San Antonio light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1911-1993, 1923-08-19

state constitution, school districts
may levy up to a maximum of 81 on
the hundred of valuation. When such
levy is made, under the charter as it
now is, the city will have left only
$1.25 to take care of everything. in
Guiding general purposes, Carnegie Ii
brary and interest and sinking fund
on its bonded debt. The latter must
be provided for or the city default,
which of course is unthinkable; with
rate of 3J cents to meet interest
and sinking fund, if provided for out
of the general funds. there would then
be left only 80 cents for general pur-
poses and Carnegie Library. To re-
duce down to that, means n curtaii-
ment of fire and police protection,
practical abandonment of parks, recre-
alton and Fairgrounds, and all other
similar municipal activities, even wa
ter and lights TO a very large extent.
The school board now leyies a tax
rate of 60 cents, the city for genera.
purposes, $1.25, and for special pur-
poses, 30 cents, or total of $50,
leaving only 5 cents margin, which
will not take care of any emergency
expenditures and certainly not of a
bond issue in excess of about $500, 900.
1t is therefore absolutely essential 4,
if the people wish flood prepention.
paving, or anything else in the way
of permanent public improvements.
that something be done allowing the
city to finance itself within the con-
stitutional provisions and not be hand
icapped as it now is.
This does not mean that if the
amendment to the charter is adopted.
the city commission can raise the tax
rate of its own volition and at once.
Having control over the general fund
rate and having already reached the
maximum allowed, they will have no
authority to raise the rate of actual
taxation for special purposes except by
vote of the people first taken, be-
cause they can raise such special tax
rate only to take care of interest and
sinking fund on bond issue and this
of course must first be permitted by
vote of the people.
The reason for asking this change
in the charter and separating the
taxes so far as the rate is concerned.
is to give the people the right to issue
flood prevention or other bonds fol
permanent public improvements, II
they wish. They can not do this as
the charter now stands.
There is no friction between the
school board and the city on this
proposition; the school boards attor
ney helped draft the amendment and
was freely consulted in the matter.
Neither will such separation increase
the cost Of collecting, as the city vii!
continue to collect the school taxes
without expense to the school board.
So that the voting Of the charter
change only allows an increase in
taxes after the people have by their
votes permitted additional bonds TO be
issued, and that at n special election
called only for that purpose and no
other. The approval of the change in
the charter does not automatically in
crease taxes; the people themselves
must first be consulted. and the prop
osition submitted to them.
But there is this to the whole thing
unless the tax separation proposition
is carried, it will be several years be-
fore any permanent public improve
ments can be had and the flood proven
ton plan must be forgotten. The city
will be perfectly helpless to protect
itself against a repetition of the dis
astrous flood Of 1921.
JOSEPH RYAN.