The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1938-03-10

estimate accordingly.
1t is possible that our Commission
ers are not familiar with this law
but there is no doubt that their at
torney who writes statements for
publication over their signature is
fully informed for he is being paid
by the tax payers to advise our Com
missioners in legal matters.
They state that they only received
one check of $4,820.OO from the
Comptroller for direct relief last
year. This cannot be true for 1 find
in their financial statement published
in October, 1887, under receipts into
checks totaling $13, 441.45. This is in
addition to the check for $4,820.00
which they admit having received in
November. They cannot help know
ing that this check for $4,820.00 was
the first installment on the new taxes
that had been collected for the State
fiscal year 1888, which started
October l, 1887, and that further pay
ments will be made as the taxes are
collected. l have been advised that
the next installment will be paid
about the end of this month after the
income tax due March Is, has been
collected and divided for distribution
to Baltimore City and the several
counties. l have no quarrel with our
Commissioners but l believe that
through lack of knowledge of the
actual facts and of the laws control
ing the disbursements of the special
taxes they have been led into the
signing of statements which as re-
sponsible officials they should know
are incorrect. Therefore, for the pur-
pose of clarifying the public mind, l
want to re-affirm that our present
Board of Commissioners is spending
approximately $123, 100000 more this
year than was expended four years
ago, and despite the fact that we are
receiving $25,000.00 per year from
the beer tax and despite the fact that
our county is receiving grants from
capitalization for the needy and d.
rect relief to those persons who are
out of employment because of physi-
cal disabilities, it cannot be denied
that we are paying in direct taxes
some $67,000.00 more than when the
present Board took office This is
brought about by the raise in our tax
rate of % cents for the year, or a
raise of 35 cents for the period of a
year and half covered by the levies
of last and this year and the increase
in our taxable basis.
In their statement they cite the
fact that there will not be available
for general purposes all the additional
funds that the raise in our take basis
will yield because Al cents on each
hundred dollars must be levied to
schools. This is only another reason
why the base should not have been
raised, for by increasing the levy for
schools we will lose a corresponding
amount each year from the State
Equalization fund. 1t is equivalent
to taking $11,0O0.00 each year from
our county tax payers and giving it
to the State insofar as the equaliza-
ton fund is concerned. In addition
it will increase the amount our peo-
pie will be required to pay in State
taxes by $5,34S.00 so that altogether
we will be losing to the State each
year over $16,000.00 through the raise
in our tax base. A reassessment was
badly needed for the purpose of cor
recting inequalities heretofore exist
ing but certainly not for the purpose
of raising assessments.
Finally, referring again to their
statement that the roads funds for
this year were cut by the Legislature
so that 100000 less than the
amount for last year will be avail
able, l wish to re-affirm my former
statement that last year our county
received only $118,00000 for roads,
construction and maintenance, and
this year there will be provided from
State and Federal gasoline taxes
$139, 100000, or $21, 100000 more than
was provided last year.
CLIFFORD FRIEND.