The Birmingham age-herald., 1923-07-28
C|Ty-COUNTY ROW. OVER 1O-CENT TAX. CARRIED |NTOOPEN.
Jefferson Owes Birmingham $216,000, Refusing To
 Pay, Wynn Says

Pay, Wynn Says
 Birmingham city officials are in intense earnestness about getting what they pronounce as "a square deal" from the Jefferson county board of revenue in the division of the 1o-cent tax in Jefferson county imposed on real property for the support and upkeep of highways.
 Under the law, it was pointed out Friday morning in the city hall, the city is entitled to an equal division of this tax, but the city IS not con- tending for that. being willing to receive--even less What the city de- mands and has set out to get Is an exact half of what Birmingham, only, contributes to the 10-cent road tax. giving the other half of the fund of city origin to the county and all of this tax that originates beyond the city limits in the confines of Jefferson county.
 pressed himself as satisfied with the result of the journey taken to Mont gomery Thursday by President D. E. McLendon, Com missioner W. l.. liar rison, Comptroller H. M. Taylor, As sistant City Attorney W. A. Jenkins and himself. They held conferences with members of the Jefferson lature and laid before the county's representatives the situation as it has been analysed. They learned in Montgomery that Ernest Matthews, speaking for the board of revenue, had already been in conference with
 
 delegation in the legislature. Wynn Discusses Situation.
 Speaking of the result of the trip to Montgomery, Mir. Wynn, Friday morning, said:
 the city Is concerned, division of the road tax, payment tG the city of withheld funds of the road tax and other matters in which the city is interested were all taken up with the members of the Jefferson county delegation In the legislature. The impression we gained was that the city will be given fair treatment.
 We told the delegation the various matters that have come up between the county and city should not be threshed out in the legislative com mittees at all, and didn't propose to advocate doing so, but we did want to put our own delegation in posses sion of facts and figures on the sub ject, and this we did.
 we feel perfectly safe in leaving all these questions between the county and the city to the fair and sound discretion of our duly chosen representatives"
 Makes Official Statement.
 Friday morning MT. Wynn pre- pared an official statement analyzing the matters that have brought on the present controversy, defending the city's rights to a fair proportion of the money paid into the county road streets within the city. MT. Wynn statement is as follows:
 Tn view of the policy of the pres ent board of revenue of Jefferson county to have laws enacted, whereby it will be relieved from re- turning to the city, for main tenance of it's streets and reads, any of the taxes paid by the taxpayers of the city of Birmingham into the county road funds, it is well that the public be acquainted with facts prov ing this policy of the board of rev. enue to be an unfair discrimination against the taxpayers of the city of Birmingham in favor of the county at large.
 "The policy of the board of rev enue, in attempting to make Bir- mingham pay the bills of the county government Is the same unfair policy as that of the state to make the county of Jefferson pay the expenses of the state government. as far as it's capacity will permit.
 "The following letter addressed to me by MT. H. M. Taylor, city comp troller is well worth the cCnsid- eration of the people of Birmingham and Jefferson county, which shows just what percentage of the state and county taxes paid in Jefferson county is contributed by the taXpay- CTS of the city of Birmingham. His letter Is as follows:
 July 23. 1923. MT. w. J. Wynn, City Attorney, City.
 Dear Sir: In reference to the amount of taxes as paid in this county, as to which you made in of the total assessed valuation of property in the county, viz: $240, 900, 900, there Is in the city of Bir- mingham $144 900, 900, which is 60 per cent of the whole. On this basis we will have the following amounts paid into the several funds:
 State general fund, rate. 25 cents; taxes paid in city. s36o,Ooo; taxes paid outside city, $24O,Ooo.
 taxes paid in city, $144,ooo; taxes paid outside city, s96,ooo.
 State school tax, rate, 30 cents; taxes paid In city, $432,0o0; taxes paid outside city. $2Ss,ooo.
 cents: taxes paid in city, s4S2,oOO; taxes paid outside city, s2ss.OOo.
 County road tax, rate. 15 cents; taxes paid in city, s216,oo0; taxes paid outside city, s144,ooo.
 County road tax. rate, 10 cents; taxes paid in city, sl44,ooo; taxes paid outside city, s96.000.
 County building and bridge fund, rate, 10 cents; taxes paid in city, s144,ooo; taxes paid outside city, s9e,ooO.
 County sewer fund. rate. cents taxes paid in city, s72,oo0; taxes paid outside city, $4S,oo0.
 County school fund, rate. 30 cents; paid outside city. $2SS,oOo.
 County school fund, rate. 10 cents; taxes paid in city, s144,000; taxes paid outside city, s96,oOO.
 County school fund. rate, cents: taxes paid in city, $72,000; taxes paid outside city. $4S,000.
 Total: Rate, s1.SO; total taxes paid in city, s2.592,OOO; total taxes paid outside city, s1,72S,ooo.
 This maks a total paid by the citizens of Birmingham in all state and county funds, viz. $2,592,000 and by the county outside of Birming- ham,. S1,72S,O0O or $S64.000 more is paid in the city than is paid by the rest of the county.
 If you will take the first five county funds as paid inside the city. $10OS,000, with that paid outside, s672,OOo then $336.oO0 more is paid in the city than outside of the city. The half of the ten cent road fund