Omaha daily bee., 1907-02-28
TERMINAL TAXATION NEEDED
Nebraska Towns and villages Are
Now Being Deprived of Their
Just Revenue.
CFrom a stan correspondent.1

villages for local purposes. He favors the
Clarke bill. This afternoon he gave out
the following interview:
"Since the State Board OF Equalization
| and Assessment fixed the valuation of the
Union Pacific main line mileage at $90,9SS
per mile and the supreme court of the
| United States in its recent decision justified
II we may assume II correct valuation.
I'm April 1906, the Union Pacific COM
pany, over the signatures, among other
officers, OF A. w. Scribner, tax commits.
sioner, and Erastus Young, general auditor,
returned the reproduction or tangible value
of the Union Pacific main line property,
! including Omaha terminals, at S14S92, ,0oS,
or an average reproduction value of SSl,S64
per mile. The state boards value of S9o,9SS
| per mile raised this value to total OF
So 525, ,94S a raise of ST. $685. 0i5, or tS5 per
| cent. which, if the Union Paciflc's return
of tangible value was correct must repre-
sent the intangible or franchise value OF
the Union Pacific main line.
"The value of its tangible property re-
turned by the Union Pacific from Omaha
and South Omaha is 81, ,S55; for the bal
ance of its main line, So 7S5,O4s. Doubtless
it is true, and il the Union Pacific orators
would have a large distributive value out
of Omaha they must admit its truth, that
the 1856 per cent of value added by the state
board as the intangible value applies In like
manner to main track sidetrack, spur
| track, building acres of right-ot-way
wherever found. Adding this 1856 per cent
of tangible value returned by the company
! from Omaha and South Omaha as the in
tangible value of the property in the two
towns, we find the value of the property
to be $11,S72,755. But Omaha and South
Omaha under the unit system of assess
ment on their 9.66 miles of main line get
an assessment of $s7S955 of this amount;
hence there is left for distribution over the
balance of the mileage only $lO,99S, 798.
do not admit that this sum ought to be
or is all distributed over the main line
mileage. 1 claim that only part of this
sum should be distributed over the main
line, and that part of it the per cent the
main line contributes to the total value of
Union Pacific lines in the state.
"Outside of Omaha and South Omaha
contributions of the tangible value are
The main line ..................,..$l $40, ,735, ,04S
The o. & r. " branches. .,........ 4,29l ,55A
The Kearney branch ................. 504 1853
Total .$lo,oaO 100
"Of this the main line contributed $50
per cent and l claim that that per cent
of the Omaha and South Omaha terminals,
viz, 1854, ,727. only can be distributed over
the main line-a distribution of terminals
of $4,000 per mile.
"But you will notice 1 am talking about
the Union Pacifc-am basins my argument
on 1.-THE only road the railroad orators
dare TO talk about because on It and on
ii only can the railroads show distribution
of terminals for the benefit Of the outlying
mileage Ano I am willing TO take 1t in
the worst way possible, and will for this
interview permit the distribution of all the
Omaha and South Omaha terminals over
the main line only $40, ,79S over 1917 miles
"a distribution of $4,000 per mile-a dis
tribution of 5000 more per mile than the
railroad orators claim and what is the re-
suit? 1 find that according to the Union
Pacifc's own sworn returns, $1s. 249s61 of
it's $42 525, ,94S assessed value is in the In
corporated towns and that these towns,
with SIS, ,249, ,S61 worth of Union Pacific prop
erty inside their limits, get assessment
under the unit system of $4,93 ,s11, and that
s13S12,O5O worth of Union Pacific property
within the limits of Incorporated towns
never answers any place for city or town
taxes
Omaha and South Omaha lost $40, ,99S 79S
of this amount. 1t follows therefore that
OF this loss $231s,252 was lost out of the
other incorporated towns on the Union
Pacific main line, and this, too, when l am
distributing terminals out OF Omaha $24000
to the mile-$,500 per mile more than the
facts warrant, and 5000 per mile more
than the aforesaid orators claim.
How can this be? 1t is easy.
Grand Island, for instance, has
within its town limits lis acres of
Union Pacific right-of-way, worth
SEQ per acre ...',... .,.,.....,.. ss5O2
2.S1 miles main track, reproduction
2OS miles side track and spur track,
reproduction value ............:.,...,. LOO
Building right-of-way not locally
assessed ........................... 4s 2s9
Total reproduction or tangible
value as sworn to by Union
Pacific ..................:.... .s261 Ills
and supreme court say 1t has in
tangible value .....,......,........... as O63
And you have for tangible and in
tangible value of Union Pacific
main line property in Grand Island S739 178
Its present assessment under unit
system Is ..'.....'......'..,......... .S2lO lS2
an 1906 the Union Paeifc's Grand ISL
and city tax on its mileage was sos.
Under H. r. 1872 it would not have been
less than three and one-half times that
amount, or S2,S00.
furnish to ali property within its limits
the privileges and advantages afforded by
its city government? Is IT not true that
II the railroad company is failing to pay
its share of the cost of city government
that other taxpayers are paying this cost
for the company2
"Grand Islands is not an isolated case.
The same condition exists In all the i'm
portant towns-Fremont North Platte,
Columbus, Schuyler, Central City Kear-
ney, Lexington, Sidney and KimbalI.
North Platte gets a city tax for 1905 from
the Union Pacific under the unit system of
1857. 1t would get under II. r. 1872 $500.
The smaller towns would gain in much
smaller proportion, because they do not
have the large amount of railroad pEop-
erty either to protect or tax
Now If this condition prevails on the
Union Pacific main line. where there is dis
tribution OF terminals under this basis of
figures most unfair to II. r. 1872, what must
be the condition where no large terminals
are distributed? / come 10 this conclusion.
that the railroads escape their fair share
of city and town taxes under the unit
system OF assessment and that II is up 10
this legislature to pass laws before them
that will correct the inequality and make
the railroads respond in city and town