The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1905-02-23

years and that a great many new buud-
ings have been constructed In that time.
In fact, the building inspector Of Mime
apolis informs ME that in 1902 1914 per-
mits were issued, amounting to $6,1SS,2lS
and in 1904, 4,41a permits were issued,
amounting to S6,210,747. For the two
years, therefore, there were $l2,39S, $50
worth of new buildings permitted, and yet
the assessment returned to the state
board showed considerably over 100000
less OF realty than in 1902. With these
facts before it, the state board promptly
increased real property S per cent in the
city of Minneapolis, which made the total
assessment of realty in the city about
S101, 500, 900. Is there any fair minded
man who will say that the action Of the
state board was not justihable? The de-
crease in realty there is very surprising,
and it is not at all improbable. that If one
should Investigate the assessments by
wards it would be- found that the large
decrease shown by the assessment was
made in the downtown or business por-
ton of the city It is naturally supposed
that such property would increase In value
with the wealth and popula alton of the city,
but perhaps it will be found that the as
sessments Of this LASS of property were
actually decreased in 1904 over what it
had been fixed iii 1902. and that the 4outly-
ing residence districts either remained
stationary or Mere actually Increased. In
other words, business property may have
been decreased Yin assessm ent for taxation
purposes, while suburban orr residence
propertyswas either increased or remained
stationary IF thf|g be true. it would seem
to be a. very strange proceeding and one
hard to account for to one not familiar
with the inside nanipula lions.
II have not been delegated by the state
board to defend its action regarding the
Minneapolis assessment nor do / believe
1t is necessary, with fair-minded people,
to do SO, but in this, as in all other mat
ters pertaining to the business of the pub
lie the truth should be known.
Other Values Raised.
It may not be out Of place at this time
to refer to the other actions Of the state
board, as it affects the taxpayers of Hen
nepin county. In 1898, the Minneapolis
Gas Light company was assessed $4,000
In 1903, the state board fixed the assess
ment at 81, 100000 III 1904, the corpora
ton itself listed for taxation property
amounting to s1,002,670. This was slight
ly increased by the board. In 1898, the
MINNEAPOLIS Street Railway company was
assessed $986,135. In 1903, the state board
of equalization fixed the assessment at
81, $50 900, and the tax was paid upon that
valuation. In 1904. practically the same
I mention this to show that the state
board did not confine it's operations
wholly to increasing household goods in
the city Of Minneapolis. A great many
other items might be mentioned, but this
is sufficient. II 49,.
It has been said that Minneapolis pays
one-sixth Of the taxes of the state and
has only one-ninth Of the population,
which is no doubt true. The dispropor-
ton is even greater in st. Louis county,
for they have approximately one-twenti-
eth of the population and pay one-ninth
of the taxes. so that argument falls of its
own weight It may be, interesting to
note this fact. '-'. Er.-.g~ ,s-
Hennepin's Proportion.
Tn 1894 the total assessed valuation Of
the state was $63S, 1926. OF that sum
Hennepin county furnished STAT, ,223,
or. in other words, in 1894 the valuation
of Hennepin county was % per cent
of the entire taxable value of the state,
while in 1904, ten years later, out of a
total assessed valuation Of $S45, 897,llO
Hennepin county furnished $l47979,94l,
or about II per cent of the whole IN
other words, after ten years OF growth
and development in wealth and popula-
ton, the assessed value of Hennepin
county remains practically unchanged,
while the remainder of the state has
increased s21O,ooo,ooo, or from s6as,ooo, oo0
to sS45, OO0, 900.
Another item which may be of interest
to Minneapolis taxpayers is that in 1894
Hennepin county contributed $325,303. %
to what is called state taxes, while in
1904 the amount was 1921 ,969.92. The
above figures do not include, in either
case, the state one-mill school tax or the
| university tax, so it is a fair comparison
These figures can be verified by calling
on the county auditor at Minneapolis OF
at the state auditors office, as they are
| taken from the abstract Of the tax lists
| In other words, Minneapolis in 1904 paid
| 500, 900 less to the support of the state
| government than It. did in 1894 These
| facts should satisfy an impartial man
| that the state board of equalization does
| not deserve thesc ensure 1T has received
from some Of the citizens Of Minneapolis
| Having shown that Hennepin county
! pays $1,000 less to the support of the
state government in 1904 than it did ir
| 1894, it may be Of interest here to note
| that the total taxes levied in the county
have increased from $3,842,51 80 in z1S94
! to s4,628, 954.61 in 1904, or an increase OF
100000 in round numbers in the tota
taxes This shows, therefore, that thu
people are now paying 100000 more il
local taxes than in 1894, and that NJ
doubt accounts for the increase in thu
/ taxes 81 "a s$ u
So, If certain Of the jealous officials o.
/ Minneapolis and some of its enterprisint
! citizens would turn the lights inwardly
i within their own corporate limits, the,