The herald., 1895-10-17
TAX SHARKS DISSATISFIED
A New Law Which Is UnpOp-
ular in Certain Circles
BENEFICIAL TO THE PUBLIC
How the Bulla Delinquent Act
Works
TIE City Clerk Says That II Is Great
Success and Predicts the City
Will Be the Gamer
BENEFICIAL TO THE PUBLIC

diuance selling to the city property &C
CURED because of delinquent taxes I'M
der the provisions of what is known as
the Bulia bill. ana City Clerk Charles A.
Luckenbach to whose interest and ener-
gy Issued the municipal ordinance cover
ing the subject, is more than satisfied
with the results obtained.
ION July 10th, ''said the city clerk yes
terday, "about $G100 worth of delinquent
taxes were sold to the city. Up to the
present time there have been received in
taxes and penalties a little over $3.50.
which as you see, is more ttan one-fourth
of the total amount sold. Most people
seem to recognize the fact tn ut this syst m
has been adopted in the interest OF the
taxpayer and, as has been always argued
By Inc advocates of this Measure, the peo-
pie are willing 10 heartily cooperate in
carrying out measures which are clearly
for their interests.
at sbe remem bered that but three
months have elapsed since these sales
have been made, and that but compare
lively few of thestaxpayers as yet have
applied to the city tax and license col
lector's office for the payment OF their
taxes for the present wear, and seen the
words SOLD for taxes 1895 stamped up
on heir receipt, and | anticipate that as
years taxes becoming delinquent APP
proaches. the number OF redemptions
will be largely increased, and l confl-
dentlypredict that before the expiration
of nine months from the cate of the sale
that the city will have received every
cent OF the amount which she would
have received had the property bean sold
to individuals instead of the city, to-
gether with fair amount OF interest for
the.time they have laid out of the money.
do you not anticipate that the COM
paratievly small penalties and long time
allowed Tor redemption will deter some
peopce from making their redemp-
tionsT' was asked.
II think not. particularly when the
provisions of the law are thoroughly I'M
desrtood. OF course, it must be recog
nzed that arguments were advanced by
opponents to this measure, who were
equally as honest as its advocates. that
this would be the result, and, perhaps,
III some cases it may be, but | feel conf
dent that such Will not be the result
among those who understand the opera
ton of the law.
For my own information I have COM
piled table which will show the opera
lions of the law and the penalties which
will be exacted from such persons who
desire 20 take advantage of the extreme
time allowed for redemption and | find
that while in the early stages it is easier
than the old law, yet the increasing scale
of penalties is such that after period of
about fifteen months, 1t is more severe
than the old system, and to one who
takes advantage of the full five years
which are allowed for the REDEEM ption,
instead of paying an average penalty OF
80 per cent, should they allow their prop
erty to become delinquent each of the
five years, would pay q penalty of SO 4-1O
per cent under the present law, or an in
Il 4
have here table which will show this to
be the fact. In computing the same l
have presumed that The amount OF taxes
assessed against given piece of prop
erty for the fiscal year ls94Y5 was
$92. 10; that all became delinquent and
was sold to the city. and that for each
succeeding year up to and including 1899
1900 the same property was allowed to
become delinquent 80 as to take advant-
age of the extreme limit granted by the
terms OF the new tax law. Tbs first 81 @
for delinquent taxes having taken place
on July ~, 1895, the city would not be
entitled to "a deed until the expiration OF
five full years, to-wit: July IL, 1900, at
which time the taxes for 1S99-19C0 would
have become delinquent, and to redeem
the sale made in 1895 it would be neces-
sary for the redemptioner to pay the
taxes. costs ard penalties for each of tn G
years from 1S94-95 up to an including
1885, lJUI. IL is also dsSuIneu ludt tHe as
sessed value OF the property and tax rate
IS the same for each year. The taxes,
costs and penalties up to the time of sale
for each year would be as follows:
....Amount of first half of taxes, s46.05;
10 per cent penalty ON first half, $3.50;
amount of second half. $4605; 5 per cent
penalty, ST. 80; advertising fee, 80 cents;
certificate fee. 80 cents. Total amount OF
taxes anu penalties sold for 500.
Presnming that redemption was made
July 10. 1900, the following estimate
would be furnished by The city clerk
showing amount necessary to redeem:
Sold to the city OF Los Angeles, 1895, 500;
interest on above from date of sale, $35
100 per cent penalties for redemp tion, $l0U
city lakes, 1886, 500. 10 penalties there
on for delinquency, $3.50. Total (a), 500.
Interest on total (a) from June /, 1896,
$2S. 58; so per cent penalties on total (a)
Tor redemption, $50 city taxes for 1869.
500. 10: penalties thereon for delinquency,
$3.50. Total (b), 500; interest on total
o. from June l. 1897, $2l.5s; 50 per cent
penalties on total { b. for REDEEM ption $50
city taxes for 1897 49, $92. 10; penalties
thereon for delinquency, $3.50. Total
(c), 500; interest on total (c) from June
/, 1893 SASS: 40 per cent penalty on
total 60 on redemption, $40; city taxes
delinquency, $3.50 Total (d), $100: in
terest on total (d) from June 1. 1899.
S7.5S; 20 per cent penalty on total (cl on
redemption, 500; city taxes for lS9)-190),
90. I0 penalties thereon for delinquency,
7.40. Total (e), $3.50; interest on total
(e) from June 1, 1900, So cents. Total
amount necessary to redeem $10o7.40.
Had taxes been paid before becoming
delinquent on any installment the total
amount paid fol- the six years cited would
have been $552.60.
Taxes and penalties paid as cited above,
$1007.40; original amount of taxes levied.
Average percentage of pealties in torego-
ing example. S2.4 per cent.
BIASED on the former redemption law
OF so per cent penalty. the penalty in
cases above cited would have been, If
property had bsen redeemed each wear
before notice and deed, $276.30, or $178. so
less than under the present law.
''You will thus see that while the
present law removes the tax shark from
public affairs and gives the property
owner an opportunity of redeeming with
In reasonable time at greatly reduce
penalties, It at the same time says to
those VINO would share the advantages OF
public Improvements at the expense OF
proportion OF the public burden that
they must in the end pay for their play
or forfeit their property, to the advantage
OF the good citizen"
at is claimed" said the Herald re-
porter, "by those who havs bought
taxes in the past and who hold tax
deeds that the city Is at their mercy,
rs to obtain q good title it will be
necessary to buy them out. What
effect do you suppose that this will have
upon the operations of the law?'