The San Francisco call., 1910-09-11
MAYOR And SAVANT
IN CONTROVERSY
Beverly Hodghead Takes Issue
With Prof. G. G. Plehn on the
Question of Annexation


President Benjamin Ide Wheeler, Mayo
Beverly Hodghead has. taken issue wit
Prof, Carl C. Plehn, head of the un
vers:ty department. of statistics, on til
question of annexation. Mayor Hodg
head declares that Professor Plehn
wrong in believing that the preser
annexation movement contemplates
city and county government. He ais
questions the authenticity of tax rat
statistics quoted by the savant in a lei
ter to George Gelder favoring consol
idation. The mayors letter follows:
BERKELEY, Sept. 6. 1910.
MY Dear President Wheeler: I
received yours of the I'd inst this
morning referring to Professor
Plehn's attitude on some questions
which are being discussed in con-
nection with the annexation
CITY AND COUNTY GOVERNMENT
Lawyers disagree as to whether,
considering section Z, article XII, of
the constitution, alone, the legisla-
ture could, by an enabling act, pro-
vide for the formation of a city
and county government In Oak
land and Berkeley But, aside
from this, section 8 presents an
absolute obstacle This section
prohibits the formation of any new
county any line of which would
pass within five miles of the coun-
" seat of the county proposed to
be divided. This was intended evil
IDENTIFY for the protection of that
portion of the county which re-
mains after the division. The line
of the new county of Oakland
would pass within five miles of the
county seat of the county which is
proposed to be divided and there
fore would come within the prohi-
bition of the section. There is, so
far as L know, no difference of
opinion among lawyers on that
point. The section would have to
be repealed or its effect avoided In
some way, which could only be
done by removing the county seat
to point more than five miles
from any line of the new county
ASSESSED VALUE OF PROPERTY
As to the relative assessed valu-
atons of property in the two
cities, | do not know on what Pro-
fessor Plehn bases his opinion, but
obviously he is mistaken There
are no doubt individual instances
where unequal assessments are
made in both cities. / have heard
of such, but We are more concerned
with the total assessment. The
only common standard from which
the two assessments can be meas
ured is the county assessment.
Here the properties in the two
cities are subjected to an indepen-
dent assessment by the same Off
Ger, and yet the county valuations
In each of the cities last year was
practically the same as the respect
i've city assessment. If there were
any inequality in the county asses
sor's valuation it would be the
duty of the board Of equalization
to correct it, but so far as I know
no protest has been presented. The
board of equalization of Berkeley
was in session throughout last
month, but no complaint was filed
against any real property. assess
ment.
Last year the total assessed val
uation in Oakland was on the basis
of $973 per capita of its popula-
tion, excluding the annexed terri
tory. In Berkeley the assessment
was only SS75 per capita On this
basis, if Professor Plehn is correct,
the per capita wealth in Oakland
is more than double that in Berlls-
ley, a condition which does not.
seem credible. Very sincerely
yours,
BEVERLY L. HODGHEAD.
Here is Doctor Wheeler's reply:
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA,
OFFICE OF PRESIDENT,
BERKELEY, Sept. z, 1910
My Dear Mayor Hodghead: Your
letter of September the sixth, just
received, seems to me a complete
answer to the contentious of Pro-
fessor Plehn. | shall surely have
him read the letter.
BENZ. j. WHEELER