Arizona republican., 1912-04-17
ABOUT SCHOOL LANDS

Sir-Anent the school 1and bill | which is now before the legislature, l l have had occasion to look into the matter for a client and would esteem 1 it d favor from you to grant me space | for the expression of my views
 It appears that there is an element l in the legislature in favor of retain ing these lands and continuing the | leasing system. Can this be done in | l irrigated districts operating under the | reclamation service? Is there any provision i'll the reclamation act un- | der which d state may subscribe for 1 water for more than one hundred and i sixty acres2 It seems that the posi- | ton that the state of Arizona is in ! at present is simply this: Retain the | lands and lose the water or sell and | let the purchaser have the benefit | l of that which the state cannot re- | ceive. Years ago the territory said in | i effect 10 each and every member of | the community: Here is a tract of | land that belongs to me, I will rent ! it to you at d yearly rental per acre !. equal to the amount your neighbor ! pays on lands he owns in fee simple. | in taxes True there is nothing on ]
 
 it and improve it I will see that you | are paid for your time and money, l and l will consider such improve ments to be anything Of a permanent character. the result of labor or cap ital expended on such land in it's reclamation development. and the ap- propriation of water thereon which has enhanced the value of the same beyond what said land would have been had it been permitted to remain in it's original state (Par. 4036. Rev Stat. 190D. and you are assured that 1 will not permit anyone to receive the benefits of your labor or capital without first paying you full compen- s.ation therefor. (Par 4037 Now this offer has been accepted until practically every acre of land susceptible of irrigation has been re- claimed. There is perfectly valid
 and binding contract. inherited from
 the territory. between the state and
 every leaseholder of irrigated school
 lands. The leaseholder has performed
 his part Of the contract by retaining and otherwise improving the land The time has come when the state
 must perform it's part of the con- tract by permitting the holder to pur- , chase the land he has improved or providing a means by which the lcaseholder shall be reimbursed for his labor and capital expended in its
 reclamation and development"
 The leaseholder has remedy. though by no means sure or good one. Paragraph 4037 provides that Anyone occupying - school lands refusing or not wishing to lease said
 lands, and other parties making ap- , plication to do so. the board of su-
 pervisOrs shall appoint three disinter-
 ested persons---to go upon said
 land and appraise the value of the
 improvements and appurtenances , thereOn-and the party wishing to
 lease shall pay to the board of su-
 perVisOrs the amount of such ap-
 praisement-befOre the board of su-
 pervsors shall execute a lease to him
 of said lands. The money so paid for
 such improvements the supervisors
 shall pay to the occupant of the land" Now if majority of the IeasehOlders of school land should take such action. and it is by no
 means improbable, what would be the
 result? The improvements are prac-
 tically all of it. The difference be-
 tween the land in it's natural state and the enhanced value. The land in . lts natural state is to be sold for not
 less than $25 an acre. If you take l the improvements off any piece of l Irrigated land what have you left?
 Desert. Now how many persons are
 prepared to pay $100 an acre cash
 for land and l doubt if there is a
 tract of school land in this county on O which the Improvements are not f worth at least that sum- The law " contemplates that the value of the = improvements must be paid in cash s ! Where does the state get off at? The Q land is worth more to the Ieaseholder Q than to any one else. He is willing
 to pay for it and can pay for it. L There are few others who can The . state cannot hold the land and get D reservoir water for it. only the indi- f NIdual owning not to exceed 160 acres 5. can What are we going to do about l II. Save 1t for our children and in c so saving it render it practically t worthless? That is the whole mes- n ton. Men talk about speculators r about robbing the children. Such ] statements are born in ignorance n There are no spectators on school e lands no man today would buy an Q acre of such lands. not knowing what Q the outcome would be. They are all t bona fide home makers No one s wants to rob the school children: h they have nearly all of them children Il themselves, but they do insist that s the school children shall not rob them
 and that is just about what is pro- q posed by some of our solons CD to t do.
 e Shall the state keep or repudiate = it's promise? Let us know, MT. Leg s islator. which you want to do and n soon. J. l.. NELSON.