Grand Rapids herald. [volume] (Grand Rapids, Mich.) 1892-1959, 1893-08-20

TAXES AS THEY ARE
Secretary kinssy Dispsoses That
We Are Highly Taxed
BYlSTssfsTlHG COMPARISONS
The Diasreao-s nesweea R~sss az
Valuation for Az-e-~nenss k'.sas-
ii-b tue Basis Of True T.x1sIon-
BYlxTsafsTlSG COMPARISONS

EDrroe % rax During the
past few years not little criticism has
been INDUCED In hpoE the sdninistra-
tion % The affairs u the city Of Grand
Rapids By many q its most prominent
peopis. The principal feature Of the
nunicipslity adversely criticised was
the sxisting high rate u taxation That
these criticisms have been u vast bene-
nt j. beyond doubt. yet there are many
chances for improvement. not perhaps
In the amount % money spent. as In the
manner IN which il - spent. However
Just IN tho minds Of Of some and unjust
IL the min,is q others. thess criticisms
may have been. these two facts must 10
borne In mind. viz: Any tendency to
excessively high rates Of taxation should
be met with vigorous and energetic
moral resistance through whatever
agency may be best employed On the
other hand. a constant cry Of high taxes
has the eject to discourage large invcst-
ments which. should they be made.
woeId materially assist in the develop
ment Of the city, Comparisons are
sometimes odious. but there 10 no other
waf in which ve can judge matter
that has 10 other standard. and have
recently secured statistics bearing on
this subject from other cities fof the
sole purpose Of Asccrtzining whether In
yestors. either at home or from
abroad. whether merchant manu-
facturcr. or land owner. would
b. justified In discriminating Ia favor
u some other town. In disclosing the
figures. scrupulously adhere 10 the in
formation obtained from the chamber
II eommercc. boards Of trade or city
officials from the various cities respond
ing - my inquiries. ! have sciectedfhos
sarying in population from 1855 to
lsklss6. according 10 the census II 1880.
l have asked. hrst. the assessed valna-
ton " all taxable property in the city;
second. cash valuasion OF the same;
third. rate % taxation for all taxes. city.
county aud state. excepting special
sewer and street improvement assess-
ments, fourth. bouted Indebtedness en-
elusive u sewer and street bonds, eth.
total city. county and state taxes. mot
including street OF sewer taxes. for the
ytar l-.kz: sixth. whether the city owns
water works. from the following cities:
Seranton and Harrisburg. Pennsylvania;
saginaw. Michigan: Evansville. Indiana;
Springfield. Lowell and Lynn. Msssachu-
sets. Omaha and Lincoln. Nebraska;
Rochester. Troy and Albany. New York;
Kansas City and ST. Joseph. Missouri;
Columbus. Dayton and Toledo. Ohio;
Ne9 Haven, Connecticut; Memphis.
Tennessee, Trenton. " j.: Los Angeles.
California. Des Noines. Iowa: Portland.
Oregon. AID salt Lake City. The
figures themselves indicate nothing un-
less thoroughly discussed. az IL will be
seen that some cities assess at full value.
While others Assess at less than one
fourth value. making q vast difference
ir the rate q TAXATION IN order 70 obtain
the emout u tax on \ lie amount u
property
10 illustrate The value of all tho
property Ia MANY. New York. - lit
fis over sGl lts1tGo market vaiucL and
lt Is Assessed al s5t.nooOo0 The total
vaIue 20 az the property IN Kansas City
j. nearly sls1tt1Uo market value. and
lt Is Assessed AZ only s4.Wo.UO. only
atoat 0Ge third q - market value. IL
y easily q he seen that II the taxes IN
tie two eities are equal. a. compared %
the market value n the property. the
rate mrst be three times az high Ia
Kansas City 49, IN Aibany
Ia discussing The figures given in the
several tables bslow. one must come %
the eouclaslon that Grand Rapids o.
cup.cs tbe nosf favorable p0slti0u m
neatly every point while she has but
t~o. really saiy che. a. Tar a. city taxes
are concerncslL successful rivals in one
poiut