The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1912-08-17

The county clerk insisted that the
statute plainly makes it the imperative
! duty of the board to make such levy
but agreed that if the board lacked the
moral and business courage to do its
plain duty in the matter the county
clerk would personally assume the re-
/ sponsibility of extending the sinking
fund levy, providing that the board
would take care of the floating indebt-
edness of the general fund and the
building fund, but insisted that no levy
would be extended that failed TO make
such provision.
within a few days after my long
conference with Prof. Starr, I had a
long talk with Judge W. E. Atchison,
then chairman of the finance commit
tee of the board, along the same lines
and with the same understanding, and
we have discussed the subject at least
half a dozen times since then. I have
each time cited the fact that this is
the opportune time TO make such a levy
inasmuch as the city levy and county
levy are to De reduced this year, giving
the board of education an opportunity
to take care of some of it's bonds with
cut materially increasing the total tax
levy of the city as compared with last
perity such as is not guaranteed for
the future.
Board Fears Responsibility.
''I supposed the board of educatio-
end county clerk were working in per-
feet harmony, trying to handle criti-
cal business situation with as little en-
barrassment as possible to all concern
ed, and the county clerk even hoped
that the board would do it's full duty
by making the levy suggested for sink
ing fund. He certainly had a right to
expect that the board would get in
the clear on its floating debt and at
least allow the county clerk to assume
the responsibility, unhampered, of max
ing the sinking fund levy which the
board admits should and must be made
but which it is afraid to assume the
responsibility for.
after having tacit understanding
with the chairman of the finance COM
mittee of the board (who should have
been able to speak with authority
that the tax levy for the year 1912
would be handled as outlined above,
the county clerk was astonished to
find that the board boldly advertised
the fact that it created a deficit in its
general fund and it's building fund
during the year 1911 and deliberately
proposes to continue those deficits for
the year 1912. and even attempts to
prevent the county clerk from protect
ing the bonded Indebtedness by resort
ing to the thin subterfuge absolutely
unwarranted by law of calling its in
terest fund interest and sinking
fund.
Knows Little of Business.
/ ''To add insult to injury, when the
board finds itself justly criticised for
it's illegal and unbusinessike way of
handling the tax levy, it admits (by
published interview of the former
chairman of it's finance committee)
that the county clerk is justified in his
every suggestion and insistence, and
at the same time attempts to justify
end even popularize its illegal con-
duct by the publication of false state
ments prepared by it's clerk, who
frankly admits that he does not know
of his own knowledge what the an
nual interest charge on bonds amounts
to- cannot tell within $4,000 what
amount of unpaid warrants are out
standing carrying per cent interest,
would not care to publish statement
showing the interest paid annually for
a period of years on unpaid warrants
and attempt to justify it as good bust
ness. knows very little about the law
on the subject, and in fact, has no
interest whatsoever in the matter ex-
cept that his staten ent was prepared
at the request of Judge Atchison, a
member of the board.
'''Che certificate of levy is respectful
ly returned herewith, with the request
that the board make a levy for gen.
eral fund, building fund, interest fund,
and sinking fund that will be legal in
every respect. and certify the same to
the county clerk not later than August
25, 1912. Very respectfully
IS. G. ZIMMERMAN. Co. Clerk"