The Newport miner. [volume] (Newport, Wash.) 1899-current, 1910-12-08
COMPARISON FAyORS DIVISION
Proposed New County Well Able
to Support Government.
Our Proportion Of Debt Grows

During the past two weeks the senti'
ment in favor of the division OF Stevens
county and the creation OF new county
therefrom has been growing rapidly.
Now that the assessable valuation OF
1910 has been made known. and IL Is
apparent that the assessment Tor lSl!
will RIM between four and a quarter ana
four and half millions, many who have
heretofore been -committal and luxe
warm on the proposition have come out
In favor of division.
For tho purpose of securing compare
tive figures showing valuations and cur
rent expenses in counties of the state OF
like population and valuation OF the pro-
posed new county. the following figures
have been secured from the reports
made to the state bureau of inspection
by the auditors of such counties.
There are three counties in the state
with an assessed valuation of more than
two and less than five millions, viz:
Asotin, Ferry and Garfield, on which we
have the figures.
Asotin county has an assessed valua-
ton of $4,O24,3 1891. In 1909 the county
levied sufficient to bring into the current
expense fund the sum of $2l ,55l.e6.
Garfield county had valuation OF a.
TAG, 4s4 and raised for current expenses
$15.214.11. Ferry county had valua-
ton of 81, 26O. 2Os and levied for current
expenses $40. 092.ss.
The current expense fund, outof which
are paid the costs of county government,
such as salaries of county officers, blanks,
printing, the cost of making the annual
assessment, courts, elections, and all ex-
penses of that nature, is the only fund
on which fair comparison can be made,
as the costs of bridges, roads. schools,
etc., are determined by local conditions,
whereas the general expense of county
government should not vary much and
may fairly be taken for comparison.
Stevens county at present levies for
current expenses tax of 8 mills, which
this side of the county pays and on a
basis of $4,000. 900 valuation over here
we contribute $4,000 to the county cur
rent expense fund. Our taxes for roads.
bridges, schools, ETC., would be no greater
in county of our own than they are in
the present county. 1t does not take
$32 900 to run counties of like size in the
state of Washington, and there is there
fore every reason to believe that taxa
ton would be no greater in the proposed
new county and would likely be less, as
was the case in the new county of Grant
formed by the legislature of 1909.
just few items to show where the
east side of the county gets the worst
OF it;
Stevens county has II voting precincts.
The proposed new county has II. 1t
costs about $40 per precinct to hold an
election or primary. 1t is easy to
figure that while we are paying one-third
the taxes of the county, our election ex-
penses are about one-fifth of the total.
Mileage of jurors and witnesses from
this side of the county add greatly to the
court costs of the county. We pay one
third the court costs.
The proposed new county has no diff.
cult problems to contend with in the
way of bridging. We are continually
paying our portion toward heavy bridg-
ing expenses on the west side.
The longer we delay county division
the larger proportion of the debt of
Stevens county we would be compelled
to assume. Four years ago an attempt
was made to divide the county. The
proposed new county then had valua-
ton of $l.600,000, less than one-half
what it has today. County division NAV
have been premature at that time, but
the fact remains that had division &C.
Cured at that time we would have been
compelled to assume less than half as