The copper era and Morenci leader., 1913-01-17
ARIZONA ASSESSORS IN CONVENTION
 AT YUMA
All of the Counties in Arizona Are Represented With the Exception Of Apache and Santa Cruz at
 Important Meeting.

l By a unanimous vote Tucson was i selected as the next place of meet ing.
 The meeting was called to order in the court house at Yuma on Monday,
 January 18th, and was in session un- til 10 o'clock Wednesday p. m. The following counties were repre-
 sented: Cochise, Coconino, Gila, Ora ham, Greenlee, Mohave, Maricopa,
 Navajo, Pinal, Pima, Yavapai, Yuma .. In addition to the representatives from the several counties the State Tax Commission was in attendance, including Chairman Zander, of Mari copa County, Chas. R. Howe, from Cochise County and P. J. Miller, from
 Yuma County.
 The various Assessors were assign ed different subjects bearing upon taxation by the Secretary and Presi- dent during the month of December in order to have their written views spread upon the minutes at the Janu- ary meeting.
 Papers w re read by the Assessors upon the following subjects:
 School and Road Taxation.
 Farm Lands.
 Personal Property.
 improvements Upon Realty.
 Timber Lands
 Mines and Mining Products
 City Lots and Improvements
 The papers presented showed a careful consideration and study Of each subject and at the conclusion of the meeting the following recom- mendations were made:
 That the tax commission enforce the Statutes providing that all classes of property be assessed at it's full val ue and asking that the commission tn tln I dot strict and broader meaning of the term cash value.
 That the Tax Commission include in their recommendations to the LegiS- Iature an amendment To the present tax law providing that taxpayers list and value their property before return ing the assessment list to the Asses sOr.
 That a law be recommended by the Tax Commission providing that all Live Stock Inspectors submit to each Clerk of the Board of Supervisors a full and complete list of all cattle and live stock inspected including age, sex, kind of live stock, owner, and pur chaser. It is claimed that this will not only aid the Assessors in assessing but will be valuable information for all live stock owners.
 That the Tax Commission recom- mend that the true money considera- ton be incorporated in all deeds and transfers recorded in any county.
 The schedules and mode of proceed ure in making assessm ents were mu- tually agreed upon by all the Asses sors present, other than mining valu- ations, which was postponed to be again taken up by the executive com mittee composed of seven members | which is to meet in Phoenix during the session of the Legislature.
 There were several papers read up on the subject of mine taxation in Arizona and the ideas and recommend l ations outlined by Jas. H. Kerby, As sessor, of this county seemed to meet with the most favor.
 From the paper presented to the Assessors convention by the Assessor | of Greenlee County the Era takes the | following extracts.
 Since becoming a taxing officer some eight years ago, 1 have devoted l much time to the study of taxation in | it's many forms, I believe now the l same as I have for many years past | that the solution for the correcting | of many evils, would be the enactment | of a gross income tax law, covering l certain classes of property, such as property, etc. I believe the | of the various minerals eX- | tracted rom the mines or tn1S state | should be claSsed as personal property | and taxed under the gross income tax plan. The products of mine when | extracted and brought to the surface f cease to be a part of that mine and in 1 my judgment 1 believe that the lands | of mining property should be assessed | IS other real property is assessed in | some classified manner, and would ] suggest something as follows:
 NOn-patented, nOn-producinS mines.
 Non-patented producing mines.
 Patented producing mines.
 Surface of mining claims.
 Including in addition all forms of i general ownership in fee or other 9ral land.
 Non-patented, non-producing min ng claims, as every one knows, in accordance with our statute, the own er must perform $100 worth of work Or eXpend this amount in improve nentS of some nature thereon. This i say should be treated in the same form and manner as the listing ! 0f personal property for taxation and 1t seems as though it should be Sub feet to taxation, affording the owner more protection as well as the govern nent by eliminating many fradulent locations, etc It should be assessed | IS personal property in the manner as mentioned.
 Non- n-patented, producing mining I believe, should be assessed under the gross income tax for the amount of production less certain