New Ulm review., 1912-10-02

seemed impossible to reach common
ground. The bill landed at the end
|of the session in the legislative ash
heap where 1t slumbered until the
following session. But the Legislature
recognizing the urgency Of the mat
ter, and feeling that something must
be done to relieve the situation. just
before it adjourned sine die adopted
q concurrent resolution requesting
the commission to adhere to existing
methods until the legislature met
again. la
Efforts Of the Legislature to Amend
the Assessment Laws and Suggestions
8 by the Tax Commission.
Having failed in 1909 in every ef-
fort to amend the laws governing the
assessment of proverty and recogniz'
ing the embarrassment of the situa'
tion the legislature on the last day
of the session adopted the following
concurrent resolution:
Be it resolved by the Senate, the
House of Representatives concurring:
That, whereas the basis of valua.
ton of property for taxation In this
state has actually been other than its
true value, and the financial affairs
of the various counties. municipali'
ties, and state institution therefore,
be it resolved by the Senate, the
House of Representatives concurring:
That the state commission be, and
it hereby is requested to take into
consideration in any regulation it
NAV make as to the valuation of pro-.
perty for taxation, the values, which
have heretofore been given such prop
erty and that the commission so act
as not to create any radical changes
in the present assessed valuation,
such as would derange the relations
which have been created, and now
exist. between the incomes and salar-
les paid by different institutions, mu-
inequalities, and public Offices through
out the state: and thereby allow the
present relative values to continue
until the next session of the legisla-
ture.
The unfortunate situation was again
presented to the legislature in all it's
bearings in 1911 but, measured by
results, the outcome was even more
discouraging than in 1909. A bill
providing that all property should be
assessed at so per cent of 'its true
and full value in money" after being
amended to read SO 1-3 per cent, pas.
sed the Senate with little opposition
late in the session and was transmit
ted to the House. After careful con-
sideration. by the House committee
on taxes and tax laws it was again
amended and as 1t finally
passed that body, provided that all
property subject to the general prop
erty tax should be divided, for pur-
poses of taxation, into four classes.
Glass / was to cover the homestead
of the taxpayer which was to be as
sessed at 33 1-3 per cent of its true
and full value. Glass 2 was to In
clude all other real estate which was
to be assessed at so per cent of its
true value. Glass 8 was to include
household goods and furniture, wear
ing apparel musical Instruments, and
sewing machines which were to be
assessed at 25 per cent of full and true
value. And Glass 4 covered all per-
sonal property not included in Class
3 which was to be assessed at so per
cent of full value.
Upon the return of the bill to the
Senate for concurrence in the House
the Senate refused to
concur. Conference committees were
appointed in both bodies for the pur-
pose of reaching an agreement. but
in the rush and turmoil of the closing
hours of the session the committees
were unable to get together and the
bill. like its predecessor in 1909, fall
ed to reach final passage.
The troublesome condition still con-
fronts us and is productive OF lncreas-
ing embarrassment in every direction.
Letters from local assessors and coun-
ty officers are constantly being re.
ceived asking for instructions as to
what percentage of true and full value
should be used in the valuation OF
property for taxation. The only reply
which the commission has been able
to make is to call attention to the
statute prescribing that property
should be assessed at its true and
full value ana 10 tne legislative re-
solution requesting that it should not
be so assessed.
Justice alike to taxpayers and tax
officials demands that the matter
should no longer be left in the chaotic
and contradictory condition in which
it is at the present time. Either the
laws now obstructing the assessment
of property at true and full value
should be so amended that it can be
50 assessed. or provision should be
made by law for it's assessment at
some specified per cent of full value.
The situation should be squarely met
and the question solved without fur
ther delay.
There is nothing sacred about the
"true and full value" standard. Any