The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-10-22

was in regular semi. monthly session:
 MAYORS OFFICE. Montgomery, Ala. October 21, 1901. TO the City Council or Montgomery: Gentlemen:-ln accordance with the ] charter of the city, I transmit herewith | the annual reports of the heads of de- 1 fiscal year ending September. 30. 1901 and | as further required, beg to submit a | synopsis of same together with certain
 recommendations pertaining thereto for the past year still exceed the income
 of the city although to much smaller l extent than for number of years. Tho
 sss5s, expenditures uTe sPs s2n Piss.ss. % deficit S. 314.2S.
 l Included in income. however. was the
 sum of $S,Ol0 from sale of real estate, | making the actual expense $10.324 28 larger than current income.
 1 The utmose economy has ben enforc- | ed in every department, and put Tor the increased interest on bonded debt and
 school appropriation for past two years the large deficit of several years since l would have disappeared. These expenses, | in my opinion, cannot be materially de-
 city and It's people. It behooves you | therefore to carefully consider other
 mbeans of getting within our income. 1 Recent amendments to the license laws | will increase. in the opinion of the City
 Clerk, the income from this source to | some extent.
 License Inspector Recommended. In this connection 1 renew the recom- | mendation made to your predecessors. that the office of license inspector be created. The duty has heretofore been performed by men detailed either from | the police or sanitary departments, which | has proven very unsatisfactory.
 Experience has shown that the selec- | tion of men especially qualified for the work largely increases collections. To his duties of collecting licenses and per l sonal taxes could be added that of mak- | ing up the tax books, which is now done by extra clerical help.
 | I repeat the recommendation in my
 last annual message that the charge | against the general fund for fire hydrant
 rental of $40 per hydrant per annum be
 reduced to s3O in fact, think 1t could | be safely reduced to $25-this would re- | duce general fund expenditures about $4,tO0.
 This would still leave the income of
 the Water Department ample for all | purposes.
 | In previous communications I have l dWelt upon the injustice to the city or
 the operation of the con5titutiona! pro, l vision relating to assessment or real
 and personal property for city taxes. | Under the construction placed upon tnls l provision by the Supreme Court, the city l Is prohibited from assessing any prop | erty except as it appears on the county l tax books for the preceding year ana | for the same amount, no matter how
  | has resulted in the loss of one year | taxes on all increases In value caused ny | improvements, or otherwise, and also | altogether on considerable personal prop
 erty, which may be lost or removed | during practically two years before IT | can get the city tax books.
 A statement of the, system or assessing | taxes that prevails in Montgomery
 shows the gross injustice of its opera, | tion The assessment for State and
 county taxes begins on the first day or ls. E,,IIrr at. a.l Tn A H.
 gust, the tax year being from October | to October.
 The city assessment begins January l
 and is completed October l.
 Concerning Tax Assessments. The assessment passed upon by the City Council this month, l9Ol, IS coniineu
 to property assessed by the County Tax | Assessor for the tax year beginning Oc- tober 1, 1S99 This very plainly shows the
 absurd working of the present system. !, | After a most careful consideration ana ! investigation, I believe that 1t is in your power to remedy at least portion or this evil. and in this conclusion mem
 bers of the Judiciary Committee ana the | City Attorney, as we'll as high authorl-
 ties In the late Constitutional ConVen- | tiuon, agree with me.
 The city charter does not fix the tax
 year. but expressly authorizes the Clty | Council to change the mode of assessing | property for taxes, not inconsistent With
 the laws and Constitution of the state.
 understand that the Constitution m the
 limitation as to municipal assessments
 for taxes to that of the State for the
 preceding year, means the preceding tax year and not the calendar year IT tnls Is correct, the Council can, by amend
 ments to the tax ordinances, change it's tax year so as to hegin Immediately at-
 ter the expiration of the State tax year,
 which Is October 1, when they are now l due and payable.
 By this means you can use the assess
 ment completed by the County Board or | Equalization in August say two months
 previous instead of fourteen monIhs as | at present. I urgently recommend that
 you investigate the matter, and IT tounu practical. make necessary changes III your ordinances, so as take erect De | fore the beginning of the next tax year
 I feel sure that it woIld result in a con
 siderable increase of revenue without do-
 ing injustice to tax payers. ,.,,,,o5
 Several years ago the Council renuceu | the fees for meat inspection much beio"
 those charged in other cities TOT sllIliar
 service. This was done on the suppossii- ton that the lower fees would De suin- l Cient to pay the expense of lnspecuoh'
 This has not proved to be the case the | actual expenditures for inspection eN.
 ceeding the income from fees TOT last 1 year over S1. .6JI. While not intended as | a profit making undertaking. It shoulo
 certainly not be source or oencl., eS l peciaNy when the increase necessary Y | would leave the fees much below those or
 other cities. Dceming the hnanclal ln- l | under existing circumstances. nay nay S l dwelt at some length on same ana VIII VII | only make a cursory review ol the l several other city departments. .-
 The Street Department.
 On account of continued litigation Tn reference to assessments for street anG | sidewalk paving, and the uncertainty "i l the action of the Constitutional CohNTn- | tion, regarding these subjects, very , nt- | tie has been done In this class ol ,r, ItL proVements during the past yea. ntS I | sidewalks on both sides of Mcpollo.sL sL Street from Washington street so bx exe | citys limits. have been paved WL'n "t tta l agon blocks, under the provisions or .Ie l 'Baby Bond" law. In addition nun nun Der of streets have been put to per Ill" | nent grade and severed. ~ ,c,oro- There are uneXpended balances Sesi ass l | gating about $1. 800 from sale or spSLrni pS., | bonds for several streets heretoIorg | paved which should be balanced or, | am advised by the City Attorney d t,d t' | under the law authorizing these non9S' noiS 1 the City Council can by proper ~ ti ot" nances transfer these uneNpchueN .hd,, 1 ances to pay for improvements on otner @ | streets under the game law AS tiie Ii a,,- l tract did not include tho necessaLS Se Q r | CT on McDonough Street. ana as 'sinosnd tne, m | no other funds available, recoiniiit si t6a f l the transfer of these balances Aoi ' | purpose. ..s where | a majority of property owners aada hv l ious to have improvements maue DS
 sidewalk pavement. . result of The uncertainty as to the SifHcuIt pending litigation has made IL uhnnds | to dispOse of Special assessment poi,Es .t,