The Oroville weekly gazette. [volume] (Oroville, Wash.) 1905-19??, 1910-12-23
LET THERE BE DIVISION.

~ oAAeso iOSoAAuy ~ ohO NoiiOy
was to be set aside as county of it.
self. Statistics have been compiled
from the county records giving the
proportion of taxes the Methow now
contributes toward the running ex-
penses of the county, and then COM
pares those figures with the sum it
would cost to run county of class
the Methow would be in. According
to those figures division would mean
the saving of $4,000 per year to the
taxpayers of the Methow valley, that
is to say it would cost the people that
much less to run an independent coun-
ty government than what they pay to
ward keeping up the present county
organization. The weakest point in
the argument favoring the split is the
small number of inhabitants in the
proposed new county, the advocates for
separation claiming only 22OO, which
is a scanty margin over the 1000 the
law requires in territory desiring to
organize as county.
Now, while the figures are not i'm
mediately at hand, it is safe to say that
an east and west division of the coun-
ty, which has been long advocated,
would show still greater saving to
the taxpayers of the north end than it
is calculated would be enjoyed by the
people of the Methow by the securing
OF division. The territory within the
lines of the proposed new north end
county embraces some 36 townships
and contains some 1000 and 5000 peo-
pie. The assessed valuation of prop
erty is more than double that of the
Methow valley, and consequently it
pays into the common treasury a great
deal larger sum of money in the way
of toll annually levied upon property.
Taking the Methow figures as a basis
of calculation a. division such as the
people of the north end is asking for
would result in a saving of $4,000 or
100000 annually to the property own
ers. Even if the saving were only half,
or One-fourth. the sums mentioned the
satisfaction of knowing where the
money they are yearly touched for to
carry on county government is spent,
and seeing the result, would be beyond
price to the people.
This question of county division
should be looked at from the point of
expediency and economy, and discussed
calmly and dispassionately. No one
can deny that on accounty of its pres
ent great and unwieldly size the cost
of administration is very great, far
greater than it would be if those limits
were materially curtailed. The de-
plorable feature is that expenses are
constantly growing, and debt piling up,
although property is taxed almost to
the point of confiscation. There seems
to be no way to reduce this annual
drain, unless it be by means of divis-
ion. No one in particular is to blame.
No moneys are criminally misappropri-
ated. Those empowered with the dis
tribution of public funds exercise due
diligence and care. The trouble grows
largely out of the physical confgura-
tion of the country.
Take the single and important item
of roads as an illustration as to the
handicap of territorial immensely.
Hundreds of thousands of dollars have
been spent on roads since the organ
ization of the county, and yet there is
hardly respectable stretch of road
within its limits. Possibly much of
the money so spent was absolutely
thrown away by Indifferent constru-
ctiOn. But let that pass. The chief
reason for the deplorable state of the
highways is because the present coun-
ty is so tremendous in size, so broken
geographically, that the money avail
able must be spread out thin, here and
there where repairs demand imme-
date attention. constant drain for
rebuilding that occurs every spring
and it is simply impossible to concen-
trate expenditures in any particular
quarter. So has it been in the past,
and so will it ever continue to be in
the future so long as the county re-
remains at it's present dimensions. Let
the present county be divided up I'M
der three separate county governments
and the problem of permanent road
building would soon find solution.
In the language of the late Grover
Cleveland it is a condition and not a
theory that confronts the people of
Okanogan county, and that condition
is so unsatisfactory and unfavorable
that it would seem property holders
would be gladly willing to accept any
change that even held out promise for
a belterment, taking their chances on
ills they know not of to escape those
too painfully apparent. For assuredly
division could make it no worse, and
the chances are it would tend to make
a decided change for the better. Give
this proposition your careful consider
alton. Be not mislead by unwarranted
statements reoardinO increased cost