Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-01-16
Home Owner Deplores
Borland Law Effect
no the Editor Of The star:

To the Editor Of The star:
read with vivid interest the leading
editorial in last Fridays Star entitled
Benefits" and felt grateful that my
own case was alphabetically pictured
in the first paragraph till the line Is
reached: 1.-THE citizen gives up IN
DISGUST, sells his home and moves to q
newly opened subdivision. There
part company with "the type" for, like
the European coloni, am chained to
the glebe and look forward to move only
on to the 6 feet Of earth in a subdivision
in which taxes will have been exacted
in advance.
have put the savings Of lifetime
into q home-just home. Not busi-
ness with profits accruing from in
creased accessibility of thoroughfares,
concrete surfacing, curbs, ETC., but q
home to be consumed-that is, used up
solely in the enjoyment of its possessor,
and therefore not an asset from busi-
ness point of view but liability as long
as one lives, and constant expense. To
the non-social q home is an incunl-
brance. The tramp, the Ishmaelite, the
anarchist doesn't want home. 1t in
terferes with his aim in life. Place the
emphasis on getting ahead In the strug-
gle and we must admit one fights more
efficiently If single-handed whether
profteering or racketeering. On the
other hand, while useless as capital for
the individual go-getter, a home as
substantial stake in the community, in
my judgment, is the most valuable con-
tribution Of the citizen to society and,
so far from mer1ting the dlscred1t1ng
snub of a punitive tax, might well re-
ceive the glad hand of bonus.
I have tried, as far as my earnings
would allow, to beautify this home, to
make it Ivable for mind as well as
body, a credit to- the neighborhood, q
pleasure to passersby. The street on
which it abuts had been paved before
acquired possession and was
thought, in fairly good condition-far
better, am sure, than some others IN
the same vicinity. But along came the
traffic expert, the engineers, the motor
lists and doubtless the base ball fans,
who visioned the great convenience and
eXhilaration of smooth motoring on q
ready highway to the Griffith Stadium
at American League Park. To the tune
of just about five hundred dollars and
the accompaniment of an per cent
delinquency tax in case I should not
come to time, I actually had to increase
the mortgage on my property by that
amount and later borrow to meet the
really oppressive regular tax, which
latter it would seem to my limited vision
should adequately cover all the "bene-
fits" enjoyed as a dweller near paved
streets. If this is not being taxed to
death, it certainly is being taxed out of
house and home, or at least thrust
relentlessly into the bread line to be
subsequently, pulled out, perhaps, by
the "doleful dole" or solaced by charity
weepily bestowed ON some one else who
looks like me.
What I want to ask is why, if the
Borland law is unjust for one, it is not
unjust for all of use, and why my hard
earned cash must be held up till some
substitute can be devised that will en-
gulf it whether or no.
Cannot all necessary street paving be
provided for in the general taxes plus
the special from trucks, buses and
automobiles directly using and requir-
ing surface improvement and the real
benehciaries therefrom, instead of from
AUDITING homes which use them only as
inlperied pedestrians?
ANNA J. COOPER.