No Dispute With Mr. Seyler

Argus Has Cut $40,000 Down to Less Than $20,000

-----

FOR A FEW DAYS ONLY

-----

For July Taxes Will Wipe Out July 1 Overdraft and Leave Money on Hand Without Mortgaging Homes

----

Editor Argus:— 

Permit me to state in your paper a few words that I may not be misunderstood. My report to the council was made at the request of the finance committee, and as far as the matter of overdraft March 1 is concerned the figures agree with those of the Argus.

I refer to the supplementary report, which was only an estimate attached, but not a part of the report proper. The Argus figures were made from a different standpoint than I had planned mine. I endeavored to show about what the city would owe July 1, taking the corresponding months for last year as a basis, that is expenses for May were classed as May warrants, June for June expenses, etc.

The Argus looks at it from the light that, as they are not allowed until the mouth following, they should become a charge for that month, viz., May bills for June, June bills for July. My estimate was based on what the city owes, the Argus on what it had to pay out, the May bills would be a taken out of the June money on hand, the June bills out of the July money on hand. In the latter case the overdraft July 1 would be lessened, which would result as the Argus has stated.

The city will be required to advance the sum of $2,500 to pay sewer and pavement bonds March 1, as there is not sufficient funds there to meet it, which will increase the overdraft. Following the lines of the Argus the overdraft will be about as follows:

March 1, overdraft..........$ 7,935 88

April 1, overdraft.......... 17,436 88

May 1, overdraft........... 20,179 88

June 1, overdraft............ 16,106 88

July 1, overdraft........... 19,452 88

Respectfully,

EDWARD L. SEYLER.

The Argus today is not disposed to go into a discussion of what the overdraft on July 1 will be, as what that overdraft will be can only be determined by the amount that the city will spend and in the fixing of that the Argus has no voice, but what it does say is that whether the overdraft on July 1 be $15,000, $19,000 or $21,000, it can all be taken care of with regular June tax levy, collected in July, and enough money left to run the city until Feb. 1, 1904, and a balance be left in the treasury on that date. This can be done without any increase in taxation. No charter law is violated by the intermediate overdrafts and the city will have been run along the same financial lines that it always has been. There is no necessity of issuing bonds, which are really a mortgage on the homes of all tax-payers. There is no necessity of paying interest for from one to ten years to take care of a permissible overdraft of from three to four months.

The Argus has cut down, by throwing the calcium light of publicity on the matter, an estimated overdraft of $40,000 for which bonds were to be issued to a temporary overdraft of $19,000, which would be wiped out in a few months without bonds, and this takes care of bonds which should have been taken care of otherwise, if the business of the city had been conducted right up to the handle.