The record-union., 1893-02-14
AN UNJUST PROPOSITION
RECLAMATION DISTRICTS.


Assembly Bill No. 3O4 treats of the
election of trustees of reclamation dis
tricts, but not III manner that is worthy
OF commentator. If it passes it puts
into the hands OF the large tact owners
of the vast present overlooked lands the
absolute power to control the funds of the
district.
The bill provides that at the election for
trustees each owner of land in the dis
trict shall have one vote for each dollars
worth OF real estate owned by him in the
district, on the basis of the assessed
valuation according to the next precod-
ing assessment roll OF the county. That
far the bill is just and right, and is the
law as 1t stands. 1t places all owners,
great and small, upon common level of
values represented in the district.
But here follows proviso, that, after
there shall have been an assessment for
reclamation purposes levied on the lands
OF the district, each owner shall have the
! right to cast one vote for each dollar for
which his land has been assessed for
reclamation purposes on the last assess
ment list for such district.
This proviso practically destroys the
original method of electing, which obvi-
ously is the most American method as
well as the most just. Under the proviso
the least valuable or least reclaimed lands,
which are usually the largest tracts and
held in the greatest single holdings, and
by non-residents, can outvote the more
valuable lands on the county assess
ment list, but least assessable upon the
reclamation assessment list.
To illustrate the injustice of this new
scheme, let US suppose the district to be
surrounded by what is known as bank
land, that which is highest lying along
the levees and which is under high state
of cultivation and has been. to all intents
and purposes, reclaimed. This bank land
IS always owned in small tracts, and has
about all the population of the district
and represents its greatest interests, in
all respects and of every character. 1t is
far more to the interest of these small
bank land owners that the whole district
be reclaimed and made secure. For their
little holdings are all they haye, gener-
ally, while the large central low-lying
tracts are of but secondary interest 10
their owners, and if damaged by overflow,
cannot visit much if any suffering upon
them.
Between and lying below the improved
bank lands are the large, low-lying CEN
trail tracts that are unreclaimed and are
OF lowest possible value, and have least
interest in tho permanency of the district
Under the amendment the executive
powers of the district-which is a district
only because the bank land has been re-
claimed and is kept up to resist waters
are placed wholly in the hands of the
least valuable tracts-those held in large
bodies and by absentee owners.
1t is, therefore, obviously unjust to put
the government of the district into the
hands of the absentee owners of large
tracts of unreclaimed lands lying lower
than the bank lands. They may, and
often do, so expend the funds when they
get control as to fritter them away in ex-
periments, or they neglect to take action
| that will enhance values all around, with
equal justice.
Clearly the just method is to give the
votes for Trustees to the lands upon the
| county assessment basis, which is more
nearly an equitable rating for representa-
tive purposes than any other. The law
as it stands is American, fair, and needs
no amendment.