The Birmingham age-herald., 1920-08-14
TAXABLE PROPERTY


 Petitioner ayers that the taxable prop erty in Birmingham for the year 15l9 was $l05, ,297, ,122. 1t is alleged that the as- sessed valuation of such taxable prop erty will be substantially greater for 1920 than 1919. One-half of the tax Of 10 cents the $l00 on the taxable prop erty within the corporate limits of the city of Birmingham levied by the board for the maintenance and construction 1 of public roads made under an act ap- proved February IT, 1885, which petitioner is entitled to receive will amount to more than $52.000.
 It is stated in the petition that the | board of revenue was under a legal duty to levy tax of 10 cents on $l0O for maintenance of public roads as required l by the act of the legislature approved February r, 1885, and fulfilled and ds- charged that duty by the resolution adopted on February 27, 1920 as alleged and shown in the petition. It is claimed | that the board was without authority | or power to amend said resolution or February 2 1920, as attempted on June 1 IS, 1920 and it's action on this date was | wrongful and illegal.
 | Petitioner asks that the board of reve- nue and Jere Gwin,- president, and R. R. | Bivens w. B. Cloe, Thomas E.. Huey ! and J. B. Vines be required to show cause why they should not be required to rescind, revoke and annul the resoiu- l ton, and that they give due notice Of such recision, revocation and amendment | to the tax assessor, tax collector and l treasurer of the county.
 | It is further asked that they show | cause why the writ of mandamus UT | other appropriate process should not is- sue to them and each of them requiring | them to pay to the petitioner the sum 1 of SS1 0TQ Uif ipfa TT
 issue warrant in due form on tho
 treasurer of the county for the pay ment of the said sum.
 GWIN'S STATEMENT 1 Jefferson county does not owe the city of Birmingham any tax money accord 1 ing to a statement made last night by Jere Gwin, chairman of the board of revenue The tables are exactly turned
 he stated. and according to records of the county. the city has been overpaid by the county s72,76955 This statement
 was made by Mir. Gwin following the filing of two petitions for writs of man. damus by the city of Birmingham yes teray afternoon in the circuit court tc | collect S51, ,O6911, with interest thereon | The city claims this is the amount due 1 from the 1919 taxes
 The city of Birmingham received cents on the s100 worth of valuation of l property III the GUY, stated MT, 1Wln
 and even in 1910, when there was no levy for public roads, the county gave sN,GJt
 to the city for it's public roads" l According to a statement of money paid the city of Birmingham under the
 act of 1885. as amended by acts of 1909 Jefferson county has paid the city oi Birmingham s72769.53 since 1910. The I following are the amounts paid by tht county to the city, according to the l nF Mr. Gu,ip
 1910, no levy, paid to s27.65o: 191l due
 city s14,s1S3s amount paid s17Ss97s. over paid $307l.02: 1912. due city $16.04o.03 amount paid s2o9O6.44. overpaid H.26s.41 1913. due city s1s.9sS. 63. amount paid $2l,- 57419, overpaid s2.605.6s; 1914. due city $19, 9,3s5, amount paid s46.6756l overpait
 $27, ,s10. 53: 1915. due city s45o92.62. amount paid s45, .96. overpaid s369.34 1916, duo city s4s, s,6s8so amount paid sis.412.5s. over paid S,74406; 1917. due city si6,56 63 amount paid $50 1ss.s7. overpaid s3.61s.H I1e1s. due city s4s1s9.94, amount paid s5l,-
 s23 42, overpaid s2,123F Total overpaie
 s72, ,7s9.53.
 1 According to this statement, after de ducting the s51,069.11 which the cit, claims as it's share of the 1919 tax money the city will still have been overpait Is21, 700. .42, 1t is pointed out