The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-06-25
THE TAX LEVY.

Auditor Broderick has prepared and
submitted his official estimate and recon-
mendation as to the rate of the tax levy
for the present fiscal year. The rate which
he figures out as proper is $1.2945 on a
property valuation of $300,000,00o or 81
on about $500, 100000 valuation, according
to the way the taxpayer sees fit to look at
1t. The truth is that Auditor Broderick is
affected somewhat by the fetch of the
dollar limit, but realizes that this phrase
OF the silurian has lost its power.
The Board of Supervisors must pres
emily pass upon the estimates of Auditor
Broderick and either adopt or increase his
suggested rate. In doing so they should
be guided by certain business principles,
the logic of which applies equally to cities
as to individuals. These principles are
mainly two. The first is that tax rate
must be fixed which will provide money
enough to carry the City through the
fiscal year without deficit The honor of
the City demands this, and its plain and
simple obligation to those who furnish it
with its necessaries requires it. The dis
grace of being defaulting debtor at the
close of each fiscal year should no longer
stain the ermine of the metropolis of the
West.
This observation suggests the second
business principle which should be OBJ
served by the board in its ixation of the
tax rate. The City of San Francisco al
ready owes considerable sum of money to
its own citizens for certain necessary
goods wares and merchandise furnished
to it during the past two years at its spe-
cial instance and request. a portion Of
this debt has already been put into the
form of judgments and it all could be, for
to these debts of honor there is no meri-
torious defense. The tax levy of the
present year should be ample enough to
pay these debts in full. The argument
that there is a clause in the State constitu-
ton which forbids cities from paying for
| the necessaries supplied during one year
out of the revenues of another is as illogi-
cal as it is dishonest. 1t is inconceivable
that the trainers of the constitution
could have intended to provide
that cities should maintain certain
departments at an expense which, though
inevitable, is not susceptible of exae1 pre-
vious ascertainment and yet that this ex-
pense must be ascertained in advance and
be provided for out of the taxes of the year
in which it was incurred. The Board of
Supervisors should adopt no such non
sensical limitation upon their honesty of
action as the City's agents at least until
the Supreme Court has Enthusiastically in
structed them to do SO. The tax levy
should be high enough to provide for the
payment of every dollar of floating in
debtedness which the City in honor and
justice to the merchants ought to pay.
1t is probable that tax rate which
should come up to these requirements
would be as high as justice to taxpayers
would permit for any single year. 1t
will be seen that Auditor Broder-
lexis report makes no provision
for street improvements or the building
of sewers or for other permanent public
improvements which have been of late
much discussed and earnestly desired.
There is way open, however, for the
making of these improvements, and the
time is ripe for its adoption. The City of
San Francisco should issue bonds. The
legality of such an Issue is past dispute in
view of the express letter of the general
laws. The wisdom and present expedi-
ency thereof are matter of easy demon
stration. The experience of all great and
growing cities proves the wisdom of making
the future liable for those permanent pub
lie improvements which the future is to
mainly enjoy. The City of San Francisco
has reached point in its history when it
must determine whether its destiny will
be dominated by the folly of the silurian
or by the wisdom of the progressive spirit
Of fhe ACE