The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1898-09-12
LAKE MERRITT
NOW A BONE
OF CONTENTION
Opinions Differ as to
the Money.
ITS EFFECT ON TAXATION
M. ]. LAYMANCE DECLARES 1T
WILL SCARE CAPITAL.
A. Schilling Says That to Neglect
It Any Longer Would Amour.
to a Heinous
Crime.
ITS EFFECT ON TAXATION
M. J. LAYMANCE DECLARES 1T
WILL SCARE CAPITAL.
Oakland Office San Francisco Call

sos Broadway, Sept IL.
Now that the evident purpose of the
City Council to pass a high tax levy is
thoroughly recognized by the taxpayers
there is a general desire to discuss the
measure.
NJ. J. Laymance made a statement this
afternoon which he declares expresses
the sentiment of ninety-nine out of every
100 taxpayers in the city. His statement
is as follows:
L heartily approve of the carrying out
Of the object for which this great tax
levy is to be made, but there is reason in
not acting too hastily. The improve
ments contemplated are necessary, but
there is no possibility of them being car
ried out during this fiscal year, and it is
absurd to raise a lot of money and let
it be kept idle. The tax levy of 81 81 is
simply outrageous 1t means a great deal
more than appears on its face. Not only
will taxpayers have to pay this amount
of tax, but on every mortgage held by
the bank the interest will be proportion
ately raised because the mortgagor will
most certainly be called upon to pay the
additional interest. This means that a
tax of 81 81, which is rs cents more than
last year, will in reality be a tax Of 81 so
TO all those who have property mort
gagged:
indiscriminately. Lake Merritt should be
improved and l want 1t improved. but
this Improvement can judiciously be dis
tributed over four or FIVE years as well
as in one year. Many Of the people who
are now agitating this great tax were
among those who a few years ago fought
the issue of bonds to complete the boule-
ward around the lake and dredge it at
that time. Eighty thousand dollars is a
large sum OF money to be expended at this
time for a proposition the necessity of
which is doubtful. ! do not say the lake
does not need improving, for 1t does, but
TO make 1t a uniform depth of four feet
Is simply guesswork, because there is no
evidence that 1t is to any extent shallower
than ii was forty years ago. Again, S3S, 500
for building sewers on either side of the
measure and should be paid for by those
Immediately interested and not by the
whole city. What benefit is il TO a man
In West Oakland or Twenty-third avenue
accommodation of few property owners
around the lake?
During the past year SIS, 900 has been
spent on making splendid thoroughfare
through a large section of East Oakland
and next year this should be finished
think this would be better than dumping
600 into a lake. These contemplated
additional taxes cannot fail to drive CAP
tal away, and there is too little capital
here now. If the lake improvements be
necessity, l think 1t should certainly be
paid for an issuance of bonds spreading
over twenty years or longer, as the ac-
cruing benefit will certainly be as much
for the next generation as this / am
not sure that the contemplated sewers
to cost $3s500 should not be paid for by
the property owners, and if l understand
Auditor Snow rightly, there are many
LOCALITIES to be settled regarding the
dredging of the lake as a sanitary meas
IRE in the light Of the park and boule-
Council should surely take legal advice
before making any such ornamental tax
evy, and I know that the great mass of