What is so shameful about a "Supplemental Tax Bill"

The SF Tax Collector office does go into a bit of explanation about what causes a "Supplemental Tax Bill", and how there are sometimes two Supplementals, depending on when the sale recorded.

He then goes into a bunch of FAQs, many of them nostalgic in nature, about "how did it used to be?"

He has nothing about "Why our website only has the "broken-out" itemization of the regular (secured property) annual property tax, and why it excludes any mention of the existence of an unpaid bill, like a Supplemental Bill., and why that unpaid bill is not tacked onto the Itemization, to come up with a combined "Total Owed",.. or... if that is too much "advanced math" for them, then why the "Regular bill" does not say, in italics, or bold print, or in a "yellow highlight" :
"WARNING: YOU ALSO OWE a separate amount for some type of past, unpaid bill. Call xxx-yyyy, to resolve this, or, eventually, it may lead to the forced sale of your property"

((We have proposed this to the staff of the SF Tax Collector, and they have no interest in doing either of the above, even though it would put money in their Treasury, sooner, rather than later.

.....no interest by the good folks on the staff.)) Thus, we need a state law, to force the issue.
jb