The Pulaskian., 1915-11-19
9th Dist. Assessments Explained
 by Commissioner Webster

Al ct IIloCIlllS Ol pIOpeIby OWl- CTS interested in Improvement District No. 8, embracing Eighth avenue and Martin and Valmar streets, north of Pros pect, held at the City Council chambers Monday night, the as- sessment matter complained of by H. F. Auten was discussed. ! Mayor Bradley and several members of the council were 1 present.
 In the last issue of The Pu- laskian the complaint made by MT. Auten before the last meet ing of the council was published, and since the hearing several re- quests have been made that this paper publish the other side of the question. That both sides might be heard, a request was made that J. B. Webster, one of the commissioners of the dis trict, explain how the assess ments were made. This MT. Webster has done in the follow ing letter:
 Editor The Pulaskian:
 1 have no desire to enter into a newspaper controversy with MT. Auten, or with anyone else, but in accordance with your re- quest for a statement relative to the assessments in Street Improvement District No. 8, Pulaski Heights, I shall submit the following:
 The assessors in the district, Claude c. Thompson, Judge M. J. Manning and o. E. White, were elected by the Pulaski Heights City Council and in- stalled in their offices according to law. These men are all resi- dents of Pulaski Heights and are well known. If MT. Thomp- sons stand at the meeting held in the council chambers on Mon day night can be taken as indica- tive of the entire board, the as- sessors are squarely and honest ly behind the assessments as made. MT. Thompson was the only member of the board at the Monday night meeting. Judge Manning, I am advised, was out of the city, and I pre- sume MT. White had some good reason for not attending.
 The meeting was called, as understand, because of the charges preferred by MT. Auten at the council meeting on the Monday night previous thereto. I think 1 may correctly state that MT. Thompson removed any impression that may have existed, judging from the report in your last weeks issue, to the effect that the assessments were made by the sexton or jan itor.
 The total assessed benefits accruing in the district are shown by the assessors book to be $16,068.00. The total tax levied against the property in the district by the City Council is 90 per cent of this sum, or 1 $14, 4,461.20, as follows: For the year 1915 the tax is II per cent of the assessed benefits; for the years 1916 and 1917 it is 10 per cent; for the years 1918, 1919 and 1920 it is 9 per cent, and for the years 1921, 1922, 1923 and 1924 it is 8 per cent.
 The total tax levied, $14,- 461.20, is figured to be sufficient to retire the bonds issued, $9,- 900.00, as they come due during a ten-year period and pay the in- terest thereon at 6 per cent per annum, payable semi-annually, amounting to some $3,276, or a total sum of $13,176 and leave a margin of $1,285. This mar gin, which accumulates gradual ly during the period, is the same in amount as the tax levied for the tenth year, 1924, which is 8 per cent of the assessed benefits. Unless it is found necessary to use this amount in repairing the streets during the ten-year pe- riod, it will not, I take it, be col lected. In that case the total tax against the property will be only 82 per cent of the assessed benefits.
 You will note from the above IL <k 4ho oofiro oocncc,,, 1x, |