation next Saturday, and will not collect
after that time.
Regarding the operations OF the new
law, Chief Deputy Herzer said yesterday:
The new law works we'll so far as collections
are concerned. The total estimation of per-
sonal property is 100000, 900, and we have
collected on $50, 900, 900. What proportion of
the money was paid in the office? The proper
ton was small. In fact, a very large percentage
of the whole amount taken in was collected by
the deputies going personally to the deln'
quents.
and notice only sent out that taxes were due |
not one half OF $437 ,562 43 would have been |
received.
There arc SO 600 assessments on the personal
property roll. and our collections cover 80 900.
We estimate that 1000 OF the assessments
are secured by real estate, and this accounts
for AZ 900 OF the $4,000 assessments, leaving
5000 unaccounted for. Last year 5000 as
sessments were unpaid.
Did make a special effort 20 get in as much
money as possible? Yes; we endeavored to
comply with the law, and sent deputies five or
Six times to the same person. do not believe
that persons other than authorized deputies
collected money, for the reason that the re-
ceipts and stu bs are kept III such form and so
closely guarded that forgeries in this respect
would be almost impossible.
"In order to get in all the money you
could collect, were deputies authorized to
reduce arbitrary assessments?'
eve contend" said Mr.. Herzer, ''that
the right to fix the valuation rests with
the Assessor, SO long as the books are in
his charge. When the roll is turned over
to the Board of Equalization the authority
to modify or change an assessment rests
solely with that body. Even then we can
keep on collecting, so the State Board of
Equalization rules"
But after the Assessor has fixed the
valUation-for example, at $1,000, and the
tax is $18 CTS deputy authorized to re-
duce the valuation to $1,000 and collect the
tax, say $14 90 on that valuation"
To this question Mr.. Herzer replied
The deputy might give the person whose
personal property was assessed at 1920 an
opportunity to come to this Office and file
sworn statement that the property was not
worth more than $1,000. We do not accept
sworn statements in every case, especially
when we have knowledge that the prop
crty is of greater value than the statement
represents it to be-"
1t came to the knowledge of THE CALL
yesterday that the following notice was
sent to G. W. Palmer, 621 Bush street;
LAST NOTICE.
ASSESSORS OFFICE, NEW CITY HALL,
SAN FRANCISCO, June %, 1S95.l
VOL 12-Page 81.
Amount OF tax due, $1S 66.
You are hereby notified that If the above
amount is not paid to the deputy presenting
this notice. or at the Assessors office within
three days of date hereof, you Will be proceeded
against according to law. The costs for seizure
and sale will amount to $40 additional. (See
sections $3.50 and 1922, revenue law
JOHN D. SIEBE, Assessor.
By ]. HUNT, Deputy.
Bring this notice with you.
N.B.-Ofice hours from O'Clock A. N. to 5
o'clock P. NJ.
Mrs. shendan. the lady who conducts
the house, sister of Mr.. Palmer, in whose
name the property is assessed, did not pay
as the notice demanded. A deputy called
two or three times, and Monday last
strenously urged the payment. She said
10 him: ''Why not collect of the Sterling
Furniture Company, the owner of the
furniture?"
The deputy replied: "The Sterling
the property"
"But they own it, and I only lease it,"
replied the lady. Besides, it is not worth
$1200."
The deputy then agreed to reduce the
assessment to $1,000 and accept S14 80 if the
money was paid that day. The money
was not paid.
Deputy Herzer was asked what course
the office pursued when the present
property was mortgaged. He explained
that two receipts were given, each receipt
for half the amount, but that the person
having the property in possession was
compelled to pay the whole amount of the
tax. The receipt was given to enable the
person paying to get proper credit on the
loan.
Mr.. Herzer remarked that no property |
had been seized or sold in collections so |
far made. case involving the constitu-
tionality of the act was still pending in |
the Supreme Court, hence no attempt was
made this year to seize and sell under the |
act. Next year, if the law holds good, an |
effort will be made to collect on every as |
sessment.
81 do not" said Mr.. Herzer, commend |
the law which places both the assessment |
of prOnart1, M +ha oo1 o1Iaotior7 of tla % va.